The New Federalist

January 16, 1995 Pages 5-7

American Almanac

Don't Entrust Your Kids to Walt Disney!

by L. Wolfe

Walt Disney makes the cover of Time magazine in 1937 and 1954.

During the recent holiday season, more than 20 million American children
found the video of the Walt Disney cartoon feature Snow White under their
Christmas tree. In addition, several hundreds of millions of dollars were
spent on merchandising related to Snow White, which was first released in
movie theaters in 1937. In the six-month span of its video release, the total
gross from the Snow White marketing blitz is expected to exceed $1 billion
dollars, far more than the gross national product of several countries in the
developing sector.

The Snow White blitz follows the success of yet another Disney cartoon
feature, The Lion King, which is now in its second run, will be seen by more
American children than any other movie in history. That film, which was
absent any human characters, took place in an African game preserve, ruled
over by predators; typical of the oligarchical "ideals" in Disney films, the
pathetic creatures are portrayed as happy to be ruled over by the carnivorous
"royal" lions, who are occasionally shown finishing off a few unspecified
bones.
Meanwhile, the buildup has already begun for the next Disney animated
feature, Pocahontas, whose advance billing claims that it is destined to
become a "classic."
Since the 1930s, more than 3 billion people worldwide have seen a Disney
movie, each containing various brainwashing messages, with most seeing
dozens of these films. More than 100 million people have a Disney videotape in their home, with many having a whole shelf full. Several hundred
million people have paid admission to one of Disney's theme parks. Disneyrelated toys are among the most popular in America.
As of 1993, Disney was the 24th most valuable American corporation, an
enormous conglomerate including four movie companies, a distribution
company, a cable television channel, a record company, a book company, a
chain of hotels, a National Hockey League franchise named after a Disney
movie, The Mighty Ducks, a chain of 268 retail outlets that sell only Disneyfranchised products, and, of course, four theme parksDisneyland in
Anaheim, California, Walt Disney World, outside Orlando, Florida, Tokyo
Disneyland and Euro Disney, outside of Paris.
Reflecting Disney's global reach and penetration, The New York Times proclaimed in 1992, that Disney's Mickey Mouse logo is recognized by more
youngsters in this country and around the world than the American flag.
But as powerful as the Disney machine might seem, it is only a predicate of
a far larger Anglo-Venetian brainwashing operation that created and controls
Hollywood and mass entertainment. It is this operation which picked Walt
Disney up in the 1920s and funded his studio. For their own purposes, this
Anglo-Venetian elite created the "Disney myth" of the self-made man, the
embodiment of "Americanism." And once they had created this myth, once
they had convinced the average American that Disney represented "whole-

someness" and "family values," they used him and his movies to help infect
American culture with some of the most evil ideas of the century.
Disney Is Created
Walter Elias Disney was born into a humble working class family in
America's Midwest at the turn of the century. Nothing in his family background suggested any but the most modest of futures for the young Disney.
His early years were characterized by a virulent anti-intellectualism that
eschewed "book learning" and an oft-repeated preference for the company of
farm animals to humans.
The first sign of Disney being picked up by the networks of his oligarchical
sponsors occurs in Kansas City in the early 1920s, where he had wandered
in search of a career as a "cartoonist." The city was a center of recruitment
activities for the then-resurgent Ku Klux Klan. Seeking support for his
cartoon and movie-making ventures, Disney associated himself with the
Masonic networks which dominated the city and oversaw the Klan operations, joining the Order of De Molay, which served as a feeder organization
and "youth group" for the Scottish Rite Freemasons. He was to remain a
member of the masons for the rest of his life, later offering it significant
funding.
But even with his Masonic connections, Disney could find little success in
his movie-making in Kansas City. Within the trade, he was recognized as
having little talent as an artist, though more as a "huckster." What little
success he did achieve was largely the result of the work of others, most
notably his partner, Ub Iwerks.
In 1923, perhaps believing that his De Molay oaths might open doors for
him, Disney decided to go to Hollywood.
The Hollywood of 1923 was already a tightly controlled Anglo-Venetian
colony, emerging as the capital of the American film making "industry"
whose purpose was the subversion of the American republic. At the top of
the heap were powerful banking interests and bankers, with direct connections to the powerful financial houses of Europe. The bankers controlled the
"lifeblood" of the movie industrycapital. In that way, they effectively
determined who would survive and who wouldn't, who would be forced to
merge and who would be thrown on the dung heap, who would be stars, and
who wouldn't and what kinds of scripts would be funded for production.

But such powerful figures, with rare exceptions, generally stayed behind the
scenes. To the average American, the powers in Hollywood were the socalled moguls, such as Harry Cohn, Sam Goldwyn, Carl Laemmle, and
Louis Mayer, etc., who ran the studios. Beneath them was a stable of actors,
actresses, directors, and producers, and below them those who created the
product that was seen in the theaters around the country. These moguls were
in turn interconnected to the organized crime mob operations, especially as
the latter interfaced with theater chains and film distribution.
At the level of the moguls and their bordello-like studios, internecine warfare was encouraged, in much the same way that families within the mafia
might fight with each other for a larger share of the spoils. When it got out
of hand, or threatened to affect the public's acceptance of Hollywood's
product, the bankers made sure that a lid was put on.
Hollywood in 1923 thus resembled nothing so much as a Sodom and
Gomorrah on the West Coast, whose decadence and sleazy entertainment
product held the nation in rapt attention.
When Disney arrived on the scene, entrance into the Hollywood inner circle
was tightly restricted. It was impossible to establish an "independent" studio
without the approval of the operators of the bordello, its bankers.
Disney's membership in the de Molay lodge and some references from
Kansas City were apparently sufficient to get his toe in the door.
Representatives of the most powerful bank of Hollywood, the Bank of Italy
of the brothers A.P. and Atilio Giannini, saw to it that Disney was given a
modest line of credit, and enough cash to get his operations going and keep
them slightly above water. The critical funding relationship with the Bank
of Italy, which became the Bank of America, continued for more than 30
years.
The Kingmakers
The Gianninis were directly connected into Venetian and Genoese banking
syndicates. By the time of Disney's arrival, they were handling the funding
of almost every aspect of the movie industry, including all the major studios
and the personal accounts of the directors, stars, and the moguls themselves.
They were also handling all the personal banking of the Mussolini family.

Clockwise from right: Opening

frames from the 1928 premiere of
Mickey Mouse as Steamboat Willie
Disney's first animated film; posters
promoting other Disney animations,
Pinocchio and Fantasia; an ad for
Snow White.

Atilio Giannini, who handled the bank's film industry loans, was a raving
and open fascist, who later became the head of the Mazzini Society and was
placed under investigation as a subversive fascist sympathizer; that investigation was quashed by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover.
The bank was never investigated for its reported laundering of hundreds of
millions of dollars of mob monies, including funds from the Capone syndicate and "Murder, Inc." of Meyer Lansky, et. al. Some of these laundered
funds found their way back into Hollywood.
The Gianninis became the only source of short-term operating capital for the
film industry and its far-flung operations. It was A.P. Giannini who personally decreed that a film in the can was to be treated as collateral, as a form of
merchandise, and given the same kind of credit treatment as dry goods.
The Gianninis also helped create the "star system" and the promotion of this
new aristocracy. Both A.P. and his brother insisted that the "bankability" of
a film was based on proven stars; their presence in the film was an effective
guarantor of the loan. If the Gianninis said that a given star had "fallen,"
that meant the studio had to get rid of him or her if they wanted to continue
its line of credit or receive cash advances for films.
Disney was part of a "talent pool" that the Gianninis kept around Hollywood.
Disney showed a knack for survival in the cut-throat competitive environment
of Hollywood, mostly through the manipulation of others around him; in
addition, he displayed an ability to produce a simple product, with modest
appeal to the tastes of the average American.
A Mouse Is Born
In 1927, Disney's first truly successful cartoon character, Oswald the Rabbit,
was stolen by Carl Laemmle's Universal Studios, which handled its distribution; in addition, Universal stole much of his staff, in a move that had the
approval of Laemmle's bankers, the Gianninis. Disney was being tested,
before being let up another step in the ladder.
He responded with the creation of his most famous character, Mickey
Mouse. Contrary to the mythology that has arisen about this birth, Mickey
was in fact the artistic creation of someone elseDisney's partner Ub
Iwerks. What gave the mouse its unique "character" was Disney's own
simplistic worldview and personality.

Unlike previous cartoon characters, even successful ones, Mickey Mouse

was "human" or anthropomorphic. As the Russian film director Sergei
Eisenstein was to write in the 1930s, Mickey Mouse "was at once animal
and human, showing the human in the animal, and therefore, the animal in
the human." This blurring of the distinction between the human and the
animal was to become a consistent theme of all Disney's later output. It did
not go unnoticed by Disney's financial angels, who at that time were also
funding the promotion of Freudian and anti-Christian Darwinian ideologies.
The first "Mickey" cartoon was also the first "talking" cartoon. Disney had
ordered that the change be made to a "talkie," immediately after the success
of the Warner Brothers film The Jazz Singer in 1927. He was no doubt
influenced by his banker, Atilio Giannini, who had stated that after The Jazz
Singer, financing would be available only for talking pictures.
Steamboat Willie, featuring Mickey Mouse, premiered to a theater stacked
with Bank of Italy clients and flacks on Nov. 18, 1928. The crowd cheered
the mouse, whose squeaky voice was Walt Disney himself. It was an overnight sensation, with the industry papers heralding the birth of a new star,
Mickey Mouse, and hailing the "genius" of his "creator," Walt Disney.
Up until this time, Disney had dealt with his controllers through intermediaries, especially his brother and partner, Roy. But following the carefully
orchestrated success of the Steamboat Willie premiere, a meeting was
arranged in a Los Angeles hotel between Disney and the Giannini brothers.
He showed them drawings for new Mickey cartoons and asked for a
substantial infusion of cash. A.P. Giannini is reported to have personally
given the okay for a major bank loan. At the same time, word was put out
through Giannini-controlled networks to promote Disney and his "Mouse,"
with the major studios ordered to cooperate in this project.
Hollywood's 'White Knight'
At that time, it was common wisdom that the so-called movie industry was
controlled by moguls who were mostly eastern European "Jews." However,
these "Jews" had almost nothing in common with the Jewish religion, and
certainly didn't follow any of its principles, especially Mosaic Law.
In fact, many of the movie executives had long since given up practicing
Judaism in any form. Louis Mayer, for example, once said that he felt closer
to the Catholic Church than to Judaism, although he never converted; he did
not practice the Jewish faith. Harry Cohn deliberately went to work on the

Jewish High Holy Days to mock religious Jews; still others among the powers in Hollywood became Christian Scientists, while Jesse Lasky became a
follower of the occult spiritualist Edgar Cayce.
These "Jews who were not Jews" had extensive links to organized crime
networks, especially those of "Jewish mobsters" Meyer Lansky, Bugsy
Siegel, etc.
They all were bound together by membership in a secular cult, the Los
Angeles lodge of the B'nai B'rith, whose spiritual leader was Edgar Magnin.
His grandfather had founded the I. Magnin department store chain that was
one of the first major accounts of the Bank of Italy. Magnin became known
as the "Rabbi to the stars."
Magnin, and his followers in the Hollywood community, saw Judaism as a
racial question. He compared the B'nai B'rith and the later large temple he
built to the equivalent temple of the Masonic order in Los Angeles. In his
preaching, Magnin demanded the secularization of the Jewish religion, and
he ran the B'nai B'rith and the temple like a business.
Magnin was closely associated with the Gianninis, developing a relationship
between the Bank of Italy and the B'nai B'rith.
At the time of the Mickey premiere, Hollywood was under increasing attack
from many quarters for eroding the morals of the nation. The attack never
significantly threatened the control over its brainwashing product, although
there were several calls for limitations on its "lewdness." Much of the attack
was deliberately steered into overt anti-Semitism, thus concealing the real
power, as represented by the Gianninis and New York investment banker
Otto Kahn, behind Hollywood's perversity.
It was Magnin who reportedly helped convince the moguls that Hollywood
needed a "white knight," a "super clean" non-Jew whose product could
appeal to "family values." In surveying the scene, Walt Disney with his
loveable mouse was the most likely candidate for this "central casting" role
of the "White Knight of Hollywood."
The Hollywood establishment allowed the "outsider" Disney to create a
studio whose product was aimed primarily at the children's market, supporting him the effort, albeit behind the scenes. At the insistence of networks
directly associated with the Gianninis, the Disney project was sanctified in
the 1930 Production Code, which stated that the industry must make a spe-

cial effort to produce films especially appropriate for children. Behind this
was the recognition that national addiction to Hollywood would be cemented
at the neighborhood theater level, and given continuity from generation to
generation by drawing children to the theaters. Disney was in fact directly
referenced in the code as exemplary of the types of films needed for children.
At the same time, Disney himself was given the "star treatment," with newspaper and magazine articles making his name and his character household
words. By no later than 1931, the mere name "Disney" associated with a
cartoon or product meant its instant acceptability by American families.
The fame and box office success of the Disney cartoons did not translate into
huge profits for his "independent" studio. In part, that was because of the
limits on the fees that trickled down from the big-studio, mob-dominated
distribution system; ultimately, Disney was to make more money from its
film-related products, such as comic books and dolls, than from box office
receipts. However, his continual lack of needed cash kept Disney tied to the
financial lines of his controllers, and constantly in debt.
During the period from 1928 through 1934, Disney gradually expanded the
length of his product, from the short cartoon, to his slightly longer Silly
Symphonies, to his first short subject, the enormously successful Three Little
Pigs. Having reached and extended the limits of short animated subjects, he
decided to press on, to a feature-length animated film.
The decision to make Snow White was termed a gamble by some, and even
"Disney's Folly" by others, but its success was all but certain from the beginning. Disney had made the decision to go ahead with the picture after a
1934 European tour where he was feted by the oligarchy. The tour featured
honors from the Gianninis' and Hollywood's favorite fascist, Benito Mussolini, and a royal dinner hosted by the King and Queen of England. It was
hardly likely that the oligarchical power that controlled Hollywood would
have let Disney fail.
To make sure that Snow White would be completed when Disney's money
began to ran out, the Gianninis dispatched Bank of America director Joseph
Rosenberg to view the partially completed film. As he left the showing at
the studio, Rosenberg, without emotion, announced that the film would be a
success and agreed to provide all funds needed to complete the project
(whose costs had expanded from $250,000 to the then-astronomical amount

of $1.7 million) and give the studio an additional $1 million line of credit.
Rosenberg would provide similar services for Disney throughout the 1950s,
whenever the company needed money.
In fact, the buildup around "Disney's folly" served to keep interest during the
long, three-year period of production of Snow White. The talk of possible
failure further magnified the carefully crafted perception of the film's success after its opening on Dec. 21, 1937. In its initial run, it grossed a thenall-time record of $8 million, while its soundtrack recording of its songs
became the first such record bestseller, and its individual songs became
"number one" singles.
How Disney Brainwashes
The production and release of Snow White marked the beginning of a new
phase of the Anglo-Venetian's Disney project. Up to that point, Disney's
primary use for his patrons was to serve as a "white knight" amid the perceived decadence of Hollywood; beyond that it was to establish a niche in
the "family entertainment" market, especially in the children's market. With
Snow White, Disney became a primary conduit for brainwashing large
segments of the population.
At its 1930s release, Snow White was seen by more children than any other
film in history. But unlike many movies, which are dated and could be released only once, Snow White and other Disney cartoon features contained
no actors who grow old in later films, dealt with "timeless" subjects, and
hence were not dated. They could be released in regular cycles (Disney
chose seven years) to catch each succeeding generation of children.
Thus, the Disney films become cultural icons, whose messages are passed
from generation to generation. In that way, the Disney film became an
essential part of growing up in America, with each generation acknowledging that perceived fact.
Disney did not "create" the messages in his films per se, any more than the
current Disney studio did for such films as The Lion King. Those messages
are the product of a degenerate culture dominated by the moral outlook of
the same oligarchical interests that created Disney.
As the result of a massive public relations campaign carried on in his behalf,
the American public was made to perceive Disney as good; from that it
followed, that what this good man produced, was also good. In this way,

critical judgment about what Disney presented was suspended, in favor of

the popular perception of the "goodness" or "wholesomeness" of his product.
People were predisposed to like what he produced.
From this carefully constructed podium, Disney was set up to preach, using
as his "method" a form of Aristotlean reductionism that became known as
"Disnification." In each of his major animated films, the Disney machine
presented battles in a Manichean universe between forces of "good" and
"evil." Into this simple framework, not-so-subtle brainwashing messages
were inserted.
The Disney machine was instrumental in helping shift America from one
degraded paradigm to another, even more degraded, over the span of several
decades.
Most Americans consider themselves moral people, who believe in God. At
the same time, most Americans would say that Walt Disney's films, especially his classics, such as Snow White are completely compatible with their
morality and their belief in God.
But nowhere in Disney films is there even any representation of God. In
fact, Disney effectively banned any mention of the word God or the implication of belief in organized religion.
During the production of Snow White, for example, there was a debate about
a particular scene in which, in the Grimm Brothers fairy tale from which the
movie idea came, Snow White offers a prayer to God, before going to bed. It
was even pointed out by his artists that most children offered the Lord's
Prayer before they went to sleep. "I don't give a damn," said Disney, "no
one was going to pray to God in my movie." The word "God" was excised
from the script, and Snow White was allowed to offer only a general prayer.
Disney films, in general, reject the most fundamental principle of JudeoChristian belief, that man is created in the image of his MakerImago Dei
and that he is distinct from the animal, in that, unlike any beast, he has the
God-given power of creative reason. Instead, Disney films portray animals
with distinctly human qualities, deliberately making any distinction between
the species seem arbitrary.
Human creative reason is either never presented, or, if it is, it is shown as
something which gets people in trouble. In its place, we are told to resolve
things through "magic"; as Disney was fond of saying when his story

developers ran into dead ends, where plot lines could not be resolved:
"Sprinkle some of that fairy dust." We are also told, as in Snow White, or
Pinocchio, to avoid reason altogether and to "think" emotionally, with one's
heart.
"The principle of any fine arts is to arouse a pure emotional reaction in the
beholder," said Disney in a 1955 interview, rejecting the principles of the
Golden Renaissance. "If I can't feel a theme, I can't make a film that anyone
else will feelI am just corny enough to like to have a story hit me over the
heart."
The desire to avoid representations of imago dei has resulted in massive distortions of many fairy tales in the "Disney version." For example, in Hans
Christian Andersen's Little Mermaid but not in the popular Disney cartoon,
the crux of the mermaid's fervent desire is to acquire a human soul, which
she associates with the quality of "love." However, when given the ability to
walk and take the human form, she is rendered mute; she is hurt by the
cruelties of a romantic love relationship and the result is tragedy. Ultimately, she returns to the sea, realizing that she can never obtain a human
soul, for that God-given quality is unique to man.
Disney reduces this tale to a simple love story between a mermaid and a
man, with banal characterizations and cuteness, and a sad ending, but with
no discussion of the question of what makes a human different from an
animal, even one that looks like a human. Where Andersen tried to help
teach what makes one human, from a Christian standpoint, Disney distorts
and twists the search for an answer into a sappy love story.
In general, Disney artists have had little trouble representing evil, often
creating images that have terrified little children. They have had a far
greater difficulty in representing the quality of good, since it is a totally
God-given quality of humanity that cannot be reduced to a simple representation but must exist as a more complicated thought object; what
Disney produces as "good" in his Manichean universe, comes out, as with
the Little Mermaid, as a sort of saccharine, phony sweetness.
Disney vs. the Fairy Tale
The moral education of a child begins as a series of questions to a parent
about events in the child's universe. But the subject of such dialogue
between parent and child is not the event itself, but the thought object
created in the child's mind by that event.

A classic fairy tale, of the type written by Hans Christian Andersen and the
Brothers Grimm, can assist in the formulation of the thought objects that
lead to the formulation of questions. But the tale, in and of itself, doesn't
answer those questions, and does not alone provide the child the new
thought object which contains the germ of the answers to the moral dilemmas posed. Only through such dialogue with a moral adult can a child's
morality and creative reasoning capacity be developed, such that he can
become a productive member of adult society.
But Disney and his sponsors have no desire to morally educate children to
become members of adult society. "If all the world thought and acted like
children, we wouldn't have any trouble," said Disney in an interview. "The
pity is that even kids have to grow up."
Disney claimed that the real key to the success of his features wasn't simply
in their appeal or power over children. He claimed to have carefully chosen
his subjects for their appeal to adult family members through a form of
nostalgia or sentimentality for their youth.
"I am appealing to the child in each of us," he boasted, and its desire to
remain "childlike," free of the responsibilities of adult society. Disney has
thus helped entrap several generations in a regressive, enforced infantilism
as they take their children to see or watch on video films that they saw with
their parents years before.
In that way, the anti-Christian, anti-human messages of the earlier Disney
films are constantly reinforced.
To accomplish this, and to make his desired points, Disney consciously
butchered the fairy tales, changing the plots, adding or deleting characters,
and enlarging or decreasing the roles of others. In the Grimms' Snow White,
for example, the seven dwarfs are minor, nondescript characters; in his
version, Disney used them as visual representations of personality types.
Similarly, the pro-Royalist Disney demanded that Snow White be awakened
by the Prince's kiss, wanting audiences to relate to the "romantic," pro-Nazi
Duke of Windsor, whose abdication occurred while the film was in production, and whom Disney admired.
The family of the author of Pinocchio threatened suit over Disney's murder
of the original story. Disney's response to this and any criticism: "After I
am done, people will only remember my version." Studies have shown him

to be right: most people now think that Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is
the name of the fairy tale, when it is a name Disney concocted.
Let's look at a few case studies to see the effect of Disney and his films on
America over the last fifty years.
Case 1: Selling Strategic Bombing
Most Americans have bought into the myth that Walt Disney was a great
"patriot," who supported the Allied effort in World War II with anti-fascist
cartoons and short training and propaganda films.
The truth is that Disney, like most of the Hollywood moguls, was a raving
fascist who attended Nazi Party rallies in the 1930s, according to recently
published reports. Disney's contact with proto-fascist movements began in
the early 1930s, when he joined a self-proclaimed group of "Young Turks,"
whose principal meeting place was the Riviera Country and Polo Club. The
invitation to the group, which included Disney's drinking buddy Spencer
Tracy, Leslie Howard, Gary Cooper, and producer Daryl F. Zanuck, came
from another Disney friend, the actor Victor McLaglen.
McLaglen, with money from the Hearst syndicate and Giannini's Bank of
America, created a paramilitary group, which trained on the polo fields,
known as the "Hollywood Light Horse Regiment." The group, with which
Disney sympathized, held Bund-like mass rallies and marches, and proclaimed itself ready for armed insurrection against a "communist menace,"
which included the labor movement and the New Deal supporters of Franklin Roosevelt. The group had branches around the country, which included
Ku Klux Klan members and similar ilk, all ready for armed insurrection and
a possible coup against the U.S. government. A second group, co-founded
by Gary Cooper, the "Hollywood Hussars," espoused identical views.
Disney supported these operations, while staying in the background. He was
to continue to back proto-fascist causes until the end of his life, with both he
and his brother Roy providing significant funding for the John Birch Society.
Disney's direct contact with the networks that supported Mussolini was
handled through his friends at the Bank of America. His contact with the
Nazis was through the Disney company lawyer, Gunther Lessing, with
whom he attended Nazi Party functions in the mid- and late 1930s.

Prints and Photographs Division/Library of Congress

Prints and Photographs Division/Library of Congress

Mr. A.P. Giannini, the banker who funded

Disney, with his family. Giannini and other
powerful bankers controlled the content and
casting of Hollywood's entertainment industry.

Prints and Photographs Division/

Library of Congress

Producer Louis B. Mayer

Vittorio Mussolini, son of the Italian dictator, is

honored at a Hollywood party in 1935.

Lessing had a history of involvement with British-backed Mazzini movements dating to his service as a lawyer for the Mexican bandit Pancho Villa.
It was Lessing who arranged, through Berlin, for Disney to hire Nazi filmmaker and rumored Hitler girlfriend Leni Riefenstahl, only to be forced to
withdraw the offer following the Nov. 11, 1938 "Kristallnacht" attack on
Germany's Jews outraged Americans. Disney, however, refused to cancel
her tour of his studio, despite protests.
After the war began, Disney became one of Hollywood's most outspoken
supporters of the America First movement, a position that he never altered
until after the U.S.A. declared war Dec. 8, 1941. When the army occupied
his studio for defensive purposes in the immediate aftermath of Pearl
Harbor, Disney screamed bloody murder, denouncing President Roosevelt.
But with the war underway, Disney's controllers had a job for him. He was
given a government contract to make propaganda and training shorts, at the
behest of a "friend," Nelson Rockefeller, then undersecretary of state for
Latin American Affairs. Ultimately, his work was put under the direct
supervision of the Committee on National Morale, headed by a Tavistock
Institute-linked section which included brainwashers Kurt Lewin and Rensis
Likert, as well as pollster Hadley Cantrill.
Some time in 1942, through these networks and London contacts associated
with his "polo" set, Disney was put into contact with Major Alexander de
Seversky, a former White Russian officer and pilot, adviser to the U.S.
military, the founder of Republic Aviation on Long Island, and the designer
of bomb-sights and aircraft. De Seversky was assigned the job of popularizing a new military doctrine of geopolitical utopianism: "strategic bombing."
To this end, he had penned the book, Victory Through Airpower, and now
recruited Disney to turn his book into a brainwashing film to sell the doctrine to the American people and their leadership.
De Seversky claimed that the development of the airplane as a weapon of
war created the need for new military thinking. However, rather than seeing
air power as it should be understood, as an extension of artillery bombardment, he argued that it was a "new strategic weapon," whose capabilities
must be divorced from any other military service or related strategy. It was
no longer necessary, he said, to contemplate long and costly military invasions of massed land- and sea-based forces. Instead, it was now possible
through mass, high-altitude bombing to render an enemy militarily impotent
and to destroy the will of its civilian population to fight.

De Seversky argued that it required only that America build a fleet of longrange bombing aircraft capable of carrying heavy payloads, and to concentrate that "strategic bombing capability" for attack on Germany and related
targets in Europe and on the Japanese islands, to bring the war on both fronts
to a rapid close, without the loss of American forces. To accomplish this
effectively, de Seversky demanded that the air forces be constituted into
their own separate military branch, as the British had done, and given the
power to develop their own strategy.
De Seversky had opened his book with a description of a "strategic" bombing attack on the United States, resulting in the total devastation of its cities
and government. While such an attack might not be possible yet in this war,
he stated, it would be possible soon, and he "predicted" that in the future,
planes would carry weapons of "enormous destruction" into the heart of
America. The only defense, he argued, was to have an even greater air force
that could "totally destroy" an enemy's capability to make war, preemptively,
if necessary.
De Seversky deliberately left out discussion of the consequent monstrous
civilian casualties. He seemed to imply an antiseptic and surgically precise
war, which, while admitting that some civilians might be lost, would save
more lives, especially American lives, than it would cost.
The arguments in the book were to be used to justify a delay of a second
front in Europe, a move backed by Britain's Winston Churchill, aimed at
slaughtering as many Germans, Russians, and Europeans as possible. But
even more important, the psywar should be seen as preparing the way for the
post-war "nuclear pre-emptive strike" against the Soviet Union as supported
by the faction associated with the evil Bertrand Russell.
The full power of the Disney studio was put behind selling this strategy.
What was produced was perhaps the most widely viewed pure political
propaganda film of all time. When it opened in 1943, audiences were
"blown away" by the power of its images, from the black blur of bombing
planes striking the United States as the film opens, to what appears to be a
fireball of destruction that marks its end. With the "Disney" name on the
film, its audience acceptance was all but assured.
James Agee, film critic for The Nation, immediately saw the power of the
film's brainwashing message, and worried whether de Seversky and Disney
"know what they are talking about, for I suspect that a lot of people who see

Victory Through Air Power are going to think they do. . . . I had the feeling
that I was being sold something under pretty high pressure which I don't
enjoy, and I am staggered by the ease with which such self-confidence, on
matters of such importance, can be blared all over the nation, without being
cross-questioned."
After the film's release, Cantrill and others reported poll results showing an
increase in support for "strategic bombing."
Churchill, according to his own account, ordered a private screening of the
film for himself and Roosevelt at the 1943 Casablanca conference, using it
and the poll results caused by its showing, to "sell" the reluctant President on
a major step-up of strategic bombing of Germany, and a further delay in the
"second front."
Disney remained a strong advocate of de Seversky's doctrine throughout his
life, and a strong supporter of the U.S. Strategic Air Command. In the late
1940s, he was an outspoken advocate of the Russell policy of use of nuclear
weapons for a first strike against the Soviet Union. Later, prints of Victory
Through Airpower were offered as "teaching tools" in U.S. history classes in
high school, free of charge, by the Disney Studio.
Case 2: Disney and Environmentalism
Some time during a European junket in the mid-1930s, Walt Disney was
given a book by Felix Salten, a Viennese pornographer from a salon kept by
the Hapsburgs. The book was Bambi, the story of a deer family in the forest,
in an English edition translated by Communist Party member Whittaker
Chambers. Disney remarked that the book exactly reflected his thinking
about the relationship between man and animals, and he stated his intention
to make it into a cartoon feature in the future.
Disney had himself always subscribed to the theories of Charles Darwin and
his modern co-thinkers, although it is hardly likely that he ever bothered to
read Darwin. Disney used eugenic theories of race to explain his reasoning
for never hiring a black, except for the position of a porter, and his acceptance of the view that some people's are "unfit" to govern themselves.
These views, and his contacts with circles in the British royal family,
brought him into contact with the Huxley family. In 1939, he sought the
advice of Sir Julian Huxley in the preparation of a sequence depicting the
origins of life for his "concert feature," the animated film Fantasia; Huxley

was brought to the studio as an adviser for the section orchestrated to

Stravinsky's Rite of Spring.
At the time, there was nothing resembling a mass movement for "environmentalism" in the United States. With the release of Bambi in 1942, Disney
produced what is probably the most anti-human, pro-environmentalist film
of all time, in the form of a "children's feature."
In the Salten story, the tamed animals revere humans as gods, while the wild
animals hate them as demons whom they call "Him." At the beginning of
the book, all creatures are willing to cede man his dominion over nature. By
the novel's end, this view is fully dispelled, when Bambi, taken by his dying
father to view the corpse of the murdered poacher, is instructed that humans
are the same as animals, that they kill and are killed and that they have no
special right to dominion over nature.
When the book was first published in 1924, The New York Times hailed this
anti-human ethos: "The author has given us the life story of a forest deer,
and Felix Salten's comprehension of the entire universe as well. . . . Throw
away your Spinozan tomes on pantheism and read Bambi."
Disney demanded that the book's central anti-human thesis be kept intact.
The forest, he told his artists, is the Lord's true universe and His creation,
and it was to be shown, in the most brutal way possible, that it was man's
intrusion into this universe that destroys it. Against the advice of his own
story people, Disney insisted that the doe, Bambi's mother, be killed by
human hunters and that the killing be jerked for every tear possible from the
audience. He further insisted that a fire, caused by human carelessness,
destroy the forest.
In order to make the contrast between the human "beasts" and their helpless,
cuddly animal "victims" more obvious, Disney insisted that all animal
predators be excised from the script: "There is nobody swooping down
eating somebody else and their one common enemy is Man. That's the
conflict therekeep it simple."
Disney demanded realism in the depiction of all the animals, but gave them
anthropomorphic personalities: "I want them to be human. I want people to
forget that they are watching animals."

He also inserted his own perverse Christian symbolism: Bambi is born into
a scene visually akin to the manger birth of Christ, replete with animals
hailing the birth of "a young prince."
The overall effect, especially on impressionable young children, was a
frightening anti-human experience that had the child identifying with animals. Said critic Richard Williams in 1989, "I came out of Bambi on my
hands and knees."
Bambi had become the symbol of, first, all deer, and then all animals, just as
Disney intended. George Reiger, writing in Field and Stream in 1980,
observed that Disney and his staff were guilty of the worst blasphemy. "In
Disney's version, once Bambi is raised in status from deer to Jesus Whitetail
superstar, man's hunting of deer becomes a crime comparable to the persecution of Christ." Today, environmentalists and others have commented on the
effectiveness of Bambi's message, calling the revulsion against harming
animals because of their alleged human qualities, "the Bambi syndrome."
But Bambi, whose box office draw has increased with each new release, was
only the first salvo in Disney's brainwashing barrage on behalf of the Huxley
networks. Coincidental with Juilan Huxley's founding of the international
environmentalist movement with creation of the International Union for the
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in 1948, Disney embarked on the development of what he termed "true life" nature productions. These "live-action"
films portray animals as having human emotions, even personalities, to blur
all distinction between animal and human society. They further imply that
animals "think" or "reason" like humans, and that they are "creative,"
denying the God-created distinction between man and all lower species.
Here, Disney mirrors the thinking of the evil Jeremy Bentham, the man who
headed British intelligence at the end of the eighteenth century and an
avowed enemy of the American Republic. Bentham claimed that animals
"feel pain," much as humans do, and therefore are to be given equal "consideration" with humans.
In Bambi and some of his other animated films that feature animals, it might
be argued that Disney was using the anthropomorphic representations as a
metaphor, in the same way as some fairy tales do. However, it can be shown
in almost every case that Disney goes beyond what is necessary for a metaphorical representation, to make a literal and emotional point about the
similarity between humans and animals.

In these "true life" adventures, which are the benchmark for much of what
comes later in "nature" propaganda films of the type shown on public
television, Disney goes a step farther into outright lying. His method is a
version of the "big lie" technique. As he explained in a later magazine
article, headlined The Roving Camera, Disney tried to create the impression
that what he presented was fact, by overwhelming the audience with minute
detail, magnified by the big screen. Like Darwin's presentation of large
amounts of observable detail as proof of his unscientific fraud, Disney
indicated that all that is important in nature was what could be seen by the
camera. His Aristotleanism denies unseen ideas that are the product of
human creative reason, ideas which become the basis for man's comprehension of nature and the basis for his mastery of it, in the spirit of the famous
commandment in the Book of Genesis.
For his first non-animated film, Disney chose a study of Alaskan fur seals
which was shot by two nature photographers he had encountered on a trip to
Alaska. It was shot in the remote Pribilof Islands, where fur seals migrate
year after year to fight, mate, bear children and then leave, all at once.
Through careful editing, Disney depicts seals with human feelings of love,
anger, remorse, etc. Disney likened the movie to an "animal soap opera."
The 30-minute film was promoted into a huge success by the Disneyfriendly media.
The series progressed to longer feature-length movies, such as The Living
Desert and The Vanishing Prairie, released in 1953 and 1954. Disney
demanded extensive editing to bring out as much anthropomorphism as
possible, even scripting the animal "characters" as if they were, indeed, real
actors.
Disney's nature series included increasingly frequent scenes of graphic and
even shocking violence and death. One critic remarked that there was more
killing going on in these so-called nature films than in a dozen war movies.
Disney defended this, stating that violence is what characterizes all animal
behavior, including human behavior. To make it more palatable, he deliberately "prettified" the blood and gore through orchestration to musica technique today commonly used in horror and other graphically violent films.
The animal "stars" were given names, and their relations with each other
became totally human. In some of them, in order to make a point in the
"plot," Disney's dishonesty borders on the grotesque. In The Legend of
Lobo, for example, he used a seemingly "wild" animal that in fact had been

trained to do certain tricks, not telling either audiences or critics about the
training.
Taken as a whole, the series is a most powerful array of films devoted to the
belief that animals are just like humans, while presenting human civilization
as their increasingly dangerous enemy.
In a 1945 article for the Tavistock Institute thinktank-linked journal, Public
Opinion, Disney had advocated the mass distribution of films through
schools as the most efficient means of "educating" youth. He put this into
practice with his "true-life" series, donating millions of dollars of audiovisual equipment and copies of the films to schools across the nation. By
the end of the 1950s, nearly every child in America had seen at least one of
these Disney films and/or Bambi, either in the theaters or in school, where
specially prepared guides instructed teachers on what to say.
The "true-life" series reached an even wider audience through the Walt
Disney Presents television series. Meanwhile, the studio continued to
hammer away on rabid environmentalist themes in its animated features,
most notably 1001 Datamations, which has been praised by animal rights
activists for helping create the movement against the use of animal skins and
furs.
With The Lion King, the Disney Studio has returned to the basic plot outlines
of the "true-life" series, weaving them into a full-length animated feature, set
in an African game park, and absent all evidence of human civilization. The
film is a celebration of the law of the jungle, with the not-so-hidden message
that animal society is the same as human in its brutality and violence. The
film is well on its way to becoming the most widely viewed movie of all
time.
Case 3: Disney and the McCarthy Witchhunt
One of the most disgusting and degrading acts of the last half century was
the toleration, and even support, by the majority of Americans for the
McCarthy witchhunt from 1945-54. Walt Disney personally played a critical
role in kicking off that operation, sponsored by British oligarchical circles
and their allies on this side of the Atlantic, and in its "sale" to the American
people.
De Molay lodge member Disney from the 1920s onward had been an
avowed "anti-communist" and supporter of fascist "anti-communist"

initiatives, especially those directed against organized labor. Through his

Masonic connections, Disney made contact with FBI Director J. Edgar
Hoover, and from at least the mid-1980s, Disney was volunteering information on "suspected communists" to the FBI. According to documentation
published in the recent Disney biography, Marc Elliot's Walt Disney: Hollywood's Dark Prince, Disney was providing regular reports to Hoover and to
his agents in the Los Angeles area.
Disney labelled a bitter 1941 union-organized strike against his studio as
communist-inspired, and sought to have its leaders investigated by the FBI.
The strike was in fact triggered by Disney's abusive labor policies, which
had his cartoonists and other employees working on one of the lowest pay
scales in the industry. Disney's refusal to give anyone but himself public
credit for the creative product of the studio also contributed to the bitterness
of his abused workforce.
With Hoover's knowledge, Disney had turned to the gangster Willie Bioff,
who ran a studio-controlled union that was effectively a branch of Murder,
Inc., to help bust the strike. The Roosevelt Justice Department, with little
help from the FBI, arrested Bioff before he could mount his intervention.
Ultimately, the strike was settled with the help of Disney's friend Nelson
Rockefeller; Disney saw to it that most of the union leaders were either
fired or forced to quit, in open defiance of labor laws then already on the
books.
Disney continued to snitch to the FBI, filing reports that were most often the
product of his paranoid imagination or pure fabrications directed against the
former strike leaders. With the blessing of Hoover, in February 1944,
Disney initiated the formation of a Hollywood "anti-communist" brain trust,
the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals; the
group included 75 prominent actors, directors, and producers, as well as Roy
Brewer, the man who had been hand-picked by the jailed gangster Bioff to
run his union, the International Association of Theatrical and Stage Employees (IASTE). With Disney as its vice president and spokesman, the first task
of these anti-communist crusaders was to work against the 1944 reelection
of FDR, whom they labelled "a dupe of the international communist conspiracy."

Prints and Photographs Division/Library of Congress

Senator Joe McCarthy

Erich Andres/Hamburg

Dresden, Germany, following the

1945 firebombing

EIRNS/Stuart Lewis

Elementary school children

celebrate "Earth Day."
War on Drugs / Ganni Franco Piras

It is important to note that, while there were many known and close
communist sympathizers and Communist Party members in and around
Hollywood at the time, the idea that they could or did control the output of
American films is pure nonsense. That output was controlled by the same
Anglo-Venetian controllers who created Walt Disney and the Hollywood
"dream machine" he became part of. For the most part this crowd, which
also effectively controlled the mobs of Meyer Lansky, Bugsy Siegel, etc.
was pro-fascist. And they, while loudly organizing people to crow about the
"red menace," authorized the cutting of checks that paid for the stable of redtinged castoffs of the Frankfurt School who were employed to help in the
presentation of "Americanism" on celluloid.
It was Walt Disney who personally initiated the witchhunt in Hollywood
with a 1944 letter to Sen. Robert Reynolds (D-N.C.) which promised the
MPA's full support the attack on the "nest of red vipers." Soon the House
Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) had investigators all over
town, handing out subpoenas.
By November 1947, HUAC, now headed by the rabidly anti-labor Congressman J. Parnell Thomas, with the full blessing of the industry, IASTE and the
American Legion, launched the most ambitious investigations in its history.
It was during these hearings that the committee focussed on a series of leftwing writers, who became known as the Hollywood Ten. The ten refused,
under relentless pressure from Parnell, to answer the question that was to
become the hallmark of this era, later named for the even more rabid, "redhunter," the notorious Sen. Joseph McCarthy: "Are you now or have you
ever been a member of the Communist Party?" The 10 stood squarely on
their First Amendment rights, yet were thrown in jail for contempt.
The committee, working with Brewer and people in the industry, proposed to
crush the careers of those whom they targeted by the creation of a "blacklist"
that would ban anyone accused by the committee from work anywhere in the
industry for all time. On Nov. 24-25, 1947, a meeting of the motion picture
industry's top people, its studio bosses, its independent producers, and
Brewer was called at the Waldorf-Astoria hotel in New York City to discuss
the blacklist and whether they would agree to enforce it against the Hollywood Ten and all others. Disney helped draft the infamous "Waldorf Statement" which endorsed the blacklist and pledged its enforcement against the
Ten and anyone else who was found to be "subversive or disloyal." He
stood by this action for the rest of his life.

By May 1947, the mere receipt of a subpoena by HUAC as an "unfriendly

witness," or even leaks from the FBI of investigation, were sufficient
grounds to be blacklisted. There were whimpering protests from some
corners, but Disney and his cronies ignored them.
The snitch Disney claimed that one of the proudest days of his life was his
testimony before HUAC as a "friendly witness" on Oct. 24, 1947, in the
afternoon session, where he attacked the communists who had "conspired"
against his studio and defended the blacklist, presenting fabricated "evidence" against the strikers.
The "blacklist" was soon a fact of life not only in Hollywood, but in other
industries across the country. Tens of thousands of innocent people and their
families were denied employment and hounded by the witchhunt apparatus.
The degenerate homosexual and drunkard, Sen. Joe McCarthy, thanked
Disney and the others in the MPA for showing the way to rest of the country.
Case 4: "One Pill Makes You Larger. . ."
Walt Disney, in the years before his death in 1966, was already, as were
many right wingers that he associated with, a vocal critic of the growing San
Francisco-based psychedelic counterculture. However, the same Walt
Disney played a crucial role in helping to create that counterculture.
As early as the Silly Symphonies of the 1930s, Disney had been experimenting with the bold use of color and loud sound that resembled nothing so
much as a hallucinogenic drug-induced stream of consciousness. Much of
this experimentation later found its way in to Disney's 1941 so-called
concert feature, Fantasia. This was later to cause Life magazine to remark
that Fantasia was the first LSD-based work of art, and that Disney was in
fact the godfather of all psychedelic art.
But there is a more direct connection between Disney and what was to
become the psychedelic counterculture. Since at least the 1920s, Disney had
been obsessed with Lewis Carroll's cocaine-influenced "children's" story,
Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. He was, he claimed, intrigued with its
surrealistic imagery, its highly illogical "logic," and its plethora of bizarre
characters. By 1945, after complicated negotiations, he secured the rights to
the story and commissioned what was to be a six-year project to bring it to
the screen.

To develop his vision, Disney turned to the one person he thought most
qualified to do the job: Aldous Huxley, already well-known in the Hollywood set as the advocate of hallucinogenic drug experience and who was
later to become one of the architects of the British-created LSD culture of
the 1960s. He had come into contact with Aldous Huxley through contact
with his brother Julian, first meeting him when the latter was collaborating
with Disney on Fantasia.
Disney explained to Huxley that he wanted to produce a "work of the head,"
something that would be beyond a children's story, that would produce a
"dizzying experience."
Huxley worked on several scenes and an overall script outline for the project, but before he could finish, he became a victim of Disney's imperious
rage. Huxley made the mistake of speaking out against the brutality used
against strikers, including his son, at Warner Brothers. Disney seized the
work that he had done on Alice and asked him to leave.
Disney, following the Huxley outline, demanded that the film's imagery be
at once real and totally surreal, at once frightening and at the same time
pleasing, and always overwhelming. The now-famous images of the Red
Queen, the Cheshire Cat, the Mad Hatter and his Tea Party came out of these
sessions. When the work was finally completed in 1951, he was certain that
he had produced a masterpiece. Following the original scenario outline from
Huxley, the film came out as almost a "free association" series of scenes,
with jarring and often disjointed images. It achieved the "dizzying" effect
that both Huxley and Disney had desired.
Disney had produced a movie that was ahead of its timeor more precisely,
was to shape a time ahead. Later studies have shown that of all the Disney
films, Alice in Wonderland, with its bright colors and surreal, free associated
images, is one of the most remembered by the generation that was to become
known as the "baby boomers." Many were not yet born when the film
premiered and others too young to see it. But see it they did, in its many
releases, or later when it became the first (and only) Disney cartoon feature
to be regularly shown each year on television.
In the 1960s, with the nation's campuses primed with doses of mescaline and
LSD, Alice in Wonderland began to play back in another "theater." Psychiatrists interviewing the takers of these hallucinogenic drugs, asked their subjects to describe the visions in their "trips." "It was like Alice, man," many

would say. "You know, like the cartoon. Like wow, you know, like shrinking. All those colors."
Alice in Wonderland, seen years ago when they were children, was now
flashing back in their drugged minds. As this became known, the movie,
along with Fantasia, became "a thing" to see and there were new "appreciations" of their "transcendental" importance.
One of the hit songs of those days by the San Francisco rock group The
Jefferson Airplane, was called White Rabbit. It described several images of
a drug trip that could have been lifted directly from Disney's Alice. Asked
where they got their inspiration for the song, Grace Slick, the lead singer,
replied, "From Disney, man. This is Disney. You know, the Cheshire Cat,
the Mad Hatter, and hey, the White Rabbit. Feed your head, man."
A Cultural Icon
On July 17, 1955, Disney opened the first "theme park" in history in Anaheim, California. It was as different from an amusement park as Disney's
animated features were from standard cartoon fare. The concept, as Disney
explained it, was to produce a "new kind of reality," something akin to what
the cyberjerks today call "virtual reality," an artificially created universe,
relying on fooling the senses, which would provide the basis for believable
interaction. From the moment a person enters the admission gate, in fact,
from the moment he or she stands in line for a ticket, Disney takes control of
his experience, allowing him to make perceived choices but only from a
range of controlled choices. This is what brainwashers call a "controlled
environment."
In the theater, or in front of the television set, there still exists a seemingly
impenetrable physical barrier between you and the action you are watching:
the screen. In its place, Disney now sought to create a "three dimensional
life space" that people would wander around it. By presenting carefully
scripted entertainment, as he told those involved with the project, Disney
could make the artificial reality now so much more compelling that people
would come away having "learned" things that they had neither thought, felt,
or believed before.
While Disney directed a hand-picked staff drawn from his studio on the
Disneyland project, key guidance came from outside, from the Stanford
Research Institute (SRI), one of the leading outposts in the United States of

the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London, the British Royal

family's psychological warfare center.
The combined effort by Disney and his brain-washer advisers produced a
park divided into "fantasy" theme areas that dragged an adult back into a
series of feeling states. The effect was to create a sense of nostalgia for an
idealized past and a present and future based on this. The feelings were
triggered by Disney-controlled images. For a child, the experiencing is
totally overwhelming, making a long-lasting impact on their young minds
which is reinforced by and reinforces their attachment to Disney.
Disneyland's 1955 nationally telecast opening amplified its effect on the
American population.
Disney's television show in 1955 was the most widely watched program by
American families; that show featured prominently the person of Walt
Disney, who now was cast, Hollywood style, as America's favorite old uncle,
who was the symbol of all that was "right" with America. His creation of
Disneyland, "America's favorite place," the "Magic Kingdom," was the
proof that this was so.
Tavistock-linked anthropologists have more recently started to describe
Disneyland and Orlando, Florida's Walt Disney World as quasi-religious,
twin "shrines" of American popular culture.
"It is clearly a pilgrimage site in that people go there not just for a simple
vacation but to relive the myths that they group up on," says Conrad Kottak,
a University of Michigan anthropologist who analyzed both the mass
television culture and Walt Disney World. "You go there to relive your
childhood and to see the things that passed for gods and goddesses. It is
going to see a national mythology at a sacred site."
"People come here because they feel it's something that they need to do,"
said an executive of Walt Disney World. "There is an emotional connection
to Disney at a very early age. You almost have to come here at some time."
Disney's America?
"I am not Disney any more," Walt Disney told an interviewer two years
before his death from cancer in 1966. "I used to be Disney, but now 'Disney'
is something that we have built up in the public mind over the years. It

stands for something that you don't have to explain what it is to the public.
They know what it is."
Disney thus described one of the effects of a four-decade Anglo-Venetian
cultural warfare operation against the American population, in which he
played a willing, if not always witting part. Disney, through his films and
his actions, had helped to undermine the ability of Americans to reason creatively, to comprehend their nation's history and the meaning of their lives.
He had "entertained" them into believing that he and his film and theme park
product represented all that was "wholesome" and "good" about America,
beckoning them to turn from complicated problems to sentimentalism.
The Disney empire continued to trade off this mythology after its putative
founder's death. However, after years of running on "autopilot," in the late
1970s and 1980s, it started to falter, producing an inferior brainwashing
product, and losing money. The company became a target for takeover
specialists who planned to dismantle it. At that point, London and Wall
Street intervened to protect their decades of "invested" capital in the Disney
psychological warfare machine. The company was saved from the corporate
raiders, by, among others, Michael Milken, given a new leadership, headed
by Michael Eisner, and refocussed around producing animated films according to the "classic" Disney formula, of which The Lion King is the latest in a
string of box office successes.
Last year, Disney initiated efforts to construct a $650 million "American
history" theme park in Virginia's Piedmont Hunt Country. Ironically, they
ran into strong opposition from the environmentalist and protectionist
movement which Disney's films had helped create; but in the end, Disney
was delayed and forced to look for a new site only by the uncertainty of the
financial markets and the company's vast debt.
In the debate on "Disney's America," as the theme park is to be called, some
historians and others challenged Disney's ability to accurately portray
history. However, no one ever raised a peep about the profound negative
effect that Disney, for more than five decades had had on the mind of the
American population. In fact, all the opponents made sure to pay homage to
Walt Disney as a "creative genius" and great patriot.
And, while there was locally based opposition to the billion-dollar theme
park, the majority of our citizens saw absolutely nothing wrong with it and
were disappointed by the project's delay.

To this day, the myth first constructed by those who created Disney persists,
the myth that, while there are problems with Hollywood in general, Disney
is "wholesome" and is something to which we can entrust the minds of our
children. After all, didn't your parents entrust you to Disney?
Yet, if we look at the effects of these decades of cultural warfare against the
minds of our population, we can see that each succeeding generation has
been more morally confused, less mentally and creatively capable than the
last. Each has been more attracted to fantasy states, to emotionalism rather
than reason, and to increasing levels of pessimism. Disney and his films,
reappearing every seven years like locusts, have played a not insignificant
role in pushing us down this slippery slope. And yet, the American population, seduced by the sentimentality and the fantasies spun by the Disney
brainwashing machine, eagerly await their next dose of mental poison.
If we are to have the moral fitness to survive as a nation, then we must reject
such pernicious "entertainments," as represented by Hollywood and its
Disney machine in favor of our moral responsibility. We must cease to want
to live in "Disney's America" and reclaim our nation for ourselves and, most
of all, for our children.