CN — LARRY ROMANOFF: 民主,最危险的宗教 — 第12章:伯奈斯与民主控制




    Democracy, The Most Dangerous Religion

    12. Chapter 12 – Bernays and Democracy Control

    By Larry Romanoff

    翻译: 珍珠



    From their experiences in the formulation, manipulation and control of public perception and opinion with the CPI, both Lippman and Bernays later wrote of their open contempt for a “malleable and hopelessly ill-informed public” in America.[1] Lippmann had already written that the people in a democracy were simply “a bewildered herd” of “ignorant and meddlesome outsiders[2] who should be maintained only as “interested spectators”, to be controlled by the elite “secret government”. They concluded that in a multi-party electoral system (a democracy), public opinion had to be “created by an organized intelligence” and “engineered by an invisible government”, with the people relegated to the status of uninformed observers, a situation that has existed without interruption in the US for the past 95 years. Bernays believed that only a few possessed the necessary insight into the Big Picture to be entrusted with this sacred task, and considered himself as one member of this select few.

    从他们在制定、操纵和控制公众看法和意见方面的经验来看,李普曼和伯奈斯后来都写下了他们对美国“易受影响且无可救药的愚昧公众”的公开蔑视。[1] 李普曼已经写道,民主国家的人民只是“无知和好管闲事的局外人”的“困惑的群体”,他们应该只作为“感兴趣的旁观者”来维持,由精英“秘密政府”来控制。[2] 他们得出的结论是,在多党选举制度(民主)中,公众舆论必须“由有组织的情报机构创造”和“由一个看不见的政府设计”,人民被降级为不知情的观察者,这种情况在美国已经存在了95年。 伯奈斯认为,只有少数人拥有必要的洞察力,能够肩负起这一神圣的任务,并认为自己是这一少数人中的一员。

    “Throughout his career, Bernays was utterly cynical in his manipulation of the masses. In complete disregard of the personal importance of their sincerely held values, aspirations, emotions, and beliefs, he saw them as having no significance beyond their use as tools in the furtherance of whatever were the commercial and political ends of his hirers.”


    In his book ‘Propaganda’,[3][3a][4] Bernays wrote, “It was, of course, the astounding success of propaganda during the war that opened the eyes of the intelligent few in all departments of life to the possibilities of regimenting the public mind. It was only natural, after the war ended, that intelligent persons should ask themselves whether it was not possible to apply a similar technique to the problems of peace. The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”


    Bernays’ original project was to ensure US entry into the European war, but later he primarily concerned himself with the entrenchment of the twin systems of electoral democracy and unrestricted capitalism the elites had created for their benefit, and with their defense in the face of increased unrest, resistance, and ideological opposition. Discovering that the bewildered herd was not so compliant as he wished, Bernays claimed a necessity to apply “the discipline of science”, i.e., the psychology of propaganda, to the workings of democracy, where his social engineers “would provide the modern state with a foundation upon which a new stability might be realized”. This was what Lippmann termed the necessity of “intelligence and information control” in a democracy, stating that propaganda “has a legitimate and desirable part to play in our democratic system”. Both men pictured modern American society as being dominated by “a relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses”. To Bernays, this was the “logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized”, failing to note that it was his European handlers who organised it this way in the first place.


    Lippman and Bernays were not independent in their perverted view of propaganda as a “necessity” of democracy, any more than they were in war marketing, drawing their theories and instruction from their Jewish masters in London. The multi-party electoral system was not designed and implemented because it was the most advanced form of government but rather because it alone offered the greatest opportunities to corrupt politicians through control of money and to manipulate public opinion through control of the press. In his book The Engineering of Consent,[5] [5a] Bernays baldly stated that “The engineering of consent is the very essence of the democratic process”. In other words, the essence of a democracy is that a few “invisible people” manipulate the bewildered herd into believing they are in control of a transparent system of government, by choosing one of two pre-selected candidates who are already bought and paid for by the same invisible people.

    利普曼和伯奈斯对宣传的歪曲看法是民主的“必需品”,这与他们在战争营销中的观点一样,他们从伦敦的犹太大师那里汲取理论和指导。 多党选举制度不是因为它是政府最先进的制度而设计和实施的,而是因为它提供了最大的机会,通过控制金钱来腐蚀政客,并通过控制媒体来操纵公众舆论。 在他的《同意工程》一书中,伯奈斯直言不讳地指出,“同意工程是民主进程的本质”。[5] [5a] 换句话说,民主的本质是少数“隐形人”操纵迷惑的群体,让他们相信他们控制着一个透明的政府体系,通过选择两个预先选定的候选人中的一个,而这些候选人已经被同一群隐形人收买和支付。

    Even before the war, the ‘secret government’, i.e., the European Jewish handlers of Lippman and Bernays, had fully recognised the possibilities for large-scale population control and had developed far-reaching ambitions of their own in terms of “Democracy Control”, and using the US government once again as a tool. Their interest was not limited to merely the American population, but quickly included much of the Western world. With Lippman and Bernays as their agents, these invisible people had the US government applying Bernays’ principles in nations all over the world, adding the CIA Project Mockingbird[6][7][8][9][10], the VOA[11][12], Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia, Radio Liberty, and much more to their tools of manipulation of the perceptions and beliefs of peoples of dozens of nations. The US State Department, by now totally onside, claimed that “propaganda abroad is indispensable” for what it termed “public information management”. It also recognised the need for absolute secrecy, stating that “if the American people ever get the idea that the high-powered propaganda machine was working on them, the result would be disaster”. But the high-powered machine was indeed working on them, and continued to an extent that might have impressed even Bernays.

    甚至在战争之前,“秘密政府”,即欧洲犹太人操纵者利普曼和伯奈斯,已经充分认识到大规模人口控制的可能性,并在“民主控制”方面制定了深远的野心,并再次利用美国政府作为工具。他们的兴趣不仅限于美国人口,而是迅速扩展到西方世界的大部分地区。以利普曼和伯奈斯为代理人的这些无形的人,让美国政府在世界各国应用伯奈斯的原则,增加了中央情报局“知更鸟计划” [6][7][8][9][10] ,美国之音[11][12] ,自由欧洲电台和自由亚洲电台,自由电台等等,作为操纵数十个国家人民观念和信仰的工具。美国国务院现在完全站在一边,声称“海外宣传”对于所谓的“公共信息管理”是不可或缺的。它也认识到绝对保密的必要性,并指出“如果美国人民认为高功率的宣传机器正在对他们进行宣传,结果将是灾难”。但是高功率的机器确实在为他们工作,并继续在某种程度上让伯奈斯印象深刻。

    The history of propaganda and its use in manipulating and controlling public opinion in the US, and in Western democracies generally, is a long story involving many apparently disparate and unrelated events. A major crisis point for elite control of American democracy was the Vietnam War, the one period in history when the American people were treated to accurate media coverage of what their government was actually doing in another country. Due to the horrific revelations of American torture and brutality, public protests were so widespread that the US was on the verge of anarchy and became almost ungovernable. Americans were tearing up their military draft notices and fleeing to Canada to escape military service. Streets and university campuses were overwhelmed with protests and riots, at least until Nixon ordered an armed response.[13][14][15] That was in 1970, but in 1971, Daniel Ellsberg stole “The Pentagon Papers” from the RAND corporation where he worked, and leaked them to the media, and that was the beginning of the end. After the political fallout and Nixon’s resignation, Bernays’ secret government went into overdrive and the American political landscape changed forever.

    宣传的历史及其在美国和西方民主国家操纵和控制舆论的用途是一个漫长的故事,涉及许多显然不同和无关的事件。精英控制美国民主的一个主要危机点是越南战争,这是历史上美国人民被媒体准确报道其政府在另一个国家实际所做的事情的时期。由于美国酷刑和暴行的可怕揭露,公众抗议活动非常普遍,美国濒临无政府状态,几乎无法治理。美国人撕毁他们的征兵通知,逃往加拿大逃避兵役。街道和大学校园到处都是抗议和骚乱,至少在尼克松下令武装回应之前是这样。[13][14][15] 那是1970年,但在1971年,丹尼尔·埃尔斯伯格从他工作的兰德公司偷走了五角大楼文件,并将其泄露给媒体,这是结束的开始。在政治后果和尼克松辞职后,伯奈斯的秘密政府进入超速状态,美国政治格局永远改变。

    A major part of this ‘democratic overdrive’ was the almost immediate creation in July of 1973 by David Rockefeller, Rothschild, and other “private citizens”, of a US-based think tank called ‘the Trilateral Commission’.[16] At the time, Rockefeller was Chairman of Rothschild’s Council on Foreign Relations as well as Chairman of the Rothschild-controlled Chase Manhattan Bank. Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was Obama’s Foreign Policy Advisor, was a ‘co-founder’. The necessity for the formation of this group was officially attributed to the Middle-East oil crisis, but they focused on a much more important crisis – that of democracy, which was exhibiting clear signs of going where no man should go. At the time, with a modicum of free press remaining, the Washington Post published an article titled “Beware of the Trilateral commission” (17). They would not do so again. Any criticism of the Commission is today officially listed by the US government as a ‘conspiracy theory’.[18]

    这种“民主超速”的主要部分是1973年7月由大卫·洛克菲勒、罗斯柴尔德和其他“私人公民”几乎立即创建的总部位于美国的智库“三边委员会”。[16]当时,洛克菲勒是罗斯柴尔德外交关系委员会主席,也是罗斯柴尔德控股的摩根大通银行主席。 奥巴马的外交政策顾问兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基是“联合创始人”。 成立这个组织的必要性被正式归因于中东石油危机,但他们关注的是一场更重要的危机——民主危机,这场危机正显示出明显走向不该去的地方的迹象。当时,在新闻自由度尚存的情况下,《华盛顿邮报》发表了一篇题为《当心三边委员会》的文章(17)。他们不会再这样做了。今天,美国政府正式将对该委员会的任何批评列为“阴谋论”。[18]

    I could find no record of any report by the Trilateral Commission on the Mid-East oil crisis, and it appears their first major report, published by New York University in 1975 only two years after their formation, was titled, “The Crisis of Democracy[19][20], a lead writer of which was a Harvard professor named Samuel Huntington.


    In the paper, Huntington stated that “The 1960’s witnessed an upsurge of democratic fervor in America”, with an alarming increase of citizens participating in marches, protests and demonstrations, all evidence of “a reassertion of equality as a goal in social, economic and political life”, equality being something no democracy can afford. He claimed, “The essence of the democratic surge of the 1960’s was a general challenge to existing systems of authority, public and private. In one form or another, it manifested itself in the family, the university, business, public and private associations, politics, the governmental bureaucracy, and the military services.”


    Huntington, who had been a propaganda consultant to the US government during its war on Vietnam, further lamented that the common people no longer considered the elites and bankers to be superior and felt little obligation or duty to obey. We needn’t do much reading between the lines to see that Huntington’s real complaint was that the wealthy elites, those of the secret government, were coming under increasing public attack due to revelations of grand abuses of their wealth and power. They were no longer admired and respected, nor even particularly feared, but instead were increasingly despised. The people also abandoned trust in their government due to the realisation of the extensive infiltration of the White House and Congress by Bernays’ “shrewd operators”, leading to, in Huntington’s words, “a decline in the authority, status, influence, and effectiveness of the presidency”.


    Huntington concluded that the US was suffering from “an excess of democracy”, writing that “the effective operation of a democratic political system usually requires apathy and noninvolvement”, stating this was crucial because it was precisely these qualities of the public that “enabled democracy to function effectively”. True to his racist roots, he identified “the blacks” as one such group that was becoming “too democratic” and posing a danger to the political system. He ended his report by stating that “the vulnerability of democracy, essentially the ‘crisis of democracy’”, stemmed from a society that was becoming educated and was participating, and that the nation needed “a more balanced existence” with what he called “desirable limits to the extension of political democracy”. In other words, the real crisis in democracy was that the people were beginning to believe in the “government by the people, for the people” part, and not only actually becoming involved but beginning to despise and disobey those who had been running the country solely for their own financial and political advantage. And of course, the solution was to engineer a social situation with less education and democracy and more authority from the secret government of the elites.


    Democracy, according to Huntington, consisted of the appearance but not the substance, a construct whereby the shrewd elites selected candidates for whom the people could pretend to vote, but who would be controlled by, and obey their masters. Having thus participated in ‘democracy’, the people would be expected to return to their normal state of apathy and noninvolvement.


    However, there was an undertone in this paper, specifically in Huntington’s comments, that I found unsettling, almost as a harbinger for things to come. Some of his “evaluation” seemed almost heretical for the time, stating that the existing basic framework of (democratic) government requires “reconsideration”, and asking, “Is political democracy, as it exists today, a viable form of government”? He wrote that “acute observers on all three continents have seen a bleak future for democratic government”. He noted one senior British official stating, “parliamentary democracy [in the UK] would ultimately be replaced by a dictatorship”, and former Japanese Prime Minister Takeo Miki warning that “Japanese democracy will collapse”. He asked, “Can these countries continue to function during the final quarter of the twentieth century with the forms of political democracy which they evolved during the third quarter of that century?” As I’ve already noted elsewhere, he stated clearly that “democracy” has failed completely in every area of human society where it has been tried (save that of government), but then laments that democracy appears to be failing in the government arena as well.


    Reading that paper in the light of political developments since, left me with a feeling that Huntington could have been hired by Klaus Schwab to present his “Great Reset”. It was disturbing that when we connect the dots of political developments in the past 50 or so years, it appears the Western world has been getting itself primed for a transition from “democracies” to fascist governments. This is especially true  since there has so clearly been a co-ordination between all of those dots, and that planning could have come only from the Jewish Khazar mafia in the City of London. There is no other central source possible for this.


    Noam Chomsky noted in an article that in the student activism of the 1960s and early 1970s, the nation apparently risked becoming too well educated, creating the Trilateral Commission’s ‘crisis of democracy’. In other words, the ignorance necessary for the maintenance of a multi-party government system was at risk of being eroded by students who were actually learning things that Bernays’ secret government didn’t want them to learn. “The Commission in a report decried the focus on what it called “special-interest groups” like women, workers and students, trying to gain rights within the political arena that were clearly “against the national interest” [of the top 1%]”. The Commission stated it was especially concerned with schools and universities that were not doing their job of “properly indoctrinating the young” and that “we have to have more moderation in democracy”. From there, the path forward was clear: young people in America would now be “properly indoctrinated” by both the public school system and the universities, so as to become “more moderate”, more ignorant, and above all to avoid demanding things like social equality and workers’ rights that were so clearly against the ‘national interest’ of the elites and their ‘secret government’.


    Before Huntington and the student activism of the 1960s, we had another renowned expert on propaganda, politics and fascism, in the person of another American Jew, Harold Lasswell, who has been admiringly described as “a leading American political scientist and communications theorist, specializing in the analysis of propaganda”, with claims Lasswell was “ranked among the half dozen creative innovators in the social sciences in the twentieth century”. His biographer, Almond, stated firmly that “few would question that [Lasswell] was the most original and productive political scientist of his time”.[21] High praise indeed, reminiscent of that ladled onto Lippman and Bernays – and for the same reasons.


    Even earlier, in the late 1930s and early 1940s, the University of Chicago held a series of secret seminars on “communication”, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, that included some of the most prominent researchers in the fields of ‘communications and sociology’, one of whom was Lasswell. Like Lippman and Bernays before him, and Huntington et al after him, Lasswell was of the opinion that democracy could not sustain itself without a credentialed elite shaping, molding and controlling public opinion through propaganda. He stated that if the elites lacked the necessary force to compel obedience from the masses, then ‘social managers’ must turn to “a whole new technique of control, largely through propaganda”, because of the “ignorance and superstition of the masses”. He claimed that society should not succumb to “democratic dogmatisms about men being the best judges of their own interests”, because they were not. Further, “the best judges are the elites, who must, therefore, be ensured of the means to impose their will, for the common good”. The Rockefeller and other Foundations and think-tanks have been slowly executing this advice now for almost 100 years.


    Among the many results of the work of Lippman and Bernays was the subsumption, of initially the Executive Branch and eventually the Legislative Branch as well, of the US government, into a global plan of the European and American bankers and their US corporate and political interests. We speak openly today of the White House and US Congress being overwhelmingly controlled by the Jewish lobby and their multinational corporations, but this forest was planted 100 years ago. By the early 1900s we already had an American government firmly under the powerful influence of, and effectively controlled by, what Bernays termed the “secret government”, and which was controlled in virtually the same manner as the bewildered public herd. During his presidential election campaign in 1912, Theodore Roosevelt said, “Behind the visible government there is an invisible government upon the throne that owes the people no loyalty and recognizes no responsibility”,[22] and claimed it was necessary to destroy this invisible government and undo the corrupt union of business and politics. Roosevelt again:


    “It was natural and perhaps human that the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties, thirsting for power, reached out for control over government itself. They created a new despotism and wrapped it in the robes of legal sanction. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people’s property, other people’s money, other people’s labor and other people’s lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness. These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power.”


    Arthur Miller wrote that “Those who formally rule, take their signals and commands not from the electorate as a body, but from a small group of men. It exists even though its existence is denied, and this is one of the secrets of the American social order, but one that is not to be discussed.” And, as Baudelaire told us, “The devil’s best trick is to persuade you that he doesn’t exist”. The truth of this is everywhere to be seen, but few want to look.


    Returning to Bernays and his propaganda to save democracy, and the versions promulgated by his heirs, there were two intermixed currents in that river. The most important was for the (largely foreign) bankers and industrialists to regain full control of the US government, especially the economic sectors, the first step being to repair the loosened control of the political parties themselves and the politicians inhabiting them. There is an interesting Chinese document that accurately addresses the deep Jewish influence on the US government at the time, stating: “The Democratic Party belongs to the Morgan family, and the Republican Party belongs to the Rockefeller family. Rockefeller and Morgan, however, belonged to Rothschild.”[23] Then, new and extensive efforts were required to regain social and political control of the population. What they needed was a vaccine, not to protect the American people, but to infect them with an incurable disease pleasantly named ‘democratisation’, but which would be more readily recognisable as zombification. They succeeded.

    回到伯奈斯和他的宣传以拯救民主,以及他的继承人颁布的版本,这条河中有两条相互交织的潮流。最重要的是让(主要是外国)银行家和实业家重新完全控制美国政府,特别是经济部门,第一步是修复政党本身和居住在其中的政治家的松散控制。有一份有趣的中国文件准确地指出了当时犹太人对美国政府的深刻影响,该文件指出:“民主党属于摩根家族,共和党属于洛克菲勒家族。然而,洛克菲勒和摩根属于罗斯柴尔德家族。” [23] 然后,需要新的和广泛的努力来重新获得对人口的社会和政治控制。他们需要的是一种疫苗,不是保护美国人民,而是用一种名为“民主化”的不治之症感染他们,但这更容易被识别为僵尸化。他们成功了。

    Democracy had always been hyped in the West as the most perfect form of government, but under the influence of an enormous propaganda campaign it soon morphed into the pinnacle of enlightened human evolution, certainly in the minds of Americans, but in the West generally. Since a multi-party electoral system formed the underpinnings of external (foreign) control of the US government, it was imperative to inject this fiction directly into the American psyche. They did so, to the extent that “democracy”, with its thousands of meanings, is today equivalent to a bible passage – a message from God that by its nature cannot be questioned. Bernays and his people were the source of the deep, abiding – and patently false – conviction in every American heart that democracy is a “universal value”. One of the most foolish and persistent myths these people created was the fairytale that as every people evolved toward perfection and enlightenment, their DNA would mutate and they would develop a God-given, perhaps genetic, craving for a multi-party political system. This conviction is entirely nonsense, without a shred of historical or other evidence to support it, a foolish myth created to further delude the bewildered herd.


    But there was much more necessary in terms of social control. By the time Regan replaced Carter in 1980, all the wheels were in motion to permanently disenfranchise American citizens from everything but their by now beloved “democracy”. Regan’s assault on the American public was entirely frontal, with Volcker of the FED plunging the US into one of the most brutal recessions in history, driving down wages and home ownership, destroying a lifetime’s accumulation of personal assets, dramatically increasing unemployment, eliminating labor unions almost entirely, and making the entire nation politically submissive from fear. Interestingly, the more that their precious democracy was impoverishing and emasculating them, the more strongly the American public clung to it, no longer retaining any desire for equality but merely hoping for survival. The eight years of Regan’s presidency were some of the most brutal in US history, but with the power of the propaganda and the willing compliance of the mass media, the American people had no understanding of what was happening to them. The lessons of the 1970s and the Vietnam War were learned well, and Bernays’ “invisible people” reclaimed the US as a colony, both the government and the people, the reclamation cleverly “engineered by an invisible government”.


    The full Machiavellian nature of this propaganda, its true intent and results, will not be immediately apparent to readers from this brief series of essays. Reading the entire series of ‘Bernays and Propaganda’ [24] will fill in many of the gaps and permit readers to connect more dots and obtain a clearer picture of the entire landscape.



    Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons).


    His full archive can be seen at

    他的完整文章库可以在以下看到: +


    He can be contacted at:


















    (12) The VOA surrounded China from all neighboring countries, and including a massive presence in Hong Kong, broadcasting American seditionist propaganda into China (according to Bernays’ template) 24 hours a day for generations. It failed, and was finally shut down in 2019. Also, when the Taiwanese scientist identified the 5 original haplotypes of the COVID-19 virus and proved they had originated in the US, it was the VOA that harassed the man so badly online that he closed all his social media accounts and went dark. Democracy being a coin with only one side, the US greatly resented China Radio International broadcasting “Beijing-friendly programs on over 30 US outlets, many in major American cities.”











    (23) The Age of Innovation 2013 Issue 6 95-97 pp. 3 of 1003, The database of scientific and technological journals of Chinese science and technology;

    (24) Bernays and Propaganda;


    This article may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorised by the copyright owner. This content is being made available under the Fair Use doctrine, and is for educational and information purposes only. There is no commercial use of this content.


    Copyright © Larry RomanoffBlue Moon of ShanghaiMoon of Shanghai, 2024

    版权所有 © 拉里·罗曼诺夫、上海蓝月亮、上海月亮,2024