CIA Manufactured Modern US Literature
August 24, 2019
Left. Ernest Hemingway was an intelligence agent. The CIA admits this on their own website . See Mathis' full expose . Miles Mathis says that modern culture is essentially
mental programming by the CIA, an arm of the Illuminati
banking cartel. The systemic destruction of traditional art
is intended to promote "alienation," the satanic view
that human life is inherently meaningless, incoherent, trivial and ugly.
Satanism is the inversion of all spiritual ideals-
Mathis: "By a constant stream of top-down propaganda, writers were convinced that being solipsistic, quotidian, and creatively modest were artistic virtues. As with painting, science, politics, and every other category, the inversion of the thing was sold as the thing itself."
Makow comment- Mathis is a brilliant and prolific writer. Although his claims that many sensational murders were faked seem outlandish, his assertions about modern culture are credible. As a Ph.D. in literature, I always felt modern culture was fraudulent. This confirms it. I feel betrayed by the education system and society. A highly organized satanic cult has re-cast Western society in its image. Contrary views are not funded or publicized. Sometimes you lose your livelihood. Another example of de facto Communism, and how we have been unwittingly inducted into a satanic cult.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
from May 26, 2017
by Miles Mathis
From Theosophy to the Beat Generation
(excerpt by henrymakow.com)
A reader alerted me to an article just published at the Chronicle of Higher Education by an English professor at Providence College, Eric Bennett. This article is about the Iowa Writer's Workshop, at which he was a student from 1998 to 2000.
He admits that the writing programs at the University of Iowa have long been underwritten by the CIA, via the Farfield Foundation, the ACCF, [The Artists and Community Collaboration Fund] and the Rockefellers. The sentence in the article that is most useful here is this one: Creative-writing pedagogues in the aftermath of World War II, without exception, read Partisan Review, The Kenyon Review, The Hudson Review, and The Sewanee Review .
They breathed the intellectual air of New Critics, on the one hand, and New York intellectuals on the other. These camps, formerly enemy camps--Southern reactionaries and Northern socialists at each other's throats in the 1930s--had by the 50s merged into a liberal consensus that published highly intellectual, but at the time only newly "academic," essays in those four journals, all of which, like Iowa, were subsidized by the Rockefeller Foundation.
As we have seen and will see, they were also subsidized by many other CIA front organizations. The government used the purse-strings to exert control over these programs, keeping them in little pens that Bennett says serve "to venerate and fortify the particular, the individual, the situated, the embedded, the irreducible."
Or, in other words, to keep them small and disempowered. By a constant stream of top-down propaganda, writers were convinced that being solipsistic, quotidian, and creatively modest were artistic virtues. As with painting, science, politics, and every other category, the inversion of the thing was sold as the thing itself.
A 2012 Salon article by Joel Whitney tells us the Partisan Review and the Paris Review [were linked to the CIA] as well.
Peter Matthiessen, the magazine's founder, has now admitted that in interviews, such as this one ... that he was recruited by the CIA right out of Yale in 1953, and that the Paris Review was his "cover." That information has been added to the Paris Review page at Wikipedia, but it is a bald admission with no commentary as to how it must affect everything to do with the magazine.
Both Matthiessen and George Plimpton, left, have tried to maintain that Matthiessen was the only one who knew, but--given what we now know from the CIA itself (see Tom Braden)--that isn't believable in the least. When various writers were pleading ignorance back in the 1960's and 70's, Braden flipped the leak, outing them . He said that all these writers and artists knew exactly what was going on, and [Francis Storer] Saunders' book [The Cultural Cold War] confirms that over and over. So does the article at Salon , which outs both Plimpton and Nelson Aldrich as members of the [CIA-front] ACCF.
INDOCTRINATION
Salon also tells us the CIA backing was a problem: "By funding a magazine with a New York office that was distributed in the U.S., it was engaged in propagandizing to the American public, which was illegal ."
Unfortunately, Joel Whitney at Salon unmasks himself at the end--if not long before--by saying this: None of which is fair to attach to the Paris Review , if not for Matthiessen's claims that the Review 's ties ended before the ugly stuff, or for Plimpton's failure to disclose the ties that remained.
So in his summation, Whitney is telling you to your face that the greatest crime here is failure to disclose and other white lies? You have to be kidding me! What about the fact that all this was illegal? What about the fact that nothing was what we were told it was?
William Styron said in the first issue, "I think The Paris Review should welcome these people into its pages: the good writers and good poets, the non-drumbeaters and non-ax-grinders. So long as they're good."
We now know that was total, malicious misdirection since the whole point of all these magazines was drum-beating. What about the fact that, all told, at least 9/10ths of 20th century American literature and criticism should now be suspected of being manufactured?
If all these people were working for Intelligence, what is to prevent us from assuming everything they did was Intelligence work, including the novels, poems, and essays?
What is to prevent us from re-reading everything published in that time period, combing it for covert propaganda? You may not think that is necessary, but I for one do.
As you will see in upcoming papers, I have found evidence that is exactly what has happened. It is not just the Beats that are fake, it is almost everyone.
------
Thanks to Bill for the tip!
Mathis Website
Related: The Satanic Theology Behind Cultural Marxism
Mathew- "Catcher in the Rye" a CIA PsyOp
Makow- How University Betrays Students
--------- How the Illuminati Control Culture
First Comment by Dan Butler (1955-2018):
The fact that 20th Century American "Literature" had a hidden agenda explains the cognitive dissonance most young readers felt while reading it. This website reviewed the mysterious J.D.Salinger's 'Catcher in the Rye' [1], one of the most disappointing reading experiences of all American high students that were forced to read it. That's one of the most obvious cases of a crappy novel with no redeeming qualities at all remaining the 'Best Sellers' list for decades, lauded by reviewers. Evidently, the only students who couldn't put it down were the twin assassins of 1980, John Hinkley and Mark David Chapman.
I read Miles Mathis' The Stolen Century this morning. I give it A+. 'Modernism' was concocted by Marxists. Marx wrote that 'cultural hegemony'(dominance) is the key to taking over. Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) developed strategies for unseating the 'traditional' intelligentsia and replacing them with "organic" (subversives). This is when the arts became strictly political vehicles of cultural subversion. Trotsky became the grandmaster of what Marxists later termed the "Long March" through the society's institutions, in order to flip cultural hegemony from the 'old world order' to the 'new'. It's called the Long March because it takes time - a long time. They've been at it for over century, and now they've moved on from Modernism into "Postmodernism".
I understood the fact that the publishing industry has this hidden agenda far too late in life. 30 years ago I read the New York Times Book Review every Sunday - religiously. With retrospect, it's plain as day how the 'best sellers' all my quasi-intellectual friends regurgitating over quiche and Chardonnay corralled our worldview, our opinions, and even our self-image.
We all read the same books, saw the same movies, listened to the same bands and singers, watched CBS news and listened to National Public Radio and thought we were oh so smart. The whole thing was sold on "snob appeal". That's how these things were marketed.
It took the 911 stunt to finally crumble that worldview they constructed in my "open mind" for forty years. I had to go through a year of dealing with "everything I knew was WRONG", but when you can throw off all that conditioning, you get to reconstruct a worldview based on observation of everything as a mature, objective person.
One learns to discern. Eventually. I quit going to Hollywood movies about ten years ago, threw the TV out of my house seven years ago, and now most of the books I read were published before Modernism took over.
[1] Illuminati Dust Off the J.D. Salinger PsyOp
Decrypting The Catcher in the Rye
You can find this article permanently at https://www.henrymakow.com/2019/08/CIA-Manufactued-Modern-US-Literature.html
Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at
Comments for "CIA Manufactured Modern US Literature "
Sheri said (June 2, 2018):
Of course this revelation jolted me as each awakening revelation has. This does not and cannot compare to the revelations of Satanism, slavery and the children.
We have work to do collaboratively, on a wide platform; and we do have this platform in the web. It will be exciting and it will force us to rethink our opinions of the literary work and world of this period. But more importantly, it will force us to delve deeper into history and reprint "lost books" of all types from those who have been storing the writings of the past.
It is our job to forensically examine the origins of the "matrix writings" based on life at that time, the attitudes and ultimately their affect on the wider populace.
Having been a young person who had no time or even access to the "great writers" as they were called, gives me now at this point in my life an unbiased attitude toward them. I will be putting their puzzles together backward - as opposed to those who carried these works in their lives.
My hope is to work in the literary world to disseminate writings and books which will have a direct impact on education in the world.
Doug P said (June 1, 2018):
Great article, no doubting its truth. We see the nihilism everywhere in the tattooed skin of young people, a sure sign of nihilism. I won't read anything that is less than 100 years old, but I read philosophy and law. I can't seem to get interested in even the novels by Solzhenitsyn or Dostoevsky. Crime and Punishment was done by the BBC, I watched that. I wonder how close it is to the book. It would be interesting if someone who knows something about lit to compare the BBC movie with the book.
Allen M said (May 27, 2017):
The "literature" is all pagan-lie-ridden-abominable- and filthy. Per the " Protocols". ALL the 'public' schools are a 666 LIE. Perpetual dumbing down accomplished via satan's boyz- the ones who sell themselves for naught.
Thank you, Henry, for another fine article. The majority of 'men' became "Freemasons" are are CLEARLY not men. A man stands for TRUTH. The "secret" they boast in makes them perverts- and that is what the US is.
My little brother was ritually 'done' when he was 9. It ended his life, and the "church" defended the Mason who did this evil. Now it is evident why the US is the satanic enabler. Like Sodom-mind-controlled via ritual abuse as children.
Sid Green said (May 26, 2017):
I can only enjoy Russian literature, I guess because it comes from a genuine culture (Christianity) and isn't an artificial attempt to sling dung at all beauty.
Kundera and other wanna be French people are seductive to unstable adolescents but their message is sensual, empty, and damaging. The unbearable Lightness of being should be called the unbearable lightness of the author's mindset.
There's a bunch of French crap across all Europe including Nabokov (wanna be french) and French stuff is always pure Frankism ( I see that now)
Russian literature is the only genre with genuine works, it seems the rest were either literally contracted by the illuminati, or at very least, the author was sucking up to the Frankfurt school by pathetically attempting to make everything seem absurd, making for crappy reading and spiritually and mentally damaging ideas
I never read Catcher in the Rye I just wrote down what the teacher said on the tests.
It strikes me now that most of literature class was actually just extremely bad advice class on how to not care and ruin your own life. I was almost directly told to drop out of school as a "life style choice". They do not know how to teach Russian literature because it transcends their degenerate minds. Much western European "literature" is no better than Frankist demonic ramblings of a disturbed mind. Camus was a profligate degenerate. We should look to Pushkin, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, and not the likes of Nabokov for inspiration
Tony B said (May 26, 2017):
Wow, Henry, this article brought out thinking people.
In my school years I was more interested in words - reading and writing - than in anything else. However, the school English literature books largely repulsed me and I refused to read what seemed stupid and meaningless to me. Now I know why. It truly was as repulsive as that moronic trash labeled "modern art."
Early on, I took all published anything with a grain of salt if it was promoted. Much later I learned from Mike Piper, whose "Final Judgment" on the Kennedy assassination outsold anything the establishment brought up on the subject by fantastic numbers, that the advertised "best sellers" were always a flat, likely CIA, lie if you thought that meant the highest volume sold or read.
It was not until I began reading pre Vatican II Catholic writings that I found straight, non-propagandistic historical, as well as truly moral, information concerned with true humanity. Post V2 writings, however, have exactly the same brassy ring as the protestant readings of most of my life. It is laughably tragic that people in the English speaking, heavily talmudicly influenced, protestant run, massively masonic, extremely monopoly capitalistic greedy, world, blame Catholic anything for their problems.
Shawn said (May 26, 2017):
Great article on the CIA and modern literature. Of course only a handful of Publishers exist to filter and censor content. But who really reads anymore? Thus the Intel Literati Octopus has downsized and diversified. Schmancy Tom Clancys behind the Games, Social Media, and indeed-all pop culture... and sub-culture as well. Literati to Technorati in 20 years for the Gatekeepers.
Greg F said (March 30, 2015):
Whenever a wealthy elite dominates society, which is practically always, of course the services of the intellectual and professional class will be purchased and controlled by the wealthy elite.
The form of government is irrelevant to this process – all that is needed is for the rich to dominate the society, and the intellectuals and professionals will be at their beck and call.
Naturally, nearly everyone wants to work for the people who possess the wealth. The only remedy for this is the flattening of the wealth pyramid.
The wealthy have used their control of the media, the entertainment industry, and the educational system to brainwash the poor into thinking that a flattening of the wealth pyramid would be unethical
Feminism isn't new
Tim Fitzpatrick said (June 2, 2018):
The anti-hero narrative of the Judeo-masonic occultism pervading literature and entertainment these days is perhaps no better epitomized than by the recent destruction of George Lucas’ Star Wars saga. Granted, the Star Wars saga is fundamentally kabbalism; however, the original trilogy at least respected the pro-hero plot, the sanctity of love, and was a cinematographic masterpiece with brilliant accompanying classical music (by John Williams).
Now, J.J. Abrams and Rien Johnson have destroyed the legacy of Star Wars by rewriting it to fit the petty wishes of social justice warriors, especially feminists. It has become a mockery—anti-hero filth, with little to no value other than for thrilling special effects. Even it’s core actor and classic hero type Mark Hamill shows plenty of signs of disgust with the direction of the story. You can find interviews of him denouncing the movie right in front of the directors. He knows that something is inherently wrong with it all. His face reveals much while he sits through the interviews. What does it say when first- and second-wave liberals are disgusted with the trajectory of things?
Modern literature and cinematography are no longer about inspiring, providing hope, or showcasing beauty. They are about political indoctrination, with cheap thrills, poor comedy, and titillation thrown in as a bonus.