Global Population

From Eugenics to Transhumanism

In a 2021 Ministry of Defense Strategic Analysis briefing, major generals Wolfgang Gaebelein and Darrell Amison announced that technoscientific developments in human augmentation are accelerating and converging with other fields, “such as sensors, artificial intelligences, novel materials, nanotechnology and additive manufacturing.” “Human augmentation,” they preface, “has the potential to impact every facet of our lives and even change the meaning of what it means to be human.”¹ Fully coinciding with Gaebelein and Amison’s analyses are those of Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist at NASA, whose 2001 briefing, “Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025],” anticipates a world “in the throes of triple/exponential (IT/Bio/Nano) Technological Revolutions” generative of novel “Products/Life Forms” resulting from “Directed Evolution” and “Cross Species Molecular Breeding.”² Numerous state-allied research institutes and programs – from the Broad Institute’s collaborations with Harvard and MIT laboratories,³ which have proclaimed a CRISPR-Cas9 (gene editing) “revolution,”⁴ to studies organized by DARPA, the NIH and/or other DOD-affiliated apparatchiks⁵ – confirm that public sector R&D in “human augmentation” is proceeding apace.

The same R&D trends are reflected in the private sector as well. For example, high-profile “network of networks” for the global predator class, the World Economic Forum (WEF), publicly promotes initiatives like “Advancing Digital Agency”⁶ and “Transhumanism,” the latter defined by the WEF as “rooted in the belief that humans can and will be enhanced by the genetic engineering and information technology of today…such as bioengineering, artificial intelligence, and molecular nanotechnology.”⁷

Joining the joint public-private transhumanist initiatives are many working at universities. Oblivious to the deception, many professors proudly proclaim their refusal to teach students who do not submit to mandatory experimental injections with products developed by indemnified violators of the Nuremberg Code.⁸ Widespread enthusiasm for what in scientific literature is referred to as “compulsory bioenhancement”⁹ – namely, in the form of mandating what most academics seem to believe are biological “mRNA immunizations”¹⁰ – has transformed university campuses from mere corporate training grounds into ground zero for the implementation of a full-blown biofascist body politic.

Following T.J. Coles, I take “biofascism” to name a political project in which global populations are “pushed into a world in which environmental control extends from the external into our very bodies.” Importantly, biofascism “is also about the artificial creation of a new dehumanised class.” Coles offers a summary statement of biofascism in the twenty-first century:

Today’s biofascism is top-down, imposed by a small number of pharmaceutical corporations, tech firms, and governments. They see the bodies of non-elites as tools for profit and experimentation. The fascist aspects of their agendas include non-consensual medical procedures carried out on people not of their class.¹¹

Biofascism becomes synonymous with technofascism insofar as Coles’s distinction between external and internal control is essentially erased with public-private transhumanist initiatives such as bioengineering, AI, gene editing, and nanotechnology. Biosynthetic technologies in particular blur the boundaries between natural and artificial, inside and outside, human and machine in ways that are indeed “revolutionary.” Today, the revolutionary biofascist initiatives of states, global industrialists and financiers, and their enthusiastic handmaidens in academia are aligned; and in these initiatives we find reflected the following tenets of faith:

• Humanity is on the cusp of an epochal evolutionary event in which some humans will transcend biology and become immortal.

• Immortality is made possible by the human invention of Artificial Intelligence.

• AI will become fully sapient and self-aware and will recursively invent better  versions of itself until it approaches technological godhood.¹²

• Some humans will merge with AI and become “godlings.”

• Many more humans will need to be sacrificed on the altar of experimentation as the universe awakens to itself in the impending and unstoppable evolutionary event.

Transhumanism is the concept that binds these tenets together. It conceptually situates the human species within a continuum of evolutionary development and an elaborate causal nexus of forces influencing that development, including technological and sociopolitical forces. Because transhumanists believe the latter are presently arranged in favor of a monumental evolutionary event – known as “the Singularity” – they are investing with religious fervor in technological and sociopolitical initiatives aimed at inaugurating that event.

The Singularity represents humanity’s salvation from exposure to death and decay, and indeed to the everyday foibles and follies of being “human, all too human.” Thanks to the saving power of the public-private transhumanist vanguard, according to transhumanist ideologue, Google consultant, and NASA collaborator, Ray Kurzweil, by the year 2099, “life expectancy” will no longer be “a viable term in relation to intelligent beings.”¹³ Death and disease will have been conquered, we mere mortals will have become as gods, and AI will be hailed as our liberator.

The transhumanist movement is rooted in the modern eugenics movement and is best understood through an historical-ideological survey of both with special reference to geopolitical contexts.

This briefing therefore surveys the modern history of global population ideology and geopolitics from eugenics to transhumanism. Transhumanism is a post-WWII rebranding of the global eugenics movement born in Victorian England and brought to political consummation in Nazi Germany. I begin with a survey of British fascism from Thomas Malthus and the British East India Company to Charles Darwin and the cult of imperial hygiene. Epidemics, quarantine, and vaccination are shown to have been used as geopolitical tools of the British Empire, and Darwin is exposed as a paranoic-fascisizing Victorian mythmaker forced into glory by a group of scientistic zealots led by T.H. Huxley. I then survey the formation and political applications of the “new religion” of eugenics from Darwin to Hitler, followed by a survey of the occult roots of eugenics and transhumanism from Hitler to COVID. I situate the latter within the general context of a critique of Empire, highlighting libido dominandi as the “operating system of Empire.” Luciferianism/Satanism is shown to constitute the core of this operating system; I exposit Luciferianism through exegesis of the biblical scene of the primordial lie in Genesis 3:1-5. The Luciferian dimensions of Nazism and the “COVID Coup,” or Rise of the Fourth Reich, are made explicit. I conclude by connecting transhumanist “nanomafia” industries with the Vatican’s “Enthronement of Lucifer.”

(A full PDF version of this briefing is available. Click here to access.)

From Malthus to Darwin: Introducing British Fascism

Professor Thomas Malthus’s pioneering algorithm for the culling of populations – that is, his principle of population – is best comprehended in the geopolitical context of the imperial ambitions of his career employer, the British East India Company.

Not to be confused with its rival, the Dutch East India Company, which dominant the world slave market, the British East India Company (EIC) also trafficked in humans, as well as cotton, tea, coffee, pharmakia – notably opium – and intel for private militias and spy networks.

According to professional intelligence officer, Dr. John Coleman, it was the EIC that started the global drug trade, which their decedent corporations have continued to the present day. “Britain has been involved in the China opium trade for over two centuries,” Coleman wrote in 1992; and China, too, has been complicit in the racket.

British plutocrats, the Russian KGB, the CIA, and U.S. bankers are all in league with China…. Opium is the most habit-forming drug known to man…. Opium was popular in all of the fashionable clubs of Victorian London and it was no secret that men like the Huxley brothers used it extensively. Members of the Orphic-Dionysus cults of Hellenic Greece and the Osiris-Horus cults of Ptolemaic Egypt which Victorian society embraced, all smoked opium; it was the “in” thing to do…. Many in the circles of royalty were regular opium users….

The first opium shipments reached England from Bengal in 1683, carried in British East India Company “Tea Clippers.” Opium was brought to England as a test, an experiment, to see whether the common folk of England, the yeomen and the lower classes, could be induced into taking the drug. It was what we could call today “test marketing” of a new product. But the sturdy yeomen and the much derided “lower classes” were made of stern stuff, and the test marketing experiment was a total flop. The “lower classes” of British society firmly rejected opium smoking.

The plutocrats and oligarchists in high society in London began casting about for a market that would not be so resistant, so unbending. They found such a market in China…. Where the British East India Company failed in England, it now succeeded beyond its wildest expectations in China, whose teeming millions of poor looked upon smoking opium as an escape from their life of misery.¹⁴

Coleman’s research indicates that the hostile Opium Wars between Britain and China were mirrored in the geopolitical shadows by insider arrangements that ensured all warring parties profited handsomely from the impoverished and addicted-by-design “lower classes.”

T.J. Coles observes: “The EIC is a microcosm of how the world worked and continues to work: a central government (in this case the British crown) gave legal and state authority to private investors to create a monopoly that used force and propaganda to expand its influence.”¹⁵

The slave-cotton-drug trade of the EIC was fantastically profitable, and was the first fully modern supranational corporate cartel. Chartered by “Isis Reincarnated” Queen Elizabeth I in 1600, the EIC flourished between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. This was a period during which, according to historian Mathew Connelly, defining and delimiting global populations became an integral geopolitical part of a larger imperial “process of making societies more ‘legible’…and thus more amenable to policy interventions.” As reported by Connelly:

The new science of demography would be a handmaiden to this process…. People would be fixed within interlocking fields of surveillance by information-gathering agencies, from police forces to public health authorities to poor-relief workers. Aggregating and analyzing this information could reveal unexpected and useful facts.¹⁶

In addition to demography and information-gathering surveillance agencies, this period also saw the founding of “social science” by one of Malthus’s intellectual predecessors, Marquis de Condorcet.¹⁷ Himself an early practitioner of social science, Malthus worked as an instructor and administrator for the EIC, and personally taught a generation of EIC officials. He also wrote his influential Essay on the Principle of Population during his career-long tenure with the EIC. And just as his employer worked on a practical-imperial level to delimit, surveil and control global populations – notably the “lower classes” – through pharmakia, monopolistic cartels and interlocking surveillance regimes, so too did Malthus work to do the same on a social-theoretical level through the imperial intelligentsia’s newfound social sciences and statistical charts.

The foundational theoretical postulate of Malthus’s Essay on the Principle of Population (1798) states that whereas the supply of food humans are capable of yielding from nature increases only in an arithmetical ratio, the number of human mouths to feed increases in a geometrical ratio. Consequently, in the abstract, humanity is confronted with an overpopulation problem: the number of offspring we produce exponentially outstrips the amount of food we are able to produce to feed them. Stated otherwise: the Empire’s resources were thought to be under threat of depletion by its mass casualties of impoverished peoples. These “surplus” populations of the British Imperium were fascistically regarded by Malthus as among the “worst animals,” whose reproductive capabilities, he argued, should be curtailed as a matter of economic and social policy. Otherwise, neither the British Imperium nor indeed the human species generally would be able to sustain itself. In this way, Malthus was the first modern theorist to formulate and raise a bleak question that his admirers have been asking – and inventively answering – ever since: “What do we do with all these useless eaters?”

Fundamentally, Malthus’s principle of population was never anything more than an algorithm for the categorical creation and culling of “surplus” peoples alleged to be “inferior” human specimens. According to the algorithmic program – alleged by Malthus to be “natural law” – “nature” selects such “inferior” members of the human species for premature death; and should nature fail in this most necessary and lawlike function, the innovative EIC professor was ready with a variety of social and political policy recommendations to ensure that “natural law” would maintain human populations within their algorithmically ordained bounds.

By thus naturalizing his principle of population, Malthus, in the words of one historian, “made societal aggression against the poor…emerge in the consciousness of the educated and affluent classes as perfectly proper and natural approaches.”¹⁸ Indeed, the only thing “natural” about Malthus’s algorithm is the fascistic psychological disposition that it naturalized. From then on, when confronted with the unseemly sight of impoverished masses, the “educated and affluent classes” would naturally react just as Professor Malthus had by branding them as animals, blaming them for society’s ills, exploiting their labor, and/or leaving them for dead.

The socially conditioned and ideological character of Malthus’s theoretical contributions bears emphasizing. When in his Essay he finally resolved all “natural population checks” to those of “misery and vice,” and correlated these to the “dismal” and “vulgar” habits of the masses,¹⁹ the EIC employee enunciated an entirely socially determined perspective from his position at the center of the imperial power-knowledge ensemble of eighteenth-century industrial England.

Today, this same ensemble, now far more developed, continues to foment industrial revolutions – most recently, a Fourth Industrial IT/Bio/Nano Revolution²⁰ – under the pretext of an allegedly naturalist scientization of society. Historian André Pichot describes well the fallacious circularity and theoretical naivety of such so-called naturalist sociologies:

Thus, in so-called naturalist sociologies…the image of nature is fashioned after the social model of the industrial revolution (particularly in the English-speaking countries)…. It is simply a rather poor justification of a particular social and economic order, by appeal to a nature that is itself conceived after the model of the society to be explained.

Pichot is speaking of social Darwinism in this instance, but the analysis applies equally to Malthus, who Darwin credited as his most decisive intellectual influence. Both belonged to what Coles describes as the “proto-biofascism” of nineteenth-century England.  It is accordingly of great significance that Darwin fully appropriated Malthus’s algorithm for the culling of populations and made it foundational for his theory of the struggle for existence and natural selection. Darwin acknowledges his indebtedness to Malthus in On the Origin of Species:

A struggle for existence inevitably follows from the high rate at which all organic beings tend to increase. Every being… must suffer destruction during some period of its life, and during some season or occasional year, otherwise, on the principle of geometrical increase, its numbers would quickly become so inordinately great that no country could support the product. Hence, as more individuals are produced than can possibly survive, there must in every case be a struggle for existence, either one individual with another of the same species, or with the individuals of distinct species, or with the physical conditions of life. It is the doctrine of Malthus applied with manifold force to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms.²¹

In other words, Darwin’s bioevolutionary postulate of the struggle for existence and natural selection was borrowed wholesale from the social science of an EIC administrator and professor. “The naturalization of the social order was thus translated into a biological conception of social classes,” as André Pichot observes. The historian continues:

Unable to prove the capacity of natural selection to explain biological evolution (The Origin of Species does not contain a single example of an evolution explained in this way), they [Darwin and his immediate intellectual heirs] illustrated this by a social metaphor that was all the more effective in that it conformed to the dominant ideology.²²

As a case in point, the power-knowledge ensemble of his day notionally awarded Darwin with an honorary doctorate in Civil Law! Thus before Indiana and California sterilization laws and Nazi eugenics laws, the English Establishment had championed the concept of so-called “science” paving the way for social policy. “Darwin, for his part, was happy to be a member of the Establishment,” writes biographer A.N. Wilson.²³ Indeed, Darwin conspicuously embodied the establishment ideology – or myth – as Wilson shows in his biography, Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker: “Darwin was to be…the embodiment of the essentially Victorian myth that science had somehow disproved, or invalidated, religion. In fact, of course, rather than disproving religion, science had become their religion.”²⁴

Darwin and his powerful lobby of Darwinian ideologues – most notably his loyal “Bulldog,” T.H. Huxley – “saw science as confirming their position as lords of the universe.”²⁵ Huxley, with the backing of the English Establishment, would devote much of his career to transforming Darwin into a symbol; and “once he had been made into a symbol by Huxley (and he was very happy to be a symbol), Darwin could take the credit for an idea which had, appropriately, evolved in many minds over many decades.”²⁶ Aided by Darwin’s own “determined and ruthless self-promotion,” Huxley succeeded in his aim in part through constant employment of one simple device: “He made it seem as if Darwin’s enemies objected to his theory only for reasons of religious bigotry,” when in fact, as A.N. Wilson poignantly demonstrates:

Darwinism succeeded for precisely the reason that so many critics of religions think that religions succeed. Darwin offered to the emergent Victorian middle classes a consolation myth. He told them that all their getting and spending, all their neglect of their own poor huddled masses, all their greed and selfishness was in fact natural. It was the way things were.²⁷

Darwin himself came into the world the son of a prosperous doctor-cum-banker as the product of an “all but arranged” marriage intended to maintain an aristocratic dynasty.²⁸ The Victorian spirit into which he was born and of which he would become an enduring symbol centered religious belief in science together with belief in imperialism and a confidence that the English could impose their own brand of civilization upon the world.²⁹ Such beliefs are everywhere reflected in Darwin’s anthropological musings in his voyage notes. Indeed, even Darwin’s famed scientific voyage onboard the Beagle was actually an imperial surveillance mission to map the coast of South America.³⁰

Throughout Darwin’s lifetime and beyond, the British power-knowledge ensemble was hard at work building its maritime Empire from South America to Canada, India, Southeast Asia, New Zealand and Australia. It is crucial to appreciate just how important the knowledge factor was to the success of the British Imperium. In addition to Darwinian theory of biological history and Malthusian social science, the sciences of demography, epidemiology, statistics and political economy were all ascendent in Darwin’s day; and as Alison Bashford has shown, these sciences and their various proclamations – soon canonized as authoritative articles of the Imperium’s newfound faith – cannot be analytically separated from their invention and applications in the service of Empire.

As Bashford demonstrates in her outstanding study, Imperial Hygiene: A Critical History of Colonialism, Nationalism and Public Health (2003):

Knowledge-techniques were developed or appropriated from other fields – in particular statistics – and were put to use as ways of gathering and formulating information about individuals and aggregating it into information about spatially defined, class defined, institutionally defined or sex defined abstract groups. In the process, the very concept of “population” – its political capacities, uses, limitations, and demands – was drawn into being. In the institutionalization of the discipline of epidemiology over the nineteenth century, the central technology was statistics: “the science of the state.” And as Ian Hacking has written, “the collection of statistics has created, at the least, a great bureaucratic machinery. It may think of itself as providing only information, but it is itself part of the technology of power in a modern state.” The specific knowledges within the new human and social sciences and their tools – sociology, epidemiology, demography – flourished out of political economy, “the science of wealth,” and became increasingly refined as to the their objects of inquiry over the nineteenth century. For Adam Smith, as Mary Poovey writes, “the working poor…had to be conceptualized as an aggregate; because they could not govern themselves, they had to be governed from above.” A new “social” domain was being delineated, the making of a “social body”….

Colonial situations presented the immediate governmental problem of both the urban poor and “ungovernable” indigenous populations. Public health programmes and visions were a key way in which colonized people and territory were administered and came to be rendered intelligible to colonisers. Although differing vastly between colonies, and in terms of the responsibilities governments took up for indigenous health, there was an enormous industry in the late Victorian and early twentieth century period in medico-administrative knowledge of indigenous people, as well as of white settlers. Over time, indigenous people in many colonial contexts were brought into tighter relations of governance, of health and welfare and of sanitation.³¹

Bashford’s study is focused on the British Imperium and conceptually delineates how the new sciences either served as tools in themselves or yielded new tools for fashioning industries and opening markets – particularly in public health and medico-administrative knowledge – all in the service of geopolitical conquest along specific “lines of imperial hygiene.” Three key examples  of imperial-hygienic geopolitical tools – or “technologies of power” – that the new sciences helped to create are vaccination, epidemics, and quarantine.

“The idea of vaccination itself,” Bashford reveals, “has a history and a geography strongly associated with colonialism and settlement, with movement and contact.” She continues:

Vaccination, like contagious disease itself, was part of the connection of Empire…. Immediately upon the expert endorsement of vaccination in England in the very early nineteenth century, and especially as the Imperial British government as well as some colonial governments flagged possibilities of compulsion for the procedure from 1853, anti-vaccinationists proclaimed about the vaccine matter itself being a contaminant, and the procedure as contaminating: “a filthy, disgusting animal poison”; a “compulsory pollution of our veins”…“millions of people have now a ruined constitution through having the loathsome filth in the blood,” wrote one….

Vaccination came to be important as a means for the collection of information through systems of registration and certification of individual infants and children. It provided one of the mechanisms through which British as well as colonial populations were rendered governable. Vaccination, like the tracking of epidemic disease itself, became part of the growing biopolitical business of population health, of collecting and producing the “vital statistics” of the social body. It helped build the vital statistics of Empire…. And unlike other public health endeavors that remained in the philanthropic, voluntary, and reform sector (broadly) until early twentieth-century welfare, vaccination was a state-interested procedure almost from the beginning. In England and Whales vaccination was connected to the Anatomy Act, the New Poor Laws and other shifts in working-class management from the 1830s….

Additionally, and significantly, systems of certificating vaccination were early implemented in many colonial contexts, as in England. The system was linked to, and provided further information for, the registration of births (and deaths) and the vaccination certificate, like the birth certificate, was intended to be an essential item for each child and parent in an increasingly governed world…. In colonial contexts medical and sanitary interventions enabled a new kind of governmentalisation of the colonial state in which quantification, distribution and administration of an indigenous or a white “settler” population was both achievable and produced new kinds of subjects for rule. Vaccination created “populations” in the bureaucratic sense: people were both individualized by the procedure, and aggregated…. The creation of an abstract population as data from vaccination offered a “field of visibility” to government, what sociologist Mitchell Dean describes as a mode by which it was possible to “picture” who and what is to be governed, how relations of authority and obedience are constituted in space.

Yet vaccination programmes created populations not just abstractly but as actual incorporations as well…. Increasingly, for many governments, to have one mark, the single pock mark of vaccination, rendered the disease status of that person known, conferring an immunity to disease and an immunity to travel over governmental lines of hygiene…. In times and places of emergency quarantine, either the vaccine scar or the scars of the disease itself conferred a capacity to move (more) freely across all kinds of borders…. The vaccination scar thus facilitated movement into “clean” spaces, but it could also get one safely into “unclean” spaces (a quarantine station, an infectious disease hospital, a segregated street or building), over borders and over lines of hygiene….

[Thus] in these developing and increasingly global and governmental systems of surveillance and of identity documentation, the vaccine-scar was a significant corporeal identity document in and of itself.³²

Correlatively, epidemics were manufactured as tools of imperial geopolitical conquest:

The epidemic was not simply a naturally occurring biological phenomenon, but was deeply constituted as a biopolitical and governmental problem which required not only medical but administrative intervention. Biopolitics is not only a response to a set of conditions, it is itself productive. Biopolitics “engenders the forms of knowledge that structure these problems and interventions.” “Epidemic” is always in some senses a bureaucratic and political effect. If, in 1881, epidemic created a public health bureaucracy, it is also the case that a political bureaucracy created the epidemic…. Rather than being self-evident, “epidemic” was produced and pronounced by government…. “Epidemic” was not only a fact of individually ill subjects, but also of their interpretation within a pattern of morbidity in the population, knowledge produced in expert realms of medicine and epidemiology, government and bureaucracy….

If a central aspiration of modern government is the health of the population, then statistics about health and disease – epidemiology – is doubly invested as a technology of power. One effect of the technology of statistics is apparent order and control: “statistical principles…tame death, render it controllable and predictable, give it a semblance of order, make it calculable.” Statistics was not a transparent recording of data but rather constituted a knowledge which was productive, which changed things, which had effects, which was a means by which power circulated through the social body…. At a multitude of local sites, conduct was modified, recommended hygienic practices pursued, contact and communication policed and increasingly self-policed as a response to the circulation of this information. This “writing” of the epidemic – its conversion and abstraction into information, statistics, a “natural history,” maps, graphs and figures, was one rationality of government which rendered the epidemic visible and apparently controllable. And it was but one technique for the constitution and management of populations.³³

A third technique of population management developed throughout the British Imperium during Darwin’s lifetime was quarantine:

If one manifestation of the “art of government” in Sydney in 1881 was the creation of the epidemic on paper, the “abstract space” of representation, the other major practice was the re-ordering of social space…. In the city, vaccination accompanied this spatial segregation, drawing attention to the clean/dirty boundaries of cordoned streets and houses…. This involved complex rituals of cleanliness and contamination….

In this artificial and temporary clustering and organizing of people, the major social classification was between those infected (unclean) and those contacts, currently healthy but always under suspicion (precariously clean). With the exception of race, in this moment of epidemic, health and ill-health became the primary form of identity, shaped through the significance of spatial placement and classification….

Chinese people were, on paper, to be compulsorily vaccinated. All unvaccinated members of the police force were vaccinated, as were nurses sent to the Quarantine Station and the Sanatory Camp…. For (white) people in quarantined houses, consent for vaccination was strongly sought, but it was not compelled. Other people elected to be vaccinated because the procedure allowed them safely (it was hypothesised) into quarantined spaces, and safety if they were already there as suspects…. The compulsion at issue was not only about the vaccination process itself, but as Durbach shows, the implications of non-compliance: fines for those who refused vaccination of their infants; the seizing of property of those who refused to or could not pay fines. Ultimately (and not infrequently) compulsion was enforced through imprisonment. Here again, the medical and penal systems dovetailed, the spaces, institutions and powers of public health, the law and criminal justice crossed-over…. Both the infected people contained in the Quarantine Station and those contained there as guards and doctors, were subject to the surveillance and limitation of movement, contact and activity characteristic of the prison, as well as intensely close medical surveillance.³⁴

Finally, as Bashford shows, quarantine was used by the British Imperium as a geopolitical tool to delineate the geo-body of a controlled territory:

Quarantine, more than any other government technology is the drawing and policing of boundaries…. Not infrequently, quarantine and national administration produce and monitor the same space: that is, the border of a nation has often been where a quarantine line was drawn. The same border might well have a military, political and economic significance…. These borders were, to cite one political geographer, the places where “the vertical interfaces between state sovereignties intersect the surface of the earth.”³⁵

Locating the origins of contemporary biofascism in the “proto-biofascism” of Victorian England, Coles corroborates Bashford’s findings:

The proto-biofascism of the 19^th century mandatory vaccinations echoes the situation in which many presently find themselves [in 2022]. The English elite of the 1850s saw smallpox-infected paupers as threats to their own health, as well as to the body politic of England. Early vaccines were offered free of charge under the Poor Laws of the previous decade, but the world’s first mandatory vaccines were imposed on the children and babies of poor people via that imposition of the Compulsory Vaccination Act of 1853. Anti-vaxx pamphlets from the period pointed out that the state had no more right “to enforce a medical belief, than it once had to enforce a religious one.”³⁶

The man who was made into a universal symbol of the English elite’s proto-biofascism, Charles Darwin, could not have fit critical portrayals of this elite’s paranoic-fascisizing, imperial-hygienic tendencies more completely. Plagued with nervous headaches, flatulence and dyspepsia, Darwin was an obsessively loyal patron of the sanatorium in the upper-class enclave where he lived, fifteen miles south of London. Cold showers and baths, elaborate rituals of “violent” scrubbing, and rigid diet and exercise routines were some of the hygienic procedures around which Darwin’s otherwise reclusive day-to-day life was organized. And just as many of today’s biofascists are firm believers in the ritual of pseudoscientific “hygienic” masking, so too were the Darwins, who may have even been pioneers in the practice.

“A sucker for the chicaneries of Dr. Gully, undergoing the water-cure, as Darwin did, at Malvern Spa.”

“Darwin’s health-obsession was an acquired characteristic inherited by his daughter Henrietta, here seen with a device attached to her nose…keeping cold germs at bay” (A.N. Wilson, Photographic Inserts, pp. 246-247

Indeed, perhaps even more in death than in life, as A.N. Wilson has observed, Malthus’s most influential intellectual heir commanded the highest degree of “Victorian reverence” for the social evils he helped to naturalize under the authority of science:

Darwin’s coffin was…carried into the Abbey by pallbearers who reflected the Victorian reverence for him. Here was the man, after all, who had told them that their land-grabs in Africa, their hunger for stock-market wealth in the face of widespread urban poverty, their rigid class system and their everlasting wars were not things to be ashamed of, but actually pat of the processes of nature.³⁷

Such “processes of nature” would soon proliferate and intensify as numerous overlapping political programs, both at national and international levels, would be developed to aid nature in its eminently natural aim of bringing mass death to the genetically degenerate and economically unfit.

From Darwin to Hitler: The Dead-Weight of Defectives

That Darwin’s bioevolutionary theory of the origin of species was directly derived from Malthus’s political-economic troubleshooting of how to manage the British Imperium’s surplus populations is well known. However, commentators do not always draw all the relevant links, and historians generally shun the obvious applied-theoretical trajectory from Malthus and Darwin to eugenics and Nazism. One passage in Darwin that clearly manifests this trajectory is chapter five of The Descent of Man (1871). There, under the section heading, “Natural Selection as affecting Civilized Nations,” Darwin cites his cousin and founder of the science of eugenics, Francis Galton, from whom he agreeingly takes the following remarks:

With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment…. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.³⁸

Richard Weikart cites this passage in Darwinian Racism: How Darwinism Influenced Hitler, immediately noting that Darwin clarifies that it would nevertheless be “an overwhelming present evil” to “check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason.”³⁹ Unnoted by Weikart, however, is the derogatory force of Darwin’s words immediately following this brief disclaimer. “Hence,” Darwin concludes, “we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind.”

Weikart’s line of critique focuses more on the reception of Darwin’s writings and less on the writings themselves. Hence he moves immediately into elaborating the many ways in which champions of “Darwinism” followed “the path Darwin described as ‘hard reason.’”⁴⁰  His opening thesis is straightforward: “long before Nazis came on the scene,” leading Darwinian biologists, anthropologists, psychiatrists, physicians, linguists and other scholars – including Darwin himself – “were disturbed by the way that modern societies were protecting their weak and sickly members, allowing them to survive and even reproduce.”⁴¹ Galton coined the term “eugenics” – from the Greek word eugenes, meaning “well-born, of good stock, of noble race”⁴² – to denote the theory and practice of breeding “eugenic” or “fit” races. Darwin’s theory, self-consciously transformed into a religion by Galton and other zealous  Darwinians,⁴³ “was a theory involving mass death for the unfit so that the fit could evolve to higher levels.”⁴⁴ Although this theory and practice is often termed “Social Darwinism” and distinguished from pure or “scientific” Darwinism, even the Victorian Symbol’s sympathetic and most influential contemporary biographers, Adrian Desmond and James Moore, counter this prejudiced reading:

“Social Darwinism” is often taken to be something extraneous, an ugly concretion added to the pure Darwinism corpus after the event, tarnishing Darwin’s image. But his notebooks make plain that competition, free trade, imperialism, racial extermination, and sexual inequality were written into the [Malthusian] equation from the start – “Darwinism” was always intended to explain human society.⁴⁵

Desmond and Moore further state that Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection biologized genocide, served as a “mechanism” for “modern-day massacre,” and was “predicated on the weaker being extinguished. Individuals, races even,” they confess, “had to perish for progress to occur.”⁴⁶

In a 1940 edition of Eugenics Review, Charles Darwin’s son, Leonard, articulated one of the foundational doctrines of the eugenics religion in his “Geneticists’ Manifesto”:

To place the sick man in a better environment than that of his healthy neighbor is often imperatively demanded on the grounds of humanity, though it is unquestionably a dysgenic proceeding. This harmful effect is because the survival and multiplication of the less fit is thus promoted… [and] the harm thus done to the race merely strengthens the demand for immediate eugenic reforms….

The questions involved are to a large extent practical rather than scientific, and the certainty that some blunders will be committed should not be allowed to stand in the way of all immediate efforts to ensure that evolutionary progress is now being made in the right direction….

To equalize the care given to the poorer strata with that obtainable by the well-to-do would be a most desirable reform; but if the poverty of the poor as a class is to any extent dependent on the presence in excess of inferior recessive genes, such a reform would produce dysgenic results by keeping more of them alive.⁴⁷

Leonard concludes his manifesto with a call for biologists, most of whom he notes are “firm believers” in natural selection, to become more proactive in the “eugenic campaign.”

But the Darwin family religion was not exclusive to them. Recalling Wilson, Darwin had been made into a symbol by T.H. Huxley for an idea which had “evolved in many minds over many decades,” and would continue to evolve. This includes not just the minds of the Darwins, but of the Huxleys as well, for example. Fifty years after Galton published his founding work on the “science of eugenics” in 1883, zoologist Julian Huxley, one of two famous sons born to T.H. Huxley, articulated the very same pious Malthusian lamentation in What Dare I Think? (1931). Britain’s “infant welfare schemes,” the eminent scientist complained, “save thousands of babies which otherwise would have died…a disproportionate number of mentally defective children among them.”

Nine hundred and ninety of them may be fine babies; but if the remaining ten are mental defectives, and if ten per thousand is a higher proportion of defectives than exists in the population at large, then we are increasing the percentage of defectives in the new generation. By reducing the rigor of natural selection, we are allowing an undue proportion of unfit types to survive….

There is only one immediate thing to be done – to ensure that mental defectives shall not have children. Whether this should be achieved by the prohibition of marriage, or, as many believe, by combining the method of segregation in institutions with that of sterilization for those who are at large, is not our present concern. We want a general agreement that it is not in the interests of the present community, the race of the future, or the children who might be born to defectives, that defectives should beget offspring. When discussing concrete proposals, this simple question should always be in mind: “Do you want mentally defective people to have children?”⁴⁸

Here Julian Huxley merely ‘dared’ to articulate again, half a century later, the views of Darwin, Galton and their contemporaries, such as Annie Besant, who in The Law of Population (1886) asserted that “the whole British race would gain in vigor, in health, in longevity, in beauty, if only healthy parents gave birth to children.”⁴⁹ In defense of her view that “sickly persons” should not be permitted to reproduce, Besant cited Vice President of Britain’s National Secular Society, George Jacob Holyoake, who distinguished between Christian and secular morality:

Let any one regard for a moment the Christian’s theory of this life. It tells us that all human beings born are immortal, and that God has to provide for them above or below! Yet in every portion of the land scoundrel or vicious parents may bring into existence a squalid brood of dirty, sickly, depraved, ignorant, ragged children. Christianity fails utterly to prevent their existence, and hurls quick words of opprobrium upon any who advocate the prevention of this progeny of crime. Yet the Christian teaches that, by mere act of orthodox belief, these ignorant and unclean creatures can be sent from the gutter to God. A Secularist cannot help shuddering at this doctrine and this practice, so fatal to society, so contemptuous to heaven.⁵⁰

The Darwins, Galtons, Huxleys, Beasant and Holyoake were joined by scores of militant devotees of the imperial religion, virtually all of them belonging to the ranks of the intelligentsia. “Family planning” activist and founder of what would become Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, for example, would develop these secularist dogmas still further when, in the April 1932 issue of Birth Control Review, she put forward seven political applications of eugenics, including:

to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring…to insure the country against future burdens of maintenance for numerous offspring as may be born of feebleminded parents, by pensioning all persons with transmissible disease who voluntarily consent to sterilization…to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization…[and] to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives….

Having corralled this enormous part of our population and placed it on a basis of health instead of punishment, it is safe to say that fifteen or twenty millions of our population would then be organized into soldiers of defense – defending the unborn against their own disabilities.⁵¹

Just one year prior to the appearance of Sanger’s manifesto, coauthors Julian Huxley and H.G. Wells had published their own monumental manifesto, The Science of Life (1931), in which they complained of human “breeding storms” among “the lower types.” The authors cited the official statistics of the British Board of Education Report of the Mental Deficiency Committee (1929), stating that, “at present there are close on ten thousand certifiable defectives in every million of the English population.”

These “unteachables” constitute pockets of evil germ-plasm responsible for a large amount of vice, disease, defect, and pauperism. But the problem of their elimination is a very subtle one, and there must be no suspicion of harshness or brutality in its solution. Many of these low types might be bribed or otherwise persuaded to accept voluntary sterilization….

There will certainly remain a considerable proportion of mankind, incapable it seems of being very much educated, incapable of broad understanding and co-operative enterprise, incapable of conscious helpful participation in the adventure of the race, and yet as reproductive as any other element in the world community. For a number of generations, at any rate, a dead-weight of the dull, silly, under-developed, weak and aimless will have to be carried by the guiding wills and intelligences of mankind.

After extensive ridiculing of “uneducable minds,” the authors move to contrast the “inferiority” of the latter with the virile brilliance and energy of superior human specimens like themselves, whose prerogative it is take control of all life upon the planet and direct its course as they see fit:

The struggle of intelligent and energetic minds throughout the world to clear out their own lumber and get together for the conscious control of the affairs of the strangely mingled multitude of our kind, to develop the still largely unrealized possibilities of science and to organize a directive collective will, is the essential drama of human life….

We have already…the gradual appearance of what we may call synthetic super-minds in the species Homo sapiens…. At the end of our vista of the progressive mental development of mankind stands the promise of Man, consciously controlling his own destiny and the destinies of all life upon the planet….

But these are only the opening sentences of the next chapter of human biology. The fall and recovery of populations, the political-economic unification of human affairs, may present phases of intense stress and tragedy, periods of lassitude and apparent retrogression, distressful enough for the generations that may endure them, but not sufficient to prevent the ultimate disappearance of misleading tradition and the dominance of a collective control of human destinies. And by that time biological science will be equipped with a mass of proved and applicable knowledge beyond anything we can now imagine.

At present eugenics is merely the word for what still remains an impractical idea. But it is clear that what man can do with wheat and maize may be done with every living species in the world – including his own…. Once the eugenic phase is reached, humanity may increase very rapidly in skill, mental power and general vigour….

Of every species of plant and animal man may judge, whether it is to be fostered, improved or eliminated. No species is likely to remain unmodified….

It is perfectly possible that man will do these things with animal bodies in the near future. Already he is learning to handle the difficult, delicate material…. Soon we shall be doing much more tremendous surgeries. It may even prove possible to operate directly on the germ-plasm, for the geneticist can already produce mutations by means of X-rays. Man has conquered the hardness of steel; he cuts and twists it and builds with it as he pleases; to-day he is learning a new art, with living protoplasm as his medium.⁵²

The authors conclude with a celebration of the “strength,” “intensity,” and “joy” felt by the scientists whose task it is to realize what they insist is not “fantasia,” but the “hard fact” of their inevitable ascendancy to the status of gods, courtesy of the new divine art of eugenics.

Joining British demigods Huxley and Wells was “Lord” Bertrand Russell, who shared their religious devotion to the project of perpetuating – and technoscientifically intensifying – the British model of the imperial rule of godlike masters over “certifiably defective” human lab rats. In 1952 Russell reported that the world wars had unfortunately failed to reduce the vast number of certifiable defectives corrupting the masters’ gene pool. “At present the population of the world is increasingly at about 58,000 per diem,” Russell wrote.

War, so far, has had no very great effect on this increase, which continued throughout each of the world wars…. War has hitherto been disappointing in this respect…but perhaps bacteriological war may prove effective. If a Black Death could spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. The state of affairs might be unpleasant, but what of it? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s.⁵³

Of the triumvirate Huxley, Wells, and Russell, Executive Intelligence Review states that throughout the twentieth century they “were [the] foremost British proponents of the One World government doctrine laid out in Wells’ The Open Conspiracy [1928].” Importantly, EIR authors Richard Freeman and Jeffrey Steinberg identify the British Empire as standing “at the top” of a world “power center” that “includes powerful nobility, and wealthy families located in France, Germany, Italy, Scandinavia, Spain, Eastern Europe…and the United States.”

The British Empire is the Anglo-Dutch Liberal financier cartel, which rules based on the oligarchical model of the reign of masters over slaves or serfs…. This cartel put Benito Mussolini into power in Italy, and Adolf Hitler into power in Germany….

At the top of this Anglo-Dutch liberal financier cartel is Prince Philip of Great Britain, his demented offspring Prince Charles, and the Dutch House of Orange-Nassau.⁵⁴

Freeman and Steinberg adeptly survey and summarize what they accurately identify as the ideology of “British liberal fascism.” “The Commonwealth,” they relay, “is a powerful institution that can push policies in the strategic interest of the Empire” and its associated “international Fascist-Synarchist movement” run by the Anglo-Dutch financier cartel.

In 1903-1907, the Eugenics Education Society was founded, which became the British Eugenics Society in 1926. Julian Huxley was vice-president (1937-1944) and president (1959-1962). Other leading members included Lords Alfred Balfour and John Maynard Keynes; Sir Francis Galton; and H.G. Wells.

In the United States, the leading institution was the Eugenics Record Office in Cold Spring, N.Y., which was founded and directed by the Harriman family, and funded by the Rockefeller family.

The international Fascist-Synarchist movement was run by the Anglo-Dutch financier cartel, and coordinated by such as Sir Montagu Norman, governor of the Bank of England; the heads of British and New York commercial and investment banks; the French-British investment bank Lazard Frères; Royal Dutch Shell; the Rockefellers’ Standard Oil company; and others.⁵⁵

Eugenic social policies were implemented throughout the imperial Commonwealth as early as 1910, when Canada assented to a eugenic immigration policy stipulating the following “prohibited classes” in section 3:

(a)  idiots, imbeciles, feeble-minded persons, epileptics, insane persons, and persons who have been insane within five years previous;

(b)  persons afflicted with any loathsome disease, or with a disease which is contagious or infectious, or which may become dangerous to the public health….

(c)   immigrants who are dumb, blind, or otherwise physically defective…[and]

(d)  persons who have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude….⁵⁶

U.S. immigration law followed suit in 1917 with its own “eugenic” immigration policy update:

Sec. 3. That the following classes of aliens shall be excluded from admission into the United States: All idiots, imbeciles, feeble-minded persons, epileptics, insane persons; persons who have had one or more attacks of insanity at any time previously; persons of constitutional psychopathic inferiority; persons with chronic alcoholism; paupers; professional beggars, vagrants; persons afflicted with tuberculosis in any form or with a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease.⁵⁷

The policy goes on to include “persons who are members of or affiliated with any organization entertaining and teaching disbeliefs in or opposition to organized government.” Of course in the British imperial-oligarchical model, to oppose the state is to oppose the Money Power through which it is established as an imperial for-profit tool of eugenic population management. And as Edwin Black (among others) has argued, it was the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Institute of Washington that “funded much of the American-based [eugenics] movement, both at home and abroad, and so sat in the driver’s seat guiding Nazi racial hygienists along their fateful path.”⁵⁸ Cera R. Lawrence concurs with Black:

From its founding in 1910 until it closed its doors in 1939, the Eugenics Record Office (ERO) at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York was the center of the American Eugenics Movement. Charles Davenport, a geneticist and biologist, founded the ERO, and served as its director until 1934….

Davenport became the director of the Biological Laboratory at Cold Spring Harbor in 1898. In 1904 he convinced the Carnegie Institution of Washington (CIW) to fund the Station for Experimental Evolution, located on the same campus. Davenport was excited by the potential social benefit of studies in human heredity….

With a grant from Mary Harriman, the widow of railroad magnate Edward Henry Harriman, Davenport founded the Eugenics Record Office in 1910. In 1917, the Carnegie Institution began funding the ERO, and continued to provide its primary funding source until the ERO closed in 1939. John D. Rockefeller, John H. Kellogg, and other private wealthy philanthropists also provide funding for the organization.⁵⁹

Along with the state of California, the ERO was an epicenter for the international eugenics movement. It served as headquarters for eugenic research in the United States, including – notably – experiments conducted at Alabama’s Tuskegee Institution under the directorship of Booker T. Washington. “From 1932 until 1944, researchers from Long Island’s Eugenic Record Office conducted detailed annual measurements of the bodies of students at Alabama’s Tuskegee Institute.”⁶⁰ At Tuskegee, eugenics researchers also conducted “The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male” from 1932 until 1972.

Beginning in 1932 and continuing to 1972 the United States Public Health Services lured over 600 Black men, mostly sharecroppers in Tuskegee, Alabama, into this diabolical medical experiment with the promise of free health care. For 40 years, hundreds of African American men with syphilis went untreated, given placebos and other ineffective treatments, so that scientists could study the effects of the disease, even after there was a cure. None of the men who had syphilis were ever told they had it. Instead they were only told that they had “bad blood.” They were also never given penicillin, despite the fact that it had become a standard treatment by 1947.

The last [known] survivor of the study died in 2004.⁶¹

Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments. Syphilis was intravenously injected like a “vaccine.”

“Group of Tuskegee experiment test subjects. By Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Public Health Service. Health Services and Mental Health Administration. Center for Disease Control. Venereal Disease Branch (1970-1973). This media is available in the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, cataloged under the National Archives Identifier (NAID) 956097: Public Domain” (https://exhibits.stanford.edu/saytheirnames/feature/tuskegee-syphilis-experiment).

To qualify eugenics as “pseudoscience” would be misleading. As Julian Huxley and H.G. Wells and every other devotee of the imperial religion of scientism here quoted evinced time and again in their writings, in their own self-conception, eugenics was not only a serious science – it was cutting-edge. Supported with enormous financial resources from the world’s wealthiest families, the eugenics movement was, as the Carnegie Institution for Science admits, expressly supported by “America’s mainstream scientific community.”⁶² Researcher Paul Weindling makes the same point when he writes that “mainstream science was overwhelmingly involved” in eugenicist human experimentation.⁶³

Hence one should qualify common statements such as “eugenics was a racist pseudoscience,” since from the point of view of its practitioners it was always perceived and practiced as “mainstream science.” This was true for the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Harriman family, America’s most prestigious universities, the ERO, the Nazi Party, the intelligentsia of the British Commonwealth, California’s Human Betterment Foundation, and the American Eugenics Society and Race Betterment Foundation. Born of the Victorian Age, all of these organizations, according to historian and investigative journalist, Edwin Black, “functioned as part of a closely knit network…and propagandized for the Nazis.”⁶⁴

Their intent, Black states in simple terms, was to “populate the earth with vastly more of their own socio-economic and biological kind – and less or none of everyone else.”

How? By identifying so-called “defective” family trees and subjecting them to lifelong segregation and sterilization programs to kill their bloodlines. The grand plan was to literally wipe away the reproductive capability of those deemed weak and inferior – the so-called “unfit.” The eugenicists hoped to neutralize the viability of 10 percent of the population at a sweep, until none were left except themselves.

Eighteen solutions were explored in a Carnegie-supported 1911 “Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenics Section of the American Breeder’s Association to Study and Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population.” Point eight was euthanasia.

The most commonly suggested method of eugenicide in America was a “lethal chamber” or public locally operated gas chambers. In 1918, Popenoe, the Army venereal disease specialist during World War I, co-wrote the widely used textbook, Applied Eugenics, which argued, “From an historical point of view, the first method which presents itself is execution…. Its value in keeping up the standard of the race should not be underestimated.” Applied Eugenics also devoted a chapter to “Lethal Selection,” which operated “through the destruction of the individual by some adverse feature of the environment, such as excessive cold, or bacteria, or bodily deficiency.”

Eugenic breeders believed American society was not ready to implement an organized lethal solution. But many mental institutions and doctors practiced improvised medical lethality and passive euthanasia on their own….

Nonetheless, with eugenicide marginalized, the main solution for eugenicists was the rapid expansion of forced segregation and sterilization, as well as more marriage restrictions. California led the nation…. In its first twenty-five years of eugenic legislation, California sterilized 9,782 individuals, mostly women….

Even the United States Supreme Court endorsed aspects of eugenics. In its infamous 1927 decision, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind…. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” This decision opened floodgates for thousands to be coercively sterilized or otherwise persecuted as subhuman. Years later, the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials quoted Holms’s words in their own defense.⁶⁵

As historians Weikart and Pichot both explicitly (in their respective ways) outline the clear and direct ideological trajectory from Darwin to Hitler, so does Black draw the clear connection between, in particular, American eugenics programs and Hitlerian eugenics programs.

Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German officials and scientists. 

Hitler studied American eugenics laws…. During the ‘20s, Carnegie Institution eugenic scientists cultivated deep personal and professional relationships with Germany’s fascist eugenicists. In Mein Kampf, published in1924, Hitler quoted American eugenic ideology and openly displayed a thorough knowledge of American eugenics. “There is today one state,” wrote Hitler, “in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of immigration] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States.”

Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. “I have studied with great interest,” he told a fellow Nazi, “the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock.”

Hitler even wrote a fan letter to American eugenics leader Madison Grant calling his race-based eugenics book, The Passing of the Great Race, his “bible.”⁶⁶

But where, ultimately, did Hitler acquire such an intense interest in eugenics? As Weikart and Pichot have both documented, Darwin’s ideology – or rather, the ideology of the British Imperium that was constructed around Darwin as its symbol and Darwinism as its dogma – was at the heart of the eugenics movement, which was in turn at the heart of Nazism.

“Darwin’s theory,” as Weikart explains, “was a theory involving mass death for the unfit so that the fit could evolve to higher levels. By massacring multitudes of people he deemed inferior, Hitler was merely trying to lend evolution a helping hand.”⁶⁷ And as Pichot has similarly concluded, “Hitler did not invent anything new; he simply put into practice, and took to their logical conclusion, processes that had already been envisage long before him.”⁶⁸ He adds that “if certain events (such as eugenics, the sterilization of the racially mixed, ‘euthanasia’, etc.) are generally relegated to the shadows, this is because they give a rather embarrassing image of the European society of the first half of the twentieth century that gave birth to Nazism.”⁶⁹

Pichot further documents how laws that are mistakenly taken to be exclusively “Nazi,” even by historians of the era, were based on existing practices in the United States. To take one example, consider Germany’s sterilization law, which was not enacted until 1933 (whereas sterilization laws had been in place in the U.S. in Indiana since 1907⁷⁰ and in California since 1909⁷¹):

1. Any person affected by a hereditary disease may be sterilized by way of a surgical operation, if, according to the experience of medical science, it is believed with high probability that person’s descendants will be affected by severe hereditary disorders, either mental or physical.

Persons suffering from the following diseases are considered as affected with a hereditary disease in the sense of this law:

1)    Congenital feeble-mindedness

2)    Schizophrenia

3)    Bipolar disorder [manic depression]

4)    Hereditary epilepsy

5)    Hereditary St-guy’s dance [Huntington’s chorea]

6)    Hereditary blindness

7)    Hereditary deafness

8)    Severe hereditary bodily malformations

Persons subject to severe crises of alcoholism may also be sterilized.⁷²

The French historian notes that extermination of those deemed “feeble-minded” was the most common. Along with the elderly, the “feeble-minded” were assigned – from the point of view of the economy – to the “category of the useless.” “These ‘useless’ people were expensive to maintain, and economizing was necessary in wartime,” Pichot explains.⁷³ As Charles’s son and chair of the Eugenic Education Society, Leonard Darwin, could write in 1922:

Political authorities should take into account the enormous burden that degenerates impose on the nation. The sums spent on legislation, criminal justice, and the police exceed £48 million per year. And that is not the whole charge…. If the community had to pay less for degenerates of all kinds, healthy men would have less to pay.⁷⁴

Exactly a century after Leonard’s comment and the rhetoric of the formation of a “useless class” is again being employed by eugenicist apologist Yuval Harari.

When AI takes over, according to Harari: “People will need to retrain themselves. Or, if you can’t do it, you fall down to a new class – not unemployed, but unemployable: the useless class” (2022). See video below.

Pichot further notes the Rockefeller Foundation’s “generosity” in funding the eugenics movement in Germany and France.⁷⁵ In 1934, echoing interests enthusiastically raised three years prior by Julian Huxley and H.G. Wells in The Science of Life, Rockefeller Foundation scientist Warren Weaver proposed a program of “strategic attack” for the foundation’s eugenicists and associates:

There is a strong and growing belief, held by many thoughtful scientists – even by many of the ablest specialists in the physical sciences – that the past fifty or one hundred years have seen the supremacy of physics and chemistry, but that the hope for the future of mankind depends in a basic way upon the development during the next fifty years of a new biology and a new psychology….

The challenge of this situation is obvious. Can man gain an intelligent control of his own power? Can we develop so sound and extensive a genetics that we can hope to breed, in the future, superior men? Can we obtain enough knowledge of the physiology and psychobiology of sex so that man can bring this pervasive, highly important, and dangerous aspect of life under rational control? Can we unravel the tangled problem of the endocrine glands, and develop…a therapy for the whole hideous range of mental and physical disorders which result from glandular disturbances?.... Can man acquire enough knowledge of his own vital processes so that we can hope to rationalize human behavior? Can we, in short, create a new science of Man?

This point of view has recently been realized by various scientists, philosophers and statesmen; many of the techniques are at hand…. The foundation has a unique chance to correlate and direct existing forces and to stimulate the creation of new forces for a coherent and strategic attack. The proposed program recognizes here one of the most inspiring opportunities with which science has ever been faced.⁷⁶

Pichot is quick to note that “this is familiar scientistic rhetoric” that “enjoys a revival today [2001]: the idea that biology is the science of the future is voiced every day in the media, with exactly the same constituents as in Weaver – genetics and neurobiology.”⁷⁷ Indeed, the eugenicists’ “strategic attack” remains fundamentally unchanged today. And once again, contemporary representative Yuval Harari exemplifies this continuity with precision in his highly publicized international bestsellers, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (2011) and Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow (2015). 

First, in Sapiens Harari adopts, like Weaver of the Rockefeller Foundation before him, a strategic theoretical attack of scientistic reductionism combined with a political attack on the separation of biology from law and political science:

Our liberal political and judicial systems are founded on the belief that every individual has a sacred inner nature, indivisible and immutable, which gives meaning to the world…. Yet over the last 200 years, the life sciences have thoroughly undermined this belief. Scientists studying the inner workings of the human organism have found no souls there. They increasingly argue that human behavior is determined by hormones, genes and synapses, rather than by free will – the same forces that determine the behavior of chimpanzees, wolves and ants. Our judicial and political systems largely try to sweep such inconvenient discoveries under the carpet. But in all frankness, how long can we maintain the wall separating the department of biology from the departments of law and political science?⁷⁸

Elaborating on these familiar ideas in Homo Deus, the acclaimed historian extols bioengineering and what he calls the “biochemical solution” as representing the best strategic attack for solving age-old philosophical conundrums concerning human happiness:

The biochemical solution is to develop products and treatments that will provide humans with an unending stream of pleasant sensations, so we will never be without them…. It will be necessary to change our biochemistry and re-engineer our bodies and minds. So we are working on that. You may debate whether it is good or bad, but it seems that the second great project of the twenty-first century – to ensure global happiness – will involve re-engineering Homo sapiens so that it can enjoy everlasting pleasure….

In seeking bliss and immortality humans are in fact trying to upgrade themselves into gods…. If we ever have the power to engineer death and pain out of our system, that same power will probably be sufficient to engineer our system in almost any manner we like, and manipulate our organs, emotions and intelligence in myriad ways. You could buy for yourself the strength of Hercules, the sensuality of Aphrodite, the wisdom of Athena or the madness of Dionysus if that is what you are into….

Who knows what might be the outcome of a few more changes to our DNA, hormonal system or brain structure. Bioengineering is not going to wait patiently for natural selection to work its magic. Instead, bioengineers will take the old Sapiens body, and intentionally rewrite its genetic code, rewire its brain circuits, alter its biochemical balance, and even grow entirely new limbs. They will thereby create new godlings, who might be as different from us Sapiens as we are different from Homo erectus.⁷⁹

Given such rhetoric, it is not surprising that in the same volumes – endorsed by globalists from Bill Gates to Barrack Obama – Harari pens passages that cannot be read otherwise than as apologetics for the Nazi project. “The main ambition of the Nazis,” the impassioned World Economic Forum consultant insists in Sapiens, “was to protect humankind from degeneration and encourage its progressive evolution.” And while biologists “have since debunked Nazi racial theory…these conclusions are relatively new. Given the state of scientific knowledge in 1933, Nazi beliefs were hardly outside the pale.” Moreover, Harari continues: “The Nazis did not loathe humanity. They fought liberal humanism, human rights and Communism precisely because they admired humanity and believed in the great potential of the human species.⁸⁰

Amidst accolades from the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, prodigious scholar E. Michael Jones has published insightful critiques of Harari’s Nazi-admiring political philosophy. “Certain political consequences flow from Harari’s atheism,” the Christian historian observes:

To begin with, “liberty” does not exist [according to Harari] because “there is no such thing in biology…liberty is something that people invented and that exists only in their imagination.” Well, the automobile is also something that “people invented,” does that mean that traffic jams exist only in the imagination? Is the social order like “liberty” or is it like the automobile? Or should I say “automobile”? Harari tries to evade the contradictory conclusions his premises demand by claiming that “We believe in a particular order not because it is objectively true, but because believing in it enables us to cooperate effectively and forge a better society.”

Harari’s use of the word “we” reminds one of the joke about Tonto and the Lone Ranger, whose punch line is: “What you mean ‘we’, paleface?” Who, in other words, gets to determine whether believing in a particular “imagined order” really “enables us to cooperate effectively and forge a better society”? In the absence of a moral order based on the logical structure of the universe, the only possible alternative social order is the one in which the powerful get to impose their will on the weak, and this is precisely the order which Harari is proposing. And if the people who don’t like it lack power, that order will get imposed on them whether they like it or not. So, in the final analysis, Harari’s philosophy comes down to might makes right.⁸¹

Jones only cites Harari’s book Sapiens in his critique, but the premise Jones targets in his political-philosophical “counter-attack,” as it were, is perhaps best expressed in Harari’s 2010 doctoral dissertation, Jewish Magic Before the Rise of Kabbalah.⁸²

It is significant that the author of the most definitive and comprehensive expression of the eugenics ideology today – Yuval Harari – was culturally and textually initiated into the globalist intelligentsia through intensive study of magic and sorcerous adjurations in Judaism from Antiquity to the present day. In his doctoral dissertation, Harari is characteristically forthright about his embrace of “self-interested” and “social-subjective” fabrications of “truth”:

I do not believe in “truth” but in its self-interested social-subjective representations within the institution (to which I belong) entrusted with the formation of knowledge in our culture – academia.⁸³

Clearly, as per Jones’s critique, Harari indeed believes that “truth” is the fabrication of academics like himself, who formulate it based upon their social self-interest. In Jewish Magic, Harari is concerned to demonstrate that the self-interested prerogatives of “truth” have likewise been understood and exercised in the discourses of Jewish rabbis, mystics, and sorcerers. There is, the historian of magic avows, a “close link between ritual power and sociopolitical power.”⁸⁴

Occult Connections: From Hitler to COVID

The essence of power is secrecy. Recall that Dr. John Coleman, in 1992, reporting after decades of research in the British Museum, identified Orphic-Dionysus cults of Hellenic Greece and the Osiris-Horus cults of Ptolemaic Egypt as systems that Victorian society embraced, royalty included. Coleman also names Freemasonry and the Illuminati in his research, the latter noted to be a predecessor institution through which new cults were introduced throughout the world (perhaps especially in North and South America). Though numerous, many such cults share overlapping literatures, rituals, sociopolitical networks, ideals and core beliefs. At the top of the networks, Coleman has warned, there exists a coordinated intention to “form a One World Government Church.” The former MI6 intelligence officer further states that “Satanism, Luciferianism and Witchcraft” form the common core curriculum for those involved in the plan, including cults both old and new, visible (like the Vatican) and invisible.⁸⁵

Former Soviet intelligence officer, Dr. Daniel Estulin, corroborated Coleman’s findings in 2021. Writing nearly three decades after Coleman,  Estulin identifies two “millennium projects” currently unfolding on the global stage (among other projects lacking such a long-term trajectory): the City of London or New Babylon project, conceptually rooted in Kabbalah, and the Beijing or Red Dragon project, conceptually rooted in Taoism. New Babylon is primarily an Anglo-America project but is aligned with New Dragon interests concerning AI and the pursuit of revolutionary IT/Bio/Nano industrial development, despite fundamental divergences between Anglo-American and Chinese cultural and conceptual systems. The Vatican and the Black Nobility families of old Europe (Rome and Venice) are enterprising collaborators in the New Babylon project, which, according to Estulin, is accurately described as “Satanic.”⁸⁶

Former world spy and founder of the Marine Corp Intelligence Command, Robert David Steele, has likewise identified satanic cults as controlling elements of world affairs, and has opened an international inquiry into “child sexual abuse and child torture…ritual ceremonies, ritual murder” and related day-to-day affairs of project New Babylon.⁸⁷

In his critique of Yuval Harari, E. Michael Jones describes these same controlling powers using Augustine’s term libido dominandi – “lust for domination” – which Jones further describes as “the operating system of every world empire.” Libido dominandi is, more specifically, the operating system of societies in which “right and wrong become the opinions of the powerful, [and] those who lack political power have no way to formulate their objections.”⁸⁸ This is precisely the system which Harari, in his dissertation on Jewish magic, recognizes has been operated (at certain times and places) by both rabbis and Jewish occultists, as well as the system he himself supports in his subsequent discourses on the merits of Nazi eugenics and the inevitability of the enslavement of the weaker members of society by the stronger. Harari calls this political system “science,” but as Jones demonstrates, the historian of occult spells consistently attacks reason and logical argumentation so that “words mean what the professor wants them to mean.”⁸⁹ Harari’s books are about control, not science. “Control means, in the first instance,” Jones explains: “decertifying any and all forms of logos or rationality which restrict the power of the oligarchs.”⁹⁰ Thus Jones logically concludes that Harari’s books are “not so much a history as a celebration, as he puts it, of ‘The Marriage of Science and Empire’.”⁹¹ 

There are reasons why the libido dominandi operating system is routinely traced back to Satanism or Luciferianism. As Jones does not fail to notice in his critique, Harari routinely makes implicit reference to Luciferian tactics and tenants of belief. Indeed, he even concludes Sapiens with a reference to the primordial Luciferian scene in the Garden of Eden. “Professor Harari can’t seem to get Genesis out of his mind,” Jones jests:

He ends his book not as the disinterested scientist but by taking on the role of the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, who told Eve “ye shall be like gods” if she and her husband followed his instructions. Harari titles the afterword to his book: “the animal that became a god,” arguing that man can become divine by following what Harari calls “intelligent design.”

It is important at this juncture of our study to define “Luciferianism.” I take Luciferianism to be synonymous with “Satanism” and to function as the operating system of the empires of the Earth. It comprises the core philosophical outlook of a seemingly endless series of cults and, recalling Harari, self-interested social-subjective societies – sometimes secret – for whom moral prohibitions do not apply. Luciferianism originates as a discursive technique of sophistically introducing confusion into an otherwise clear principle so as to reverse, invert, or pervert it to fit purposes that are fundamentally at odds with its original import. (This is the basic form of Jones’s critique of Harari’s philosophy, i.e. that it is largely characterized by such a discursive technique). Luciferianism is best defined in reference to the biblical passage from which it is derived: the scene with the serpent in the Garden of Eden in the primeval prologue of Genesis.

Biblical theologian Geerhardus Vos (1862-1949) provides astute commentary on the primeval scene of primordial deception in the Garden of Eden. Citing God’s one prohibition in paradise –“from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat” (Gen. 2:17) – Vos notes the common misapprehension of this prohibition as indicative of a petty and selfish God who would rashly deny humanity free exercise of its most prized possession: intelligence. Indeed, this is the Luciferian reading precisely because – like Adam and Eve – those who adopt it are seduced to do so by Lucifer, symbolized by the serpent (as I will elaborate below). To this reading Vos contrasts his Christian reading, which first of all requires that the reader give careful attention to the Hebrew phrase for “knowledge of good and evil.”

The phrase is not “knowledge of the good and the evil.” It reads, literally translated: “knowledge of good-and-evil,” i.e., of good and evil as correlated, mutually conditioned conceptions. Man was to attain something he had not attained before. He was to learn the good in its clear opposition to the evil, and the evil in its clear opposition of the good. Thus it will become plain how he could attain to this by taking either fork of the probation-choice. Had he stood, then the contrast between good and evil would have been vividly present to his mind: the good and evil he would have known from the new illumination his mind would have received through the crisis of temptation in which the two collided. On the other hand, had he fallen, then the contrast of evil with good would have even more vividly impressed itself upon him, because the remembered experience in contrast with his memory of the good, would have shown most sharply how different the two are. The perception of difference in which the maturity consisted related to the one pivotal point, whether man would make his choice for the sake of God and of God alone.⁹²

However, rather than making their choice for the sake of God and God alone, Adam and Eve were deceived by the serpent’s subtle discursive techniques. Vos adopts a view of the serpent as “both a real serpent and a demonic power, who made use of the former to carry out his plan.” Such a view is supported, Vos notes, by the archeological record: “for in the Babylonian representations there appears often behind the figure of the serpent the figure of a demon.”⁹³ He further cites Jesus’s reference to the “primordial liar” in John 8:44 and other New Testament references to the figure of the serpent:

In the New Testament we have the words of Jesus to the Jews, John 8:44, where in the reference to the Devil he is represented as both a liar and a murderer from the beginning. This must refer to the temptation [of the serpent in Gen. 3]. “The father thereof,” i.e., of lying, means the primordial liar. Further, “your father the devil” alludes to the phrase “your seed” addressed to the serpent [Gen. 3:15]. So does the phrase “children of the Wicked One” in Matt. 13:38. Paul in Rom. 16:20 understands of Satan what in the curse is made the serpent’s punishment, viz., his being bruised under foot. I John 3:8 says that the Devil sins from the beginning. In Rev. 12:9, Satan is called “the great dragon, the old serpent.”⁹⁴

The serpent’s subtlety, Vos comments, is “the reason of its fitness for serving as the demon’s instrument. If Satan had appeared bluntly and boldly, the temptation would have been much less alluring.”⁹⁵ In the subtly of the serpent’s discourse we find all of the essential elements to arrive at a definition of Luciferianism that maps onto the concept of libido dominandi as the operating system of every world empire.

Vos divides the process of the deception into two stages. In both the central purpose of the deceiver is to induce cognitive confusion and reactive emotions in human hearts and minds.

Genesis 3:1-3: First Stage of Luciferian Deception

In the first stage, the clarity of the divine prohibition is challenged and a distortion introduced into its formulation, thereby opening the way to confusion:

In the first stage it is at the start a mere question of fact: “Yea, has God said?” Has the prohibition been actually issued? Still even here the suggestion of a more serious aspect of the matter lies in the words “of every tree in the garden.” In this phrasing the Serpent hints at the possibility that, should such a prohibition have been actually issued, God has made it far too sweeping through excluding man from the use of the fruit of every tree.⁹⁶

The serpent has thus introduced a distortion leading to confusion. This is the subtlety by which Eve is interpolated into the serpent’s lie. Eve corrects the distortion – “Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat” – but in attempting to return to clarity in response to the serpent’s introjection of deception and confusion into the divine law, Eve ends up mirroring the deception and formulating a lie of her own: “…neither shall ye touch it.” The notion that God may have restricted her too severely has entered Eve’s mind, and “by entertaining this, even for a moment, she had already begun to separate in principle between the rights of God and her own rights.”

And still further, in this direction goes the inexact form of her quoting the words of God: “ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it.” In this unwarranted introduction of the denial of the privilege of “touching” the woman betrays a feeling, as though after all God’s measures may have been too harsh. Satan does not fail to follow up the advantage thus gained.⁹⁷

Notice that Luciferian deception moves from a straightforward principle (or prohibition) to a play on feelings, through which process the advantage is gained. As distortion clouds the mind, confused feelings fill the heart. Eve has been enticed into engagement with the serpent and immediately she begins to mirror his deceptive discursive techniques by introducing into the divine prohibition a distortion of her own making.

Genesis 3:4-5: Second Stage of Luciferian Deception

Source: https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0103.htm

In the second stage of the deception, a complete reversal of the divinely established principle is accomplished. Reversal or inversion is a fundamental Luciferian modus operandi. First, confuse the mind and conjure reactive feelings in the heart, thereby producing additional “raw materials,” as it were, upon which to manipulatively act; and then using those raw materials – the distorted concept, the confused mind, and the volatile emotions – formulate the Lie to be inhabited as an alternate, false reality. (Incidentally, this is why, to effectively undo satanic distortions, Jesus spoke in parables, since the semiotics of the parable operate in the opposite direction of those of the primordial liar, first by parabolically removing the listener from the false “truths” of their reality under Empire, and then by re-grounding them in the truth of God’s reality.)⁹⁸

Entering boldly upon the second stage of the temptation he now seeks to awaken in the woman doubt in the pronounced form of distrust of the word of God recognized as such: “Ye shall not surely die.” In the Hebrew of these words the placing of the negative at the opening of the sentence should be observed. Where for emphasis’ sake the infinitive and a finite verb are put together, and to this a negation is added, the negation usually stands between. Had this been followed here, the correct rendering would have been: “Ye shall surely not die.” On the other hand the unusual construction followed makes it to mean: “It is not so (what God has said), this: ye shall surely die.” This is intended to give the lie to God’s utterance in the most pointed manner. And to the temptation to charge God with lying the reasons for the likelihood of His lying is added, viz., God is one whose motives make His word unreliable. He lies from selfishness; “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil.”

It has been strikingly observed that the woman in yielding to this thought virtually put the tempter [or deceiver] in the place of God. It was God who had beneficent purposes for man, the serpent had malicious designs. The woman acts on the supposition that God’s intent is unfriendly, whilst Satan is animated with the desire to promote her well-being.⁹⁹

The two stages of Luciferian deception culminate in the fatuous promise that man can be as God. The deception is accomplished through satanic reversal – a kind of moral coup in which demonic cleverness usurps divine creativity, and all of creation suffers. Confusion gives rise to the fiction that the words of God, which spoke forth all of creation, are unduly prohibitive and indeed downright malicious. The deception in this perspective first induces Eve to mimic Satan’s falsifying of God’s words and subsequently produces in her a desire to be herself as God. This desire opens upon a brave new world into which Adam and Eve freely though confusedly step, a world the operating system of which is rooted in and fueled by this desire – Satan’s Empire.

In Satan’s Empire the serpent’s words promise a reality that appears more desirable than the reality created and sustained by God’s words. Thus, for God and the serpent respectively, reality is manifested (God) and manipulated (Satan) at the linguistic level. Just as there are beautiful ways to sing the world, so too can spells be cast and deceptions worked. The satanic mode of linguistic manipulation of the real operates through a reversal or perversion of God’s Word. The principle of satanic reversal is well-established in Freemasonic and kabbalistic literature. To take an authoritative example,  kabbalist and Freemason Albert Pike expressed this principle when he wrote of Satan in his monumental Freemasonic tome, Morals and Dogma (1871):

The true name of Satan, the Kabbalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry. For the Initiates, this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which presides over the physical generation, under the mythologic and horned form of the God PAN; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer [Lucifer].¹⁰⁰

Pike held the Kabbalah is the most complete occult text. In a conflation typical of occultists, Pike asserted that the Old Testament wisdom books Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are “Kabalistic Books,” implying that the Kabbalah is, ipso facto, the “Debar Iahavah” (דבר יהוה), the Word of God.¹⁰¹ It is in this context that the above reference is made to the “true name of Satan” as understood by kabbalists like Pike – the reverse of the name of God – and this name identified as a force that is identical with the “Ancient Serpent” and “Light-bearer’ Lucifer. Thus Pike views the God of the Bible as being the opposite but equal to Lucifer, which is a common occult teaching.

For Luciferians, the satanic force is wielded through practical applications of the principle of reversal, as exemplified in the writings of arch-Satanist, international spy and self-proclaimed “Beast 666,” Aleister Crowley. Expounding on kabbalistic teachings in his highly influential Magick in Theory and Practice (1929), Crowley instructs Luciferian adepts in several practical applications of the principle of reversal:

Let the…Adept first train himself to think backwards by external means, as set forth here following.–

(a)   Let him learn to write backwards, with either hand.

(b)  Let him learn to walk backwards.

(c)   Let him constantly watch, if convenient, cinematograph films, and listen to phonograph records, reversed, and let him so accustom himself to these that they appear natural and appreciable as a whole.

(d)  Let him practice speaking backwards: thus for “I am He” let him say, “Eh ma I.”

(e)   Let him learn to read backwards…. Let his disciple read aloud to him backwards, slowly at first, then more quickly.¹⁰²

For Luciferians, practices such as these not only train the brain to “really work backwards,” as Crowley states. They also serve to encode occult messages.

Let us proceed directly to a startling example.

Luciferian deception proceeds, as expounded in the biblical account of the primordial lie, by means of confusing minds and manipulating emotions. It first plants doubts by letting slip a lie (“Has God really said…?”), which gives rise to fears (Can God really be trusted?), which in turn generate further falsehoods in relation to which beguiling desires are surreptitiously conjured. The deceived then fully enters, via linguistic cognitive-affective recoding, into a false reality.

In 2019-2020, the entire world was transported into such a false reality when the Old Serpent’s  viceroys linguistically recoded our social reality by redefining the meaning of “pandemic,”¹⁰³ falsely declaring God’s creation a ubiquitous biohazard, and conjuring in countless hearts and minds a desire to come under the alleged protection of a fictional community of the immunized.

Another foundational lie was established through the presentation of a false image of computer-generated reality by Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London. Ferguson authored the fraudulent epidemiological model of an infectious disease outbreak promising to kill untold millions.¹⁰⁴ The lie was then advanced through deployment of a fraudulent diagnostic tool, the PCR test.¹⁰⁵ The process was executed under both the covert operation title “CORONA” (thereby linking it to the U.S. National Reconnaissance Office’s covert 1960-1972 panoptic surveillance project, also titled “CORONA”¹⁰⁶), and the occult cryptographic title COVID, which in reverse spells the Yiddish word for “the possession of a demon” or “evil spirit.”

“Let him learn to write backwards…. Let him learn to read backwards,” the Beast 666 instructs.

“DIVOC” – or COVID spelled backwards – is homophonous with dybbuk, the name of a malicious spirit in kabbalistic magic and mythology. In Hebrew, dybbuk is spelled דיבוק (dalet, yod, bet, vav, gimmel) and COVID is spelled קאוויד (gimmel, alef, vav, vav, yod, dalet). Since the letters which differ between the two words are nevertheless, in this case, pronounced the same, “dybbuk” (דיבוק) and “COVID” spelled backwards (דיוואק) are exactly homophonous.

DIVOC is also an acronym for “Digital Infrastructure for Vaccination and Open Certificate,” which is a digital platform for biodigitally tracking over a fifth of the world’s population.¹⁰⁷

“Dybbuk,” by Ephraim Moshe Lilien (1874-1925)

A Jewish source confirms: “The name Divoc is a variant of the Hebrew word ‘dybbuk’. This is a demon spirit that inhabits the soul of humans. This demon has the ability to control people by destroying their will…. While it has no direct connection to the English word, it is a close cousin of ‘covid’. The word is spelled ‘covid’ if you spell it backwards. Its pronunciation is the same as the original… just a different version of the word.”¹⁰⁸

In Jewish Magic, Yuval Harari presents and analyzes magical amulets inscribed with adjurations– some of which are formulated for the purpose of sorcerous subjugation of entire human populations and the attainment of absolute rule over others.¹⁰⁹ As an example of such magical formulations, consider this adjuration written for one “Yose, son of Zenobia.” It reads:

Just as the sky is suppressed before God, and the earth is suppressed before people, and people are suppressed before death, and death is suppressed before God, so may the people of this town be suppressed and broken and fallen before Yose son of Zenobia.¹¹⁰

Such adjurations usually call upon the aid of angels, which from a Christian point of view are demons. Dybbuk (DIVOC) is a demon which can assist in the subjugation of free will. Notably, Yuval Harari has stated, in the era of “the COVID strike,” that human free will is “over.”

(See also Planet Divoc-91.¹¹¹ Designed by the artist of Walking Dead and produced in association with the NHS Foundation Trust and U.K. Academy of Medical Sciences, Planet Divoc-91 uses imaginative mediums to strongly reinforce virus fearmongering among the world’s youth.¹¹²)

Indeed, the MindWar epidemic was crafted and cast like a magic spell through which multitudes became possessed by a malignant spirit of demonic fear. Of course it was all imaginary – a fabrication or fabulation – just as many rabbis today regard dybbuks as nothing more than the product of over-active imaginations.¹¹³ To the kabbalist, however, the imagination serves as a sorcerer’s lab, and together with Luciferian linguistics and magical formulae, pharmakia in particular have always served an essential purpose in the sorcerer’s quest for control.

The Greek word pharmakeia appears in Galatians 5:20 and Revelation 18:23. Terms from the same root word appear in Revelation 9:21, Revelation 21:8, and Revelation 22:15. These are typically translated into English as “sorcery,” “witchcraft,” or “sorcerer.” Ancient Greek uses of pharmakeia closely mirror the generic modern English word drugs; and the same Greek root word produced English terms such as pharmacy and pharmacist.

Once again we come full circle back to contemporary eugenics enthusiast and expert on magic, Yuval Harari. Just as in his dissertation on Jewish magic Harari had searched out the connections between sociopolitical power and sorcerous language, so in his later literary output and lectures has he applied himself to theorizing and advancing the sociopolitical uses of pharmaceuticals.

As the words themselves testify, Harari’s “self-interested social-subjective” academic pursuits are not coincidental. Anyone with a scholarly interest in the practice of magic will also take an interest in pharmakeia, since the two have been conceptually united at the linguistic level since antiquity. Here also the seamless compatibility of occult moral outlooks and magical practices with the Darwinian religion of the British Imperium can be clearly perceived. Both are born of the libido dominandi operating system of every world empire; and today, in a movement toward a One World Empire with a “One World Government Church,” two-time WEF keynote speaker Yuval Harari has aggressively promoted the orthodox terms and tenets of this one-world system:

As far as we can tell, from a purely scientific viewpoint, human life has absolutely no meaning. Humans are the outcome of blind evolutionary processes that operate without goal or purpose. Our actions are not part of some divine cosmic plan, and if planet Earth were to blow up tomorrow morning, the universe would probably keep going about its business as usual…. Hence any meaning that people ascribe to their lives is just a delusion.

Harari extends this meaninglessness to human history as well. “Meaningless, meaningless,” says the Professor, “all is meaningless!” But in a typical self-contradictory move that is to be expected of any scholar whose avowed motivation for inquiry is the acquisition of power, both human life and history turn out to have meaning after all, and that meaning is pharmaceutical:

There is only one historical development that has real significance. Today, when we finally realize that the keys to happiness are in the hands of our biochemical system, we can stop wasting our time on politics and social reforms…and focus instead on the only thing that can make us truly happy: manipulating our biochemistry.

If we invest billions in understanding our brain chemistry and developing appropriate treatments, we can make people far happier than ever before, without any need of revolutions. Prozac, for example, does not change regimes, but by raising serotonin levels it lifts people out of their depression. Nothing captures the biological argument better than the famous New Age slogan: “Happiness Begins Within.” Money, social status, plastic surgery, beautiful houses, powerful positions – none of these will bring you happiness. Lasting happiness comes only from serotonin, dopamine and oxytocin.

“Or did he mean OxyContin?” E. Michael Jones aptly questions. If on the one hand Harari sounds like Julian Huxley in What Dare I Think? and The Science of Life, on the other hand his rhetoric also evokes the words of Julian’s brother, Aldous, when Harari advises that “each day, each person” ought to take “a dose of ‘soma’, a synthetic drug which makes people happy without harming their productivity and efficiency.”¹¹⁴ In his critique, Jones further notes that Harari’s soma in its current form is OxyContin:

OxyContin – which is the time-release version of Oxycodone, an opiate which has been in existence since 1916 – is a Jewish invention. It was created by the Sackler family and marketed by their drug firm Purdue Pharma. In 2007, Purdue Pharma had to pay a $600 million fine for “lying to doctors about the potential for patients to abuse OxyContin” and thereby almost single-handedly igniting what is now being called the opioid crisis. The $600 million Purdue Pharma paid was a drop in the bucket compared to the billions OxyContin has earned for it since the drug was first approved by the FDA. The Sackler family alone has a net worth of $13 billion, which places them above the Rockefellers and the Mellons on the [public] list of America’s richest families.

Jones proceeds to draw a direct connection between Harari, the Sackler family, and the British imperial project and opium trade:

The Sackler family epitomizes in our day the perfect marriage of science and capitalism which Harari celebrates in Sapiens. Like the English involvement in the opium trade in the 19^th century, Arthur Sackler provided the imperial project with practical knowledge, ideological justification, and pharmaceutical gadgets which turned Americans into Harari’s idea of the ideal citizen, which is to say, into a mass of drugged out zombies who made the Jews rich by becoming their docile chemical slaves. Without the collaboration of the Jewish pharmaceutical industry, “it is highly questionable whether Europeans [i.e., the Anglo-American empire] could have conquered the world.”¹¹⁵

Jones wrote his critique of Harari before the COVID con. He notes that Arthur Sackler was posthumously inducted into the Medical Advertising Hall of Fame for “bringing the full power of advertising and promotion to pharmaceutical marketing.” With COVID medical advertisers would outdo themselves, but it would be a tough sell, and that was well understood.

In 2016 concern was raised among the drug pushers that whereas addictive drugs like OxyContin are a relatively easy sell, the biosynthetic pharmakia (marketed as “coronavirus vaccines”) which they now sought to administer would require a more intensive advertising campaign. At a meeting involving the NIAID, Biotechnology Industry Organization, AstraZeneca and numerous affiliated organizations, Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance (styled as “the DARPA of Healthcare”) advised:

Daszak reiterated that, until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs [medical counter-measures] such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process, Daszak stated.¹¹⁶

Daszak’s use of the military term “counter-measures” (as in “MCMs” or “medical counter-measures”) is telling. As numerous researchers have shown, for example, Katherine Watt,¹¹⁷ COVID was a military operation. Indeed, participants at the 2012 Third Annual War Council of the National Solutions Foundation shared Daszak’s concern three years before he raised it. After describing the emergences of the “nano world” and use of nanotubes, nano-spacers, nano-rods, and nano-wires in the industrial development of “Brain Chip mesogenic bio-sensors,” William E. Halal of Emerging Technologies and the Global Crisis of Maturity stated:

Although technological powers will be vast and progress will likely be made, the normal level of social resistance and political statement is likely to oppose change. Thus it may take an occasional environmental collapse, global wars and terrorists, or as yet unknown calamities, to force the move to global consciousness.¹¹⁸

In other words, marketing and war and terrorism and nano experimentation and environmental collapse and as yet unknown calamities – all of these comprise interlocked “strategies of attack,” recalling Warren Weaver of the Rockefeller Foundation, for making profitable use of the useless.

Cameroonian philosopher Achille Mbembe describes exactly these strategies of warfare under the abstract moniker “necropower.” Necropower specializes in killing and enslaving through pharmakia and is itself a pharmakon. As a pharmakon – that is, a poison claimed to be curative¹¹⁹ – necropower “thrives on a state of insecurity,” the Cameroonian philosopher writes, “which it participates in fomenting and to which it claims to be the solution.” Thus while necropower always “appeals to the exception, emergency, and a fictionalized notion of the enemy” to achieves its objectives, “[i]t also labors to produce these same exceptions, emergencies, and fictionalized enemies.” Mbembe frequently draws on religious language to describe the workings of necropower. For example, using the Israeli occupation of Palestine as his model, Mbembe shows how necropower organizes an “immense therapeutic liturgy” of ritual killings as it transforms each of its targeted zones into a “sphere of unregulated war” fueled by the cultivation and normalization of a “general atmosphere of fear.”¹²⁰

While Jones refers us to Augustine’s notion of libido dominandi and Mbembe fashions the concept of necropower, others have for good reason associated events surrounding and leading to COVID and beyond with the Rise of the Fourth Reich. “In his treatise, the COVID Coup: The Rise of the Fourth Reich, Dr. Leonard Horowitz maps the historical roots and ultimate purpose of the Third Reich and its metamorphosis into the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’.”

Dr. Horowitz’s warning in COVID Coup is unequivocal. Failure to expose the underlying bulwark of this coup and the Fourth Industrial Revolution will metastasize into the Fourth Reich. This warning is not alarmist. In a 2016 video entitled, “What is the 4^th Industrial Revolution?” the World Economic Forum (WEF) enunciated its intent to destroy not just humanity but the very meaning of what it means to be human.

“Now a Fourth Industrial Revolution is building on the Third,” the WEF reported. “It is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres…. The very idea of a human being, some sort of natural concept, is changing. Our bodies will be so high tech we won’t be able to really distinguish between what’s natural and what’s artificial.”

Though the means by which the WEF seeks to achieve its intention were unavailable to the Third Reich, the ends are the same. And like the Reich, while its ends are not subject to rational comprehension, the dystopian vision is plainly stated. The 4^th Industrial Revolution is a world where monsters seek out and destroy the divinity of our genome and twist us into their own grotesque image. It is a world where the natural has been annihilated. A hellish nightmare, where we will no longer be able to distinguish ourselves from their synthetic devices, is overtaking us…. Who among us, after reading the words of the WEF above, would argue pathological evil has been extinguished, or that vigilance against its re-ascendance is misplaced?¹²¹

Horowitz begins his 500-page treatise by connecting the dots between the Huxley brothers, Julian and Aldous, WEF Founder and Executive Chairman, Klaus Schwab, and Bill Gates and his father – the latter “an outspoken official in the Planned Parenthood organization promoting eugenics, ‘racial hygiene’, ‘ethnic cleansing’, and ‘population management’ (i.e. depopulation).” These connections immediately expose others – including with the Rockefeller family, Henry Kissinger, the CIA, academia, Wall Street, Silicon Valley and Big Pharma – all of which comprise an international network of interlocking powers with a common and longstanding ‘social-subjective self-interest’ in achieving godhood and exercising dominion over humanity through the technoscientific manipulation of life. Horowitz designates this network variously as the “Deep State,” “global elite,” and “Devil-Doers.”

Foundationally, according to the investigative scholar and Harvard graduate, the system these “Devil-Doers” operate is rooted in psychopathologies stemming from trauma and childhood abuse. In chapter 6 of COVID Coup, “Consolidating Global Control by MindWar,” Horowitz outlines his prognosis:

To gain control over civilization, you must gain control over free will by sabotaging human hearts and minds, imposing pain, fear, loss, and threats to survival, [thereby] conditioning people and society to accept [the] controllers’ agendas….

By projecting their psychopathologies onto civilization, the global elite imposes their abuse upon society as it was imposed on them. Child abuse does this to its victims. Thus, Deep State officials view humanity as defective because deep inside, they view themselves as defective – unworthy of empathy, respect, and honor.¹²²

Horowitz correctly identifies the continuity between CIA-conducted MindWar projects and experiments – notably MKULTRA – and abusive society-wide eugenics experiments such as those conducted by the Third Reich, which has now metastasized into the Fourth Reich. The overlap extends to occult ritual abuse as well, since numerous survivors of MKULTRA abuse have testified to the mutual imbrication of the programmatic abuse administered by the Deep State and Satanic Ritual Abuse. In this context, Horowitz provides an exposé on former U.S. military chief intelligence officer and ostentatious Satanist, Lt. Col. Michael A. Aquino.

In addition to his alleged involvement in U.S. military-run child sex abuse and trafficking rings, Aquino devised and advanced a theory of MindWar. MindWar seeks to control free will by sabotaging hearts and minds. “Essentially you overwhelm your enemy with argument,” the colonel explained in his 1980 MindWar paper. “You seize control of all the means by which his government and populace process information to make up their minds, and you adjust it so that those minds are made up as you desire.”¹²³

The Set-worshipping PSYOP specialist was no mere dabbling Satanist. Like the Nazis before him, who were steeped in occultism, Aquino was a connoisseur of pagan and occult traditions, and took an especially keen interest in the satanic workings of SS Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler. In 1983, while travelling on “official NATO business,” Aquino staged a satanic “working” at former Nazi SS Headquarters, Wewelsburg Castle, the purpose of which was, Aquino wrote: “to summon the Powers of Darkness at their most powerful locus.”¹²⁴

The occult connections from Nazism to the conjuring of dybbuk are deep and pervasive. They intersect both “liberal-globalist” (e.g. Schwab) and “conservative-nationalist” (e.g. Hitler) political ideologies, financial and industrial interests, academic ambitions, intelligence nodes and human trafficking networks, secret societies and the satanic underground.

Klaus Schwab has a Nazi industrialist background that also involves industrial nuclear support of apartheid South Africa. His father’s company, Escher-Wyss, “would use slave labor to produce machinery critical to the Nazi war effort as well as the Nazi’s effort to produce heavy water for its nuclear program,” and Klaus himself “served on the board of directors when the decision was made to furnish the racist apartheid regime of South Africa with the necessary equipment to further its quest to become a nuclear power.”¹²⁵

Schwab has been one of the most visible industrialist promoting the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution. Indeed, in 2016 he published a book by that title, which was followed in 2020 by COVID-19: The Great Reset and in 2022 by The Great Narrative For a Better Future. Recruited by Zionist Henry Kissinger to found what became the World Economic Forum, Schwab’s network of networks for the global predator class has twice featured Yuval Harari as a keynote speaker at its annual Davos meeting. Among other themes reminiscent of British eugenicists Julian Huxley and H.G. Wells, Harari spoke of engineering a transhuman species, data colonialism, AI and the creation of a “useless class,” the rise of “digital dictatorships,” and the opportune dovetailing of evolutionary and industrial interests accompanying science’s next frontier: “hacking humans” with “biometric sensors.” The WEF also recruits and trains world leaders and cultural influencers as part of its Young Global Leaders program.¹²⁶ Schwab has openly boasted of how many of his recruits have “penetrated the cabinets” of governments worldwide.¹²⁷ Among these “leaders” are presidents and prime ministers, who gather with other functionaries of Money Power at extravagant venues, putting high demand on VIP escort services whither they go.¹²⁸

Schwab’s inherited Nazi company, Escher-Wyss, has since transformed its industrial niche to production of biomaterials technologies. Specifically, Escher-Wyss is invested in helping to “form the basis for medical technology products,” while WEF participants – like Bill Gates – are frequently quoted as supporting the application of biomaterial medical technologies to the “challenge of overpopulation.”¹²⁹ This “challenge” is detailed in Henry Kissinger’s NSSM-200 Memorandum (1974, now declassified): Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests. In it Kissinger concludes with Malthusian recommendations for developing new technology to sterilize the masses, including sterilization by injection.¹³⁰

In her 2014 study, Global Population: History, Geopolitics, and Life on Earth, Alison Bashford examines the “straightforward continuity” between interwar eugenics and postwar population control. The continuity, Bashford concludes, lies “at the level of problematized object of inquiry: the mass poor characterized by high fertility and mortality rates.”¹³¹ What must not only be added but emphasized is that the “breeding storms” among the poor masses were problematized  precisely because they were viewed as a threat to the genetic purity of the stock born to rule. “Science” authorized this megalomaniacal delusion as mythmakers from the “liberal-fascist” British Establishment to the “conservative-fascist” Third Reich uniformly propagated the same religion of aristocratic birthright and racial deification.

Through eugenics and racial hygiene – practices which continued beyond the interwar period, though by different names – a self-appointed scientific “elite” joined forces with industry, royalty, aristocracy and Money Power to breed the next phase of human evolution. Recalling Julian Huxley and H.G. Wells, the fundamental conviction animating the “new science” of eugenics – or more accurately, the new religion – was the Darwinian doctrine of the “promise of Man, consciously controlling his own destiny and the destinies of all life upon the planet.” Such, at least, was the prerogative of the stock born to rule; and as they pursued their destiny, they did so under the (to them) self-evident assumption that the “dead-weight of the dull, silly, under-developed, weak and aimless” presented the greatest challenge to its realization.¹³²

For Nazi Germany, the science of genetics and racial hygiene was a handmaiden in “the cunning triumph of Aryan man.” The swastika – a symbol dating as far back as 1000 BC and used by many cultures around the world¹³³ – was adopted by the Nazis to represent the destiny and racial conquest of the Aryan race. Thus while abortion was encouraged for non-Aryans, it was made illegal for those believed to be descended from the master race.¹³⁴ Aryans were thought to be at the top of the evolutionary hierarchy – a hierarchy which extended into intra-Aryan relations. The “best stock” were recruited into the SS based upon their “racial purity,” thereby establishing an aristocracy of the SS invested with a mandate to ensure healthy breeding within the ruling race. Within the ranks of the SS, no one was permitted to marry without SS approval. In 1935, SS Chief, Heinrich Himmler (who was also Assistant Chief of the Gestapo), founded the Ahnenerbe, a think tank staffed with scientists and scholars from a wide range of disciplines all devoted to researching the origin, achievements, and spiritual destiny of the master race.¹³⁵

The Ahnenerbe – and the Nazi Party more generally – were steeped in occultism from their start. Speculating on the mythical origins of the Aryan race, serious German minds postulated that a proto-Aryan race had once occupied the island of Thule. The Thule Society, also known as the Germanendorden or “German Order Walvater of the Holy Grail,” was an occult secret society which formed the basis of the Nazi Party. The Thule was largely based on the theosophical writings of occultists Guido von List and Lanz von Liebenfels. Its symbol was a long dagger superimposed on a swastika, and its affiliations overlapped (variously and at various times) with that of other secret and occult organizations, including the List Society’s Higher Armanen Order, the Order of the Temple of the East (OTO), the Brotherhood of Saturn, the Theosophical Society, the Anthroposophical Society, the Golden Dawn, and Aleister Crowley’s Cult of Thelema.¹³⁶

Historian Peter Levenda documents how the Thule Society transformed into the Nazi Party by organizing a united militant front against Communist incursions into Germany:

Meeting in the expensive Four Seasons Hotel [in Munich], the leading industrialists and aristocracy of the city, along with a generous helping of local police and military officials, are designing a two-pronged strategy of political activism. The Thule Society will do the organizing, will make the right connections among the society figures, the wealthy capitalists, the intelligentsia. They will stockpile weapons. They will organize units of the Free Corps, particularly the Ehrhardt Brigade (which will become an official unit of German’s navy as the Ehrhardt Naval Brigade and, eventually, subsumed into Himmler’s SS) and the Freikorps Oberland.

But another arm of the Thule has already begun recruiting – not among Munich’s “beautiful people,” the rich and the powerful – but among the working people, the lower- and middle-class citizens who have been hit hardest by the civil wars, the enormous rates of inflation, the chaos and confusion. There will be no overt involvement of the Thule Society in this group, which is to be called instead the German Workers Party and which will be led by a serious, humorless, railroad employee and locksmith named Anton Drexler. They will meet at a beer hall….

Within a year, this project of the Thule Gesellschaft will become the NSDAP: the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The Nazi Party. It will sport a swastika flag and a swastika armband, and its leader will be a war veteran, a corporal who had been sent by the German Army to spy on the organization: Adolf Hitler.¹³⁷

Thus “occultists had virtually created both the Party and Hitler,” Levenda concludes: “the wildest, most extreme aims of the Thule Society would all eventually become official policy of the Third Reich, while its purely metaphysical and occult characteristics were adopted wholeheartedly by the SS.”¹³⁸

Lanz von Liebenfels, whose writings, along with those of Guido von List, informed Thule Society doctrine and practice, “was Hitler’s early mentor.”¹³⁹ Levenda documents the ties. But what did the Thule Society believe? To answer that question Levenda introduces Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891) and the founding of the Theosophical Society in New York City in 1875. Blavatsky’s writings – notably Isis Unveiled (1877) and The Secret Doctrine (1888) – were foundational for twentieth-century occultism. Blavatsky took the dogmas of the emergent religion of Darwinian science and “gave them a mystical twist.”

Taking her cue from Darwin, she popularized the notion of a spiritual struggle between various “races,” and of the inherent superiority of the “Aryan” race, hypothetically the latest in the line of spiritual evolution….

The rationale behind many later Nazi projects can be traced back – through the writings of von List, von Sebottendorff, and von Liebenfels – to ideas first popularized by Blavatsky. A caste system of races, the importance of ancient alphabets (notably the runes), the superiority of the Aryans (a white race with its origins in the Himalayas), an “initiated” version of astrology and astronomy, the cosmic truths coded within pagan myths…all of these and more can be found both in Blavatsky and the Nazi Party itself, specifically in the ideology of its Dark Creature, the SS.¹⁴⁰

Levenda does not fail to further observe that Blavatsky’s work represented “paganism as a movement set up in opposition to Judeo-Christianity,” and that driving this movement was the assumption of science to the status of “the new religion.”¹⁴¹ Purest of the pure of the master race, SS officer Otto Rahn (1904-1939), even published a book in 1937, Lucifer’s Servants, promoting the worship of Lucifer. “Indeed,” writes one investigative commentator, “the idea of Lucifer as a benign or divine being was familiar and congenial to the ‘white light’ Theosophists of the 1920s who, after all, entitled one of their official German publications ‘Luzifer’.”¹⁴²

Historian of the Occult Roots of Nazism, who authored a classic study by that title (1985), Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, likewise identifies the theosophy of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky as having been “borrowed” by Guiodo von List and Lanz von  Liebensfels in their formulations of Thule Society doctrine. Goodrick-Clarke describes these as doctrines of “elitism and purity” deeply indebted to the “Darwinist idea of evolution through struggle,” which was “taken up in order to prove that the superior pure races would prevail over the mixed inferior ones.” Extensive though the borrowing may have been, Goodrick-Clarke nevertheless maintains that Nazi occultism was “an original contribution” by virtue of the manner in which it syncretized elements from “secret societies…the mystical gnosis of Rosicrucianism, Cabbalism, and Freemasonry” into the uniquely German völkisch ideology.¹⁴³

But the völkisch ideology – an extreme form of ethnic nationalism – was hardly exclusive to Germany. The National WWII Museum in New Orleans reports:

The American fascist movement in the 1930s and early 1940s…was arguably the most organized attempt to bring Nazism to the forefront of American society. While not the earliest pro-Nazi American organization, the German-American Bund was one of the most successful. The Bund was founded in 1936 with a goal to empower German-American citizens to spread Nazi ideology in the United States and to create an American counterpart to the German Nazi Party. The culmination of the German American Bund’s work would be a February 20, 1939 rally at Madison Square Garden in Manhattan where 22,000 members gathered amidst a flurry of American and Nazi imagery.

At the Madison Square Garden rally, attendants “performed Nazi salutes toward three-story tall banners of George Washington flanked by Nazi swastikas.”

“American Nazism and Madison Square Garden” (The National World War II Museum): https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/american-nazism-and-madison-square-garden

Just as the Thule Society orchestrated an alliance between the German Workers Party and the Thule’s upper-class occultists that would metamorphosize into the Nazi Party, so too were the interests of American high commanders of finance and industry mirrored amongst the American middle and working classes – although in America the unification of these elements was not successful. But that is not to say that it was not attempted.

In 1934, a colossal claim reached the American news media: There had been a plot to overthrow President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in favor of a fascist government. Supposedly in the works since 1933, the claims of the conspiracy came from a very conspicuous and reliable source: Major General Smedley Butler, one of the most decorated war heroes of his time. Even more unbelievable were his claims of who was involved in the plot – respected names like Robert Sterling Clark, Grayson M.P. Murphy, and Prescott Bush. While news media at the time mocked Butler’s story, recently discovered archives have revealed the truth behind Major General Butler’s claims.¹⁴⁴

Indeed, General Butler wrote a book about the plot, which he heroically foiled and condemned.  In War Is A Racket (1935), Butler is unequivocal:

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the [First] World War a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows….

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few – the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.¹⁴⁵

What must be added to Butler’s account is that World War was also, for the upper echelons of millionaires and billionaires who funded it, a eugenic proceeding. Millions of dysgenic expendables would be sacrificed in war, thereby helping to rid the human gene pool of degenerate traits. The attempted fascist coup exposed by General Butler was international in scope and organized by elements – like Prescot Bush – who would later staff the CIA. Although they ostensibly failed in their attempted coup, these elements were never totally defeated. Along with their German Nazi counterparts, who after WWII were exfiltrated via the CIA and Vatican ratlines to safe havens (notably in North and South America), the Anglo-American eugenics movement went underground, where it continued to carry out eugenics experiments incognito in both clinical and public settings.

In Secret Agenda: The U.S. Government, Nazi Scientists, and Project Paperclip, 1945-1990, researcher Linda Hunt documents the American-Nazi alliance and exfiltration projects:

At least sixteen hundred scientific research specialists and thousands of their dependents were brought to the U.S. under Operation Paperclip. Hundreds of others arrived under two other Paperclip-related projects and went to work for universities, defense contractors, and CIA fronts. The Paperclip operation eventually became such a juggernaut that in 1956 one American ambassador characterized it as “a continuing U.S. recruitment program which has no parallel in any other Allied country….”

The legacy of Paperclip is said to be the moon rockets, jet planes, and other scientific achievements…. What the project’s defenders fail to mention is that its legacy also includes the horrific psychochemical experiments conducted on American soldiers at Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland, the U.S. Army center for chemical warfare research…. The disturbing truth is that American doctors were the ones who sifted through grim concentration camp reports and ultimately used Nazi science as a basis for Dachau-like experiments on over seven thousand U.S. soldiers.

As I have shown, eugenic experiments were also conducted on “over 600 Black men” (likely considerably more) at Tuskegee. “In essence,” Hunt writes in the preface of Secret Agenda, “this book deals with a hauntingly familiar and contemporary subject: a small group of men in the Pentagon who decided that they alone knew what was best for the country.”¹⁴⁶

The “familiar subject” to which Hunt refers is the subject of this briefing. It is the subject of a self-appointed scientific and governing elite who, as A.N. Wilson said of Charles Darwin and T.H. Huxley and their guild, “saw science as confirming their position as lords of the universe.”

And it is indeed “hauntingly familiar.”

Just as General Butler saw the minting of thousands of new millionaires and billionaires through World War I, so too did the workers of the world look on in 2020 as their livelihoods were destroyed and wealth transferred to their lords through the war-gamed declaration of a MindWar pandemic. Indeed, whether kinetic or psychological, war is a racket, and the general public shoulders the bill.¹⁴⁷ Such is the operating system of Satan’s Empire, to which the rich pay homage every time they worshipfully sacrifice entire populations at the altar of Money Power.

Prescot Bush’s war booty financed two successful U.S. presidential runs (that of his son and grandson). The British Royal family, which played a role in the creation of the Third Reich¹⁴⁸ and is again involved in the rise of the Fourth Reich, is speculated to have plundered a share of Nazi gold, together with the Vatican. And as Linda Hunt noted, the legacy of Paperclip for U.S. interests at large “is said to be the moon rockets, jet planes, and other scientific achievements.” However, it is questionable whether these achievements had anything to do with Paperclip. More likely they were a cover for the Pentagon’s classified “black budget” operations, about which little is known, although one researcher has collected “patch intel” – that is, military patches from special operations divisions, all of which conceal in symbols covert meanings – suggestive of supramundane interests, NWO ambitions, and a predilection for sinister and magical themes.

Trevor Paglen, I COULD TELL YOU BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE DESTORYED BY ME: EMBLEMS FROM THE PENTEGON’S BLACK WORLD (https://www.are.na/block/20401560)

Following WWII eugenics fell into disfavor and was forced underground. The eugenics ideology would have to be rebranded, and Julian Huxley took up the challenge. In a lecture delivered in 1951, Huxley offered an alternative term for eugenics, a term that was originally coined by French polytechnician Jean Coutrot (1895-1941). “If it so wishes,” Huxley lectured, “the human species can transcend itself…. We need a new name for this new conviction. Perhaps the word ‘transhumanism’ will be appropriate: man will remain man but transcend himself by realizing the possibilities of his human nature and to their advantage.”¹⁴⁹ Huxley continued to proselytize for the idea of an evolutionary religion of salvation by science based on classic eugenicist convictions. “We shall start from new premises,” Huxley disingenuously wrote in 1957:

For instance, that beauty…is indispensable, and therefore that ugly or depressing towns are immoral; that quality of people, not mere quantity, is what we must aim at, and therefore that a concerted policy is required to prevent the present flood of population-increase from wrecking all our hopes for a better world….

“I believe in transhumanism”: once there are enough people who can truly say that, the human species will be on the threshold of a new kind of existence, as different from ours as ours is from that of Pekin man. It will at last be consciously fulfilling its real destiny.

The “destiny” which Huxley undauntingly continued to pursue was one he acknowledged would “begin by being unpleasant,” since “it will begin by destroying the ideas and even the institutions that stand in the way of our realizing our possibilities.” But, he assured his readers – many of whom had just spent half a century destroying the world in faithful pursuit of their “destiny” – the transhumanist project “will go on by at least making a start with the actual construction of true human destiny.” Huxley was explicit that the transhuman destiny would be realized only “in a few of us human beings.” This “self-aware” vanguard, he wrote, had been “suddenly appointed managing director of the biggest business of all, the business of evolution.”¹⁵⁰

As the early transhumanists set about destroying the institutions which stood in their way, they also worked to build new ones and to influence existing organizations suited to their agenda. At the center of these efforts was population politics. “Huxley tried to get population problems into the agendas of the United Nations as well as into those of its specialized agencies, not least UNESCO, FAO, WHO as well as supporting the UN Population Commission.” He was also “aligned with the Rockefeller Foundation” – the Money Power behind the rise of molecular biology¹⁵¹ – and the Ford Foundation.¹⁵² As Oxford Professor Paul Weindling explains:

Huxley’s peripatetic career was linked to ideological agendas, not least of “a new world order….” [He] emerges as a crucial bridging figure from what has been referred to as “old eugenics” to a new eugenics based on molecular biology, providing an influential analysis of human evolution and a set of persuasively appealing concepts for both the wider public and scientific elite….

Huxley’s post-Second World War concept of “evolutionary humanism” represents a continuity of eugenic commitment from the founding years of the eugenics movement…. His later skillful uses of the term “evolutionary humanism” meant that he sustained the image of eugenics as “humane” by linking it to the post-Second World War human rights revolution.¹⁵³

In her chapter titled, “Julian Huxley’s Transhumanism,” Alison Bashford indirectly concurs with Weindling when she criticizes scholars of human enhancement and transhumanism for making the “common error of imaging that eugenics only operated through the radical right.”

His [Huxley’s] humanism and even his transhumanism once he started using that term, was always based on what he called evolutionary humanism….

The first moment “at which the [evolutionary] process transcended itself” was passage from the inorganic to the biological. The second was passage from the biological to what he called the psychosocial. Now (his present) was the third stage, “from the psychosocial to the consciously purposive phase of evolution….”

The evolved capacity to imagine and direct the future should render evolution the new religion, Huxley claimed, an extension of his claims that eugenics might be the religion of the future. Evolutionary humanism, indeed, was to be “the new world faith.”¹⁵⁴

Former intelligence officer Daniel Estulin has looked more deeply into the Huxley’s and their activities as part of the inner circle of British imperial powerbrokers. “Few realize that Julian Huxley represented a social set of miscreants the likes of which have not been seen since.” Estulin names “Satanist Aleister Crowley” as a “personal mentor” to the founder of the British Eugenics Society and first Director-General of UNESCO. Crowley participated in establishing Britain’s satanic Cult of Isis, which was organized around Helena Blavatsky’s Isis Unveiled. Meanwhile, Julian’s brother, Aldous Huxley,¹⁵⁵ was an initiate of the “Children of the Sun,” a Dionysian cult comprised of the children of Britain’s Round Table Elite. The Round Table Elite formed a ruling oligarchy devoted to “the recruitment and training of an ever-expanding priesthood dedicated to the principles of imperial rule” and “scientific paganism.”¹⁵⁶

Of Julian Huxley’s rebranding of eugenics as “transhumanism” Estulin writes:

Meanwhile, immediately after the war, Sir Julian Huxley changed the name of their program for enforced birth control, zero economic growth, and the technology of mass mind control, and continued to apply the principles which created Nazi Germany’s mass murder against the “racially unfit.” In 1946, Huxley announced that, “even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examine with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”¹⁵⁷

Today, eugenics has indeed become thinkable as “transhumanism.” Not only from sea to shining sea in the United States but in bookstores around the world Yuval Harari’s bestselling Sapiens and Homo Deus can be found prominently displayed. Many consumers of Harari’s ideas are oblivious to the eugenics ideology they revive. This briefing makes the connections explicit.

Transhumanism and the Singularity: “Dataism Is Our New God”

The transhumanist movement is the eugenics movement of yesteryear rebranded and imposed upon the world using militarized propaganda in conjunction with state of emergency and state of siege warfare. It is an initiative of the world’s wealthiest families and their organizations, whose members are endeavoring to defeat death and reign over the living as lords of the universe. In this century as in previous centuries, it is indissolubly wedded to fascism or “biofascism,” understood as a political project in which populations are foisted into a world of totalitarian control that reaches all the way into our bodies, and in which a small number of ruling “elites” regard the bodies of non-elites as expendable tools for profit and experimentation.

The postmodern iteration of this ruling class religion repeats the modern eugenics fable of a future point in time when science and technology will unburden humanity from every dysgenic imperfection, including all the “useless people.”

This point in time is known today as “the Singularity.”

The Singularity buzz word is “exponential.” Computers, genetics, nanotechnology, robotics and artificial intelligence are predicted by transhumanist prophets like Ray Kurzweil to increase at an exponential rate until – voilà! – “the Singularity” will be reached and machine intelligence will be “infinitely more powerful than all human intelligence combined.” The human-machine merger will then be complete and the universe will at last “wake up” to its fullest potential.¹⁵⁸

The potential profit yield on “super exponential growth” makes the Singularity pitch attractive to investors. Massive investments have fueled transhumanists industries leading the way to the Singularity. Indeed, the transhumanist/Singularity imaginative has so completely filled the minds of Money Power that in 2017 a Japanese investor was able to create the largest hedge fund of all time – one-hundred billion dollars – by exploiting the talismanic power of just two commanding terms: “AI and the Singularity.”¹⁵⁹

All such investments belong to what is known as the “bio economy” of the fourth industrial revolution. “The quest for an improved human with enhanced physical, intellectual, sexual, and emotional capacities fits in perfectly with this global phenomenon of biologization and bio medicalization of culture and identities that underlie the bio economy,” writes Nicolas Le Dévédec.¹⁶⁰ Within the bio economy, molecular nanotechnology plays a crucial role. Since the early 2000s, “nanotechnology has become a big business, with worldwide research funding amounting to the billions of dollars.”¹⁶¹ Researcher David Salinas Flores has aptly dubbed this booming business the “nanomafia.” He explains in an article published in the International Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Journal (2018):

Nanotechnology has become a billionaire industry with multiple potential applications on human beings; however, experimentation in humans is high risk, and for that reason, the transnational nanotechnology companies would be resorting to criminal methods like organized crime to achieve that purpose. Thus, mafias of nanotechnology, “nanomafias,” would be created…which would be multiplying vertiginously due to several factors like the ignorance in society regarding the use of nanotechnology as a criminal weapon…its economic power…silence and participation of the press and the health unions, the media disinformation campaign…and the possible participation of authorities of the national police, the prosecutor’s office and the judiciary, and the intelligence services. Nanomafia aims to become the greatest organized crime network in the world; therefore, society should know, be alert and report the crimes committed by this nanomafia.¹⁶²

Asa Boholm of Gothenburg’s School of Global Studies refers to “visionary nanotechnology” as “oriented towards the discovery and engineering of the fundamentals of life and matter.”¹⁶³

In Athens in 2021, High Priest of the Nanomafia Church of Transhuman Deliverance, Yuval Harari, announced that biosensors have been subcutaneously administered into human bodies, thereby rendering their hosts subject to “total biometric surveillance.” Thus Spoke Harari:

In a couple of decades when people look back, the thing they will remember from the COVID crisis is [that] this is the moment when everything went digital…the moment when everything became monitored…the moment when surveillance started going under the skin…. I think the big process that’s happening right now in the world is hacking human beings…. And for that the most important data is not what you read and who you meet and what you buy; it’s what’s happening inside your body. So we’ve had these two big revolutions – the computer science revolution (or the infotech revolution) and the revolution in the biological sciences; and they are still separate. But they are about to merge. They are merging around I would say the biometric sensor. It’s the thing, it’s the gadget, it’s the technology that converts biological data into digital data that can be analyzed by computers; and having the ability to really monitor people under the skin – this is the biggest game-changer of all…. So this is the crucial revolution, and COVID [DIVOC] is critical because this is what convinces people to accept – to legitimize – total biometric surveillance…. So people are now watching us online all over the world…. Now, maybe even right now the people who are watching us are being watched and analyzed – and the thing is not just, you’re watching this; the thing is we know that you are watching this and we also know how you feel.¹⁶⁴

High Priest Harari has also declared that “Dataism Is Our New God,”¹⁶⁵ and that whoever controls the data will control the future “not just of humanity, but the future of life itself.”¹⁶⁶

According to Israeli citizen Ilana Rachel Daniel, Israel – also Yuval Harari’s homeland – is “leading the way to transhumanism.” “It is with increasing concern that we find this country continues to be used as a pilot project nation for too many of the dark changes the world is undergoing,” Daniel reported in April 2023. “These threats,” she elaborates:

present themselves from several fronts…. They come first to the Israeli people and are later intended for you. That is, the digitization of healthcare as promoted by the WHO…the reckless countrywide rollout of 5G and other emergent surveillance technology and weaponry actively underway, and the epically shortsighted genomic database collection and bio-convergence innovation in the commoditization and militarization of all aspects of our lives.

Daniel quotes Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Israel’s bio-convergence economy: “We are doing something of historical significance. We are developing the industries of tomorrow. In fact, these are the industries of today. They are based on three things: very large databases, artificial intelligence, and connectivity.”

Daniel concludes: “This is the digitization of your body and its ancient systems to reach a future of absolute control. It’s the decimation of self-determination…. This is the future of weaponry, of slavery, and the commoditization of the primary systems of body and planet.”¹⁶⁷

But Israel is not the only pilot project nation for the dark changes the world is undergoing. Israel is joined by the Commonwealth nations that pay fidelity to the British Crown: Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. A comment regarding the historical alliance between Zionist Israel, Nazi Germany, and the British Empire is therefore in order. In Zionism: A Conspiracy Against Jews (2004), Dr. Henry Makow summarizes well:

In 1935 the steamer “Tel Aviv” made its maiden voyage from Nazi Germany to Haifa with Hebrew letters on its bow and a Nazi flag fluttering from its mast. The Captain of the Zionist-owned ship was a member of the Nazi Party. A passenger described the spectacle as a “metaphysical absurdity.” Actually it made perfect sense. The ship transported German Jews who had taken advantage of the “Haavara” program, which allowed them to exchange their money for its value in German products in Palestine. As a result, the fledgling Jewish colony received about 70,000 highly educated German Jews and 140 million Reichsmarks worth of German industrial equipment. This laid the foundation of Israel’s infrastructure. The arrangement also boosted the Nazi economy at a time when Jews Worldwide were boycotting German products.

Why retell this story of Zionist-Nazi cooperation now? Because “Jewish” leaders have been exploiting their “lesser brethren” for a long time, and are doing so today. Ordinary Jews pay the price and this price could rise. In my opinion, Zionism is a movement to deceive Jews into advancing the objectives of British imperialism…. Zionists who have built their lives on a false premise naturally will reject this view. Specifically, Jews helped the British-Jewish elite colonize the oil-rich Middle East under the pretext of Jews needing a national home. Despite the appearance of neutrality, the British (and Americans) financed, trained and equipped the Jews…. The “British” are really the London-based international banking cartel associated with names like Rothschild and Rockefeller. It doesn’t answer to any government. Its goal is to colonize the world and everyone in it. Jews are a means to this end. As seen in Iraq, Zionists (a.k.a. Neocons) play a major role in the colonization of the Middle East. The important thing to remember is that Israel is the creation of this cartel; both Israel and the US are its tools. Iraq is only a phase in the emerging New World Order, which represents a continuation of the goals of “British” imperialism.¹⁶⁸

In 1917, in a letter of “sympathy with Jewish Zionists,” Lord Arthur Balfour bequeathed Palestine to the Rothschilds as “a national home for the Jewish people.”¹⁶⁹ Balfour was active in a secret society called the “Ghost Society,” whose members gathered to conducted séances.¹⁷⁰

As I have indicated in this briefing, the Rothschild/Rockefeller axis not only intersects with Zionist Israel, Nazi Germany, and the British Imperium. Importantly, the Vatican and the Black Nobility (or Venetian Oligarchy) are also collaborators in the movement toward One World Inc. The most powerful of the Black Nobility – so called for their reputation for ruthlessness – are located in Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Britain, Holland and Greece (in that order). The families of the Black Nobility are descended from the Venetian oligarchs, who became fabulously wealthy through human trafficking (slave trade),¹⁷¹ and who were of Khazarian extraction.¹⁷²

The Vatican today is closely allied with the Rothschilds. In 2020, Pope Francis and Lynn Forester de Rothschild jointly launched the “Council for Inclusive Capitalism,” led by a “core group of global leaders, known as Guardians for Inclusive Capitalism.”¹⁷³ “These leaders represent more than $10.5 trillion in assets under management, companies with over $2.1 trillion of market capitalization, and 200 million workers in over 163 countries.”¹⁷⁴

The new Vatican push comes as the World Economic Forum, the IMF, the UN, and the British monarchy peddle what they call the “Great Reset.” According to WEF boss Klaus Schwab, every country and every industry “must be transformed” as part of the scheme. “In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism,” said Schwab, whose organization is also openly promoting the totalitarian idea that by 2030, “you’ll own nothing.” Critics ridiculed and blasted the new scheme…. Shane Trejo said the Vatican was helping to “rebrand corporate globalism.” “Pope Francis, who has allegedly protected known pedophiles as Pontiff, is playing a key role in the destruction of the West,” concluded Trejo.¹⁷⁵

Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum praised the Vatican’s initiative when reporting that “the pope put his stamp on efforts to shape what’s been termed a Great Reset of the global economy in response to the devastation of COVID-19.”¹⁷⁶

Vigilant Catholics have long been raising concern over the Church’s complicity in “devilry.” Indeed, it has been compellingly alleged that on June 29, 1963, on the eve of the coronation of Pope Paul VI, a ceremony of the Enthronement of Lucifer was held at the Vatican. Fr. Brian W. Harrison has publicly testified that the satanic ceremony was mirrored by a corresponding ceremony held in the Chapel of St. Paul in New York City the day after the coronation.¹⁷⁷

Vatican Audience Hall. An unmistakable likeness. The Luciferian symbolism is not disguised.

Inside the Audience Hall: Pericle Fazzini’s “The Resurrection”

Inside the Audience Hall: Pericle Fazzini’s “The Resurrection” sculpture depicts Jesus rising from out of a “nuclear apocalypse.” Jesus is thus reimagined, in a post-nuclear world, as resurrecting into the serpent’s head, becoming the serpent or subsumed by the serpent, whereas according to the biblical account God assures Christians that the head of the serpent will be crushed under their feet (Gen. 3:15; Rom. 16:20). The architecture of the Vatican Audience Hall thus embodies the principle of Luciferian reversal. The pope is seated before the resurrected figure, vicar of the Antichrist, who speaks from mouth of a snake.¹⁷⁸

When Pope Francis entered the United States Congress to deliver a congressional address in 2016, he was greeted with a standing ovation that lasted nearly a full two minutes.

Dr. John Coleman has summarized what will come to pass should humanity stand by and allow it:

A One World Government and one-unit monetary system, under permanent non-elected hereditary oligarchists who self-select from among their numbers in the form of a feudal system as it was in the Middle Ages. In this One World entity, population will be limited by restrictions on the number of children per family, diseases, wars, famines, until 1 billion people who are useful to the ruling class, in areas which will be strictly and clearly defined, remain as the total world population. There will be no middle class, only rulers and servants. All laws will be uniform under a legal system of world courts practicing the same unified code of laws, backed up by a One World Government police force and a One World unified military to enforce laws…. Those who are obedient and subservient to the One World Government will be rewarded with the means to live; those who are rebellious will simply be starved to death or be declared outlaws…. Privately owned firearms or weapons of any kind will be prohibited. Only one religion will be allowed and that will be in the form of a One World Government Church…. Satanism, Luciferianism and Witchcraft shall be recognized as legitimate One World Government curricula with no private or church schools. All Christian churches have already been subverted and Christianity will be a thing of the past in the One World Government.¹⁷⁹

Vibe of the day:

1. Gaebelein and Amison, “Human Augmentation: the Dawn of a New Paradigm” (MOD, 2021), pp. 7-8: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/986301/Human_Augmentation_SIP_access2.pdf. Emphasis mine.

2. Dennis Bushnell, “Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025]”  (NASA, 2000): http://wayback.archive.org/web/20031224161719/http:/www.dtic.mil/ndia/2001testing/bushnell.pdf. See relatedly: National Science Foundation, “Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science” (Arlington, Virginia, June 2002): https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/bioecon-%28%23%20023SUPP%29%20NSF-NBIC.pdf; “The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Supplement to the President’s 2023 Budget,” Product of the Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology (National Science and Technology Council, February 2023): https://www.nano.gov/sites/default/files/pub_resource/NNI-FY23-Budget-Supplement.pdf; “National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan,” A Report by the Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology (National Science and Technology Council, October 2021): https://www.nano.gov/sites/default/files/pub_resource/NNI-2021-Strategic-Plan.pdf; Daniel Ratner and Mark A. Ratner, New Weapons for New Wars: Nanotechnology and Homeland Security (Pearson Education, 2004).

3. https://www.broadinstitute.org/news/broad-institute-harvard-and-mit-license-crispr-cas9-technology-editas-medicine-therapeutic; https://news.mit.edu/2014/broad-institute-awarded-first-patent-for-crispr-cas9-system.

4. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2014/crispr-a-game-changing-genetic-engineering-technique/.

5. See “DARPA and the Brain Initiative”(https://www.darpa.mil/program/our-research/darpa-and-the-brain-initiative); “Bridging the Bio-Electronic Divide” (https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2015-01-19); “Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology” (https://www.darpa.mil/program/next-generation-nonsurgical-neurotechnology); “Towards a High-Resolution, Implantable Neural Interface” (https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2017-07-10); NIH Digital Media Kit, “Gene Editing” (https://www.nih.gov/news-events/gene-editing-digital-press-kit). As with all major industries, interlocking public-private partnerships are commonplace in the field of human augmentation. Exemplary in this regard is the career of Regina Dugan, who served as DARPA’s 19^th Director before heading to Google’s Advanced Technologies & Projects division, joining an advanced R&D team at Facebook’s Building 8, and – after a second tour as Director of DARPA – becoming Chief Executive Officer at Wellcome Leap (styled as “the DARPA of healthcare”). Dugan and the institutions with which she is affiliated all have open and critically documented ties with the FBI, CIA, and the World Economic Forum(see Whitney Webb, 2021: https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/06/investigative-reports/a-leap-toward-humanitys-destruction/).

6. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Advancing_towards_Digital_Agency_2022.pdf.

7. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/04/transhumanism-advances-in-technology-could-already-put-evolution-into-hyperdrive-but-should-they/. Emphasis mine.

8. Anecdotally, in 2021, several of my former professors at Western University announced with irritation that they would not teach students who refused to be injected with pharmaceutical products developed by criminal enterprises. For information on the criminal activities of the global pharmaceutical industry, see https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/industry/pharmaceuticals; U.S. Department of Justice, “Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History” (September 2, 2009): https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history; Frank Bergman, “Bill Gates Hit with Indian High Court Notice over Vaccine Death,” Slay News (September 5, 2022): https://slaynews.com/news/bill-gates-indian-high-court-notice-vaccine-death/; Matthew Roscoe, “FDA slowly starts release of Pfizer vaccine data to the public,” EuroWeekly News (March 8, 2022): https://euroweeklynews.com/2022/03/08/fda-pfizer-vaccine-data/. To cross-reference these criminal violations with the Nuremberg Code, see The Nuremberg Code: 75th Anniversary Commemorative Edition (2022): https://nuremberg75.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Nuremberg-Code-Final.pdf.

9. See, for example, Parker Crutchfield, “Compulsory moral bioenhancement should be covert,” Bioethics (2019), pp. 112-121. Crutchfield argues that “it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement [drugs] to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement.”

10. For a list of colleges and universities that have mandated “mRNA immunizations,” see

https://nocollegemandates.com/.

11. T.J. Coles, Biofascism: The Tech-Pharma Complex and the End of Democracy (2022), p. 23-33.

12. This point is borrowed from “2nd Smartest Guy in the World” (March 31, 2023):

The Unrecognized Threat of Human Augmentation

13. Ray Kurzweil, The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence (Penguin Books, 1999), p. x.

14. John Coleman, Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Committee of 300 (Bridger House, 1992), pp. 108-111.

15. Coles, p. 116.

16. Mathew Connelly, Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population (Harvard University Press, 2008), p. 25. Emphasis mine.

17. Robert J. Mayhew, Malthus: The Life and Legacies of an Untimely Prophet  (Harvard University Press, 2014), p. 47.

18. Quoted in ibid., p. 181.

19. Thomas Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population and Other Writings (Penguin, 2015), p. 49.

20. See, for example, Klaus Schwab, The Fourth Industrial Revolution (World Economic Forum, 2016).

21. Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species (Oxford, 2008 [1859]), p. 51. Emphasis mine.

22. André Pichot, The Pure Society: From Darwin to Hitler (Verso, 2009 [2001]), pp. 43-44.

23. A.N. Wilson, Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker (HarperCollins, 2017), p. 321.

24. Ibid., p. 82.

25. Ibid., p. 9. Emphasis mine.

26. Ibid., p. 16.

27. Ibid., p. 17. Emphasis mine.

28. Ibid., p. 26.

29. Ibid., p. 117. Emphasis mine.

30. Ibid., p. 119. The idea to bring a naturalist on board the Beagle had in fact been that of the vessel’s captain, FitzRoy (see ibid., p. 148).

31. Alison Bashford, Imperial Hygiene: A Critical History of Colonialism, Nationalism and Public Health (Palgrave Macmillan, 2014 [2003]), pp. 8-9. Emphasis mine.

32. Ibid., pp. 15-38.

33. Ibid., pp. 43-45.

34. Ibid., pp. 45-53.

35. Ibid., pp. 123-130.

36. Coles, p. 33. See also Nadja Durbach, “‘They Might As Well Brand Us’: Working-Class Resistance to Compulsory Vaccination in Victorian England,” The Society for the Social History of Medicine (2000).

37. A.N. Wilson, p. 350.

38. Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (Penguin Books, 2004), p. 159.

39. Richard Weikart, Darwinian Racism: How Darwinism Influenced Hitler, Nazism, and White Nationalism (Discovery Institute, 2022).

40. Ibid., p. 82. Emphasis mine.

41. Ibid., p. 13.

42. https://www.etymonline.com/word/eugenics.

43. See Weikart, p. 81.

44. Ibid., p. 18.

45. Quoted in ibid., p. 21.

46. Ibid., p. 22.

47. Leonard Darwin, “The Geneticists’ Manifesto,” Eugenics Review 31(4), 1940, pp. 229-230.

48. Julian Huxley, What Dare I Think? (Chatto and Windus, 1933 [1931]), pp. 96-98.

49. Annie Besant, The Law of Population (1886), p. 43.

50. Quoted in ibid., p. 46.

51. Margaret Sanger, “A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review: The Legal Aspects of Birth Control, Vol. XVI, No. 4, April 1932, pp. 107-108. Emphasis mine.

52. Julian Huxley and H.G. Wells, The Science of Life (1931), pp. 873-880. Emphasis mine.

53. Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (AMS Press, 1968 [1953]), pp. 102-104. Emphasis mine. 

54. Richard Freeman and Jeffrey Steinberg, “The Genocidal Lombard League of Cities Apparatus,” Executive Intelligence Review 35(21), May 23, 2008: pp. 50-63. Emphasis mine.

55. Ibid. Emphasis mine.

56. “9-10 Edward VII. Chap. 27. An Act respecting Immigration. Assented to 4^th May, 1910.” URL: https://pier21.ca/research/immigration-history/immigration-act-1910. Emphasis mine.

57. “U.S. Immigration Act of 1917,” United States Statutes At Large, Vol. 39, 1917: pp. 874-898. URL: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/llsl//llsl-c64/llsl-c64.pdf. Emphasis mine. See also Jay Timothy Dolmage, Disabled Upon Arrival: Eugenics, Immigration, and the Construction of Race and Disability (Ohio State University, 2018). Dolmage concludes that “we must acknowledge that eugenics is alive and well [in 2018]. It may be disguised as genetics or biotechnology or ‘simply scientific’, but it still undergirds immigration rhetoric. It is polemic rhetoric dividing old and young, North Americans from others, abled from disabled, and liberal from conservative.” Quoted in Norma Coto Smith, World Medical and Health Policy (2019 Policy Studies Organization): pp. 474-475.

58. See Garland E. Allen, “Was Nazi eugenics created in the US?” (review of Edwin Black, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race), European Molecular Biology Organization Reports 5(5), 2004: pp. 451-452. 

59. Cera R. Lawrence, “The Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (1910-1939),” The Embryo Project Encyclopedia: https://embryo.asu.edu. Emphasis mine.

60. Paul A. Lombardo, “Excerpt: The Banality of Eugenics: Why researchers measured the bodies of black children in Depression-era Alabama,” April 4, 2016.

61. https://exhibits.stanford.edu/saytheirnames/feature/tuskegee-syphilis-experiment.

62. “Carnegie Institution for Science Statement on Eugenics Research,” Carnegie Institution for Science: https://carnegiescience.edu/carnegie-institution-science-statement-eugenics-research. Emphasis mine.

63. Quoted in Andrea A. Rusnock, The Uses of Humans in Experiments: Perspectives from the 17^th to the 20^th Century (review) in Bulletin of the History of Medicine 91(2), 2017, pp. 808-809.

64. Edwin Black, “The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics,” History News Network (September 2003), pp. 2-4: https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1796.

65. Ibid., p. 4. Emphasis mine.

66. Ibid., pp. 4-5. Emphasis mine.

67. Richard Weikart, Darwinian Racism: How Darwinism Influenced Hitler, Nazism, and White Nationalism (Discovery Institute, 2022), p. 18.

68. André Pichot, The Pure Society: From Darwin to Hitler (Verso, 2009 [2001]), p. 327. Emphasis mine.

69. Ibid., p. 331.

70. [1]https://www.in.gov/history/state-historical-markers/find-a-marker/1907-indiana-eugenics-law/.

71. See Alexandra Minna Stern, “STERILIZED in the Name of Public Health: Race, Immigration, and Reproductive Control in Modern California,” American Journal of Public Health 95(7), 2005: pp. 1088-1281. URL: https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/epub/10.2105/AJPH.2004.041608.

72. Quoted in Pichot, p. 178.

73. Ibid., pp. 206-207. Emphasis mine.

74. Quoted in ibid., p. 207. Emphasis mine.

75. See ibid., pp. 181-192.

76. Quoted in ibid., p. 187. Emphasis mine.

77. Ibid., p. 189. Emphasis mine.

78. Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (Signal, 2014 [2011]), p. 263.

79. Yuval Noah Harari, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow (Signal, 2017 [2015]), pp. 48-50. Emphasis mine.

80. Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens, pp. 259-261. Emphasis mine.

81. E. Michael Jones, Darwinism, Materialism, and other Jewish Fables (Fidelity Press, 2018), chapter 2, “Harari’s Ignorance.” Emphasis mine.

82. Yuval Harari, Jewish Magic before the Rise of Kabbalah (Wayne State University Press, 2017 [2010]).

83. Ibid., p. xii.

84. Ibid., p. 11. Emphasis mine.

85. John Coleman, Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300 (Bridger House, 1992).

86. Daniel Estulin, 2045 Global Projects at War: Tectonic Processes of Global Transformation (2021). Emphasis mine. See especially p. 57.

87. See “Chief Counsel Robert David Steele (ITNJ Seating),” International Tribunal for Natural Justice (2018):   https://commission.itnj.org/2018/06/05/chief-counsel-robert-david-steele/. 

88. E. Michael Jones, chapter 7, “The War on Logos.”

89. Ibid., chapter 8, “Truth.”

90. Ibid., chapter 6, “The War on Logos.”

91. Ibid., chapter 8, “Truth.”

92. Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments (Banner of Truth Trust, 2000 [1948]), pp. 31-32. Emphasis mine. 

93. Ibid., p. 34.

94. Ibid. Emphasis mine.

95. Ibid.

96. Vos, p. 35. Emphasis mine.

97. Ibid. Emphasis mine.

98. See John Dominic Crossan, In Parables: The Challenge of the Historical Jesus (Harper & Row, 1973).

99. Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments, p. 37.

100. Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry (Charleston, 1871), p. 102. Emphasis mine.

101. Ibid., p. 323.

102. Aleister Crowley, Magick in Theory and Practice (1929), pp. 417-418: https://ia800800.us.archive.org/15/items/b29825064/b29825064.pdf.

103. Geneticist and former research director of INSERM (the French NIH), Dr. Alexandra Henrion-Caude, called attention to the WHO’s clandestine modification of their definition of “pandemic” in a 2021 interview. “If I had to say something about the crisis, it’s about the crisis of language,” Henrion-Caude relays. “A new definition [of ‘pandemic’] had been coined by the WHO in 2009-2010, which suppressed the notion of severity.” Under the new definition, a “public health emergency of global concern” could be falsely declared and draconian emergency medical counter-measures allegedly justified. Interview URL: https://mega.nz/file/uYMm2TbJ#O6y9HaWcDWyt0qieO1_zkAeP2808lLZ_IDkoE5fNLx0. See also Toby Green, The COVID Consensus: The New Politics of Global Inequality (Hurst & Company, 2021), pp. 173-175, 202. Recalling Albert Pike’s reference to the horned God “PAN…brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer,” it is noteworthy that the words “pandemic” and “pandemonium” share etymological family resemblances. “Pandemic” joins the Greek words “pan,” meaning “all,” with “dēmos,” meaning “people.” In the word “pandemonium,” the Latin “daemonium,” meaning “evil spirit” (from the Greek “daimonion”), replaces the people or dēmos. Coined by John Milton, “Pandæmonium,” in  Milton’s Paradise Lost, is the name of the palace built in the middle of Hell, “the high capital of Satan and all his peers,” an abode of demons (https://www.etymonline.com/word/pandemonium).

104. See, for example, Patrick Howley, “Gates Foundation Funded Both Imperial College and IHME, Failed Model-Makers” (National File, May 2020): https://nationalfile.com/gates-foundation-funded-both-imperial-college-and-ihme-failed-model-makers/; Chris von Csefalvay, “The Unexamined Model Is Not Worth Trusting” (City Journal, May 2020): https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-unexamined-model-is-not-worth-trusting; Phillip W. Magness, “The Failure of Imperial College Modeling Is Far Worse than We Knew” (American Institute for Economic Research, April 2021): https://www.aier.org/article/the-failure-of-imperial-college-modeling-is-far-worse-than-we-knew/; Sanjeev Sabhlok, “A critique of Neil Ferguson’s (the Imperial College) pandemic model” (The Times of India, April 2020): https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/seeing-the-invisible/a-critique-of-neil-fergusons-the-imperial-college-pandemic-model/; “Six questions that Neil Ferguson should be asked” (The Spectator, April 2020): https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/six-questions-that-neil-ferguson-should-be-asked/; Peter St. Onge and Gaël Campan, “The Flawed COVID-19 Model That Locked Down Canada” (MEI, 2020): https://www.iedm.org/the-flawed-covid-19-model-that-locked-down-canada/#content; John fund, “‘Professor Lockdown’ Modeler Resigns in Disgrace” (National Review, 2020): https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/professor-lockdown-modeler-resigns-in-disgrace/; Derek Winton, “The Imperial Model and its Role in the UK’s Pandemic Response” (The Daily Sceptic, February 2021): https://dailysceptic.org/2021/02/18/the-imperial-model-and-its-role-in-the-uks-pandemic-response/; Patrick Wood, “Imperial College London: Pseudo-Science, Cracked Computer Models And Coverup” (Technocracy News & Trends, April 2021): https://www.technocracy.news/imperial-college-london-pseudo-science-cracked-computer-models-and-coverup/.

105. See Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter, “COVID-19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless” (Bulgarian Pathology Association, 2020): https://bpa-pathology.com/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/; David DeGraw, Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter, “COVID Tests Scientifically Fraudulent, Epidemic of ‘False Positives’” (Center for Research on Globalization, 2020): https://www.globalresearch.ca/national-security-alert-covid-tests-scientifically-fraudulent-epidemic-false-positives/5720271; Celia Farber, “Gary Null’s Epic Full 1996 Interview with PCR Inventor Kary Mullis” (The Truth Barrier, 2021):

Gary Null's Epic Full 1996 Interview With PCR Inventor Kary Mullis

Ralph Lopez, “‘Second Wave’ Faked on False-Positive COVID Tests” (2021): https://discover.hubpages.com/politics/Pfizer-Chief-Science-Officer-Second-Wave-Based-on-Fake-Data-of-False-Positives-for-New-Cases-Pandemic-is-Over; Clare Craig, “We Are in a False Positive Pseudo-Epidemic” (2020): https://dailysceptic.org/2020/11/17/dr-clare-craig-false-positive-pseudo-epidemic-coronavirus-testing-pcr-lateral-flow/;  Kit Knightly, “WHO (finally) admits PCR tests create false positives” (2020): https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/18/who-finally-admits-pcr-tests-create-false-positives/; “COVID-19 test is scientific fraud: PCR cannot detect infection” (Wicked Truths, 2020): https://wickedtruths.org/en/covid-19-test-is-scientific-fraud/.

106. See National Reconnaissance Office, “CORONA” (declassified 1995): https://www.nro.gov/History-and-Studies/Center-for-the-Study-of-National-Reconnaissance/The-CORONA-Program/.

107. https://divoc.egov.org.in/.

108. https://jewish.shop/37046/what-does-divoc-mean-in-hebrew/.

109. Harari, Jewish Magic before the Rise of Kabbalah, p. 222.

110. Ibid. This amulet dates to the beginning of the seventh century AD.

111. https://planetdivoc91.com/.

112. https://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/covid-19-inspired-webcomic-praised-by-top-scientists-and-policy-makers/.

113. See The Jewish Chronicle (October 2013): https://www.thejc.com/judaism/rabbi-i-have-a-problem/what-can-i-do-if-i-am-haunted-by-a-dybbuk-1.49397.

114. Quote in Jones, chapter 9, “Heaven on Earth.”

115. Ibid. Emphasis mine.

116. “Rapid Medical Countermeasure Response to Infectious Diseases: Enabling Sustainable Capabilities Through Ongoing Public- and Private-Sector Partnerships: Workshop Summary” (National Academies Press, 2016): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK349040/.

117. See Katherine Watt, Bailiwick News:

American Domestic Bioterrorism Program

118. Integrative Health Systems, LCC, “Global Brain Chip and Mesogens: Nano Machines for Ultimate Control of False Memories” (January 2012): https://cognitive-liberty.online/wp-content/uploads/Nano-Machines-for-Ultimate-Control-of-False-Memories.pdf.

119. https://carrington.edu/blog/historical-overview-of-pharmacology/.

120. Achille Mbembe, Necropolitics (Duke University, 2019 [2016]).

121. JTK deCordova, Forward to Leonard G. Horowitz, COVID Coup: The Rise of the Fourth Reich (Tetrahedron, 2019), pp. 15-16. Emphasis mine.

122. Leonard G. Horowitz, COVID Coup: The Rise of the Fourth Reich, p. 211. Emphasis mine.

123. See my article, “What Is MindWar?” (2022): https://mindwarintel.substack.com/p/what-is-mindwar.

124. See Jeffrey Steinberg, “Satanic Subversion of the U.S. Military,” EIR 32(33), August 2005: pp. 21-23.

125. Johnny Vedmore, “Schwab Family Values” (2021): https://johnnyvedmore.com/2021/02/20/featured-content-2/https:/johnnyvedmore.com/2021/02/20/featured-content-2/. 

126. See  Richard Seager, “All the Young Global Leaders from 1993 until 2021” (February 2022):

All the Young Global Leaders from 1993 until 2021

127. https://archive.org/details/klaus-schwab-at-harvard-in-2017-we-penetrate-the-cabinets. See also:

128. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11643585/Prostitutes-gather-Davos-annual-meeting-global-elite-demand-skyrockets.html.

129. See Aaron Weaver, “Bill Gates Conspiracy Theorists Might Not Be as Crazy as You Think” (2020): https://www.ccn.com/bill-gates-conspiracy-theorists-might-not-be-as-crazy-as-you-think/.

130. Henry Kissinger (December 1974), pp. 109-110: https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PCAAB500.pdf.

131. Alison Bashford, Global Population: History, Geopolitics, and Life on Earth (Columbia), p. 334.

132. Julian Huxley and H.G. Wells, The Science of Life (1939).

133. https://www.thoughtco.com/the-history-of-the-swastika-1778288.

134. See “Occult History of the 3rd Reich – Heinrich Himmler – Full Documentary” (2019):

135. Ibid.

136. See Peter Levenda, Unholy Alliance: A History of Nazi Involvement with the Occult (Ibis Press, 2019 [1995]), pp. 33, 43, 285-286.

137. Ibid., p. 36. Emphasis mine.

138. Ibid., pp. 77-78.

139. Ibid., p. 79.

140. Ibid., p. 40. Emphasis mine.

141. See ibid., pp. 59-60.

142. Peter Crawford, “The Occult History of the Third Reich” (2017): http://thirdreichocculthistory.blogspot.com/2014/04/national-socialism-and-occult-part-v-ss.html.

143. Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and Their Influence on Nazi Ideology (New York University Press Classics, 1992 [1985]), pp. 2-5. Emphasis mine.

144. “Smedley Butler and the 1930s Plot to Overthrow the President” (Arcadia Publishing): https://www.arcadiapublishing.com/Navigation/Community/Arcadia-and-THP-Blog/September-2018/Smedley-Butler-and-the-1930s-Plot-to-Overthrow-the.

145. Smedley Butler, War Is A Racket (1935): https://ia904706.us.archive.org/5/items/WarIsARacket/WarIsARacket.pdf.

146. Linda Hunt, Secret Agenda: The U.S. Government, Nazi Scientists, and Project Paperclip, 1945-1990 (St. Martin’s Press, 1991), Prologue. Emphasis mine.

147. https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotognini/2021/04/06/meet-the-40-new-billionaires-who-got-rich-fighting-covid-19/?sh=2475cf9e17e5.

148. Dmitry Yurievich Peretolichin, World Wars and World Elites (difficult to obtain full-copy in English).

149. Quoted in Christian Byk, “Transhumanism: from Julian Huxley to UNESCO,” JAHR 12(1), 2021, pp. 141-162. See also Alison Bashford, “Julian Huxley’s Transhumanism” in Crafting Humans: From Genesis to Eugenics and Beyond (National Taiwan University Press), p. 155. Emphasis mine.

150. Julian Huxley, New Bottles for New Wine (Chatto &Windus, 1957), pp. 13-17. Emphasis mine.

151. See Lily E. Kay, The Molecular Vision of Life: Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology (Oxford University Press, 1993).

152. Paul Weindling, “Julian Huxley and the Continuity of Eugenics in Twentieth-century Britain,” Journal of Modern European History 10(4), 2012, pp. 480-499.

153. Ibid.

154. Alison Bashford, “Julian Huxley’s Transhumanism” in Crafting Humans: From Genesis to Eugenics and Beyond (National Taiwan University Press), pp. 160-161. Emphasis mine.

155. It is commonly supposed that the author of Brave New World was a critic of that for which his friends H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell openly advocated in their co-authored book, The Open Conspiracy (1928). This is misconception, which Estulin’s account thoroughly dispels. On March 20, 1962, for example, Aldous Huxley delivered a lecture at UC Berkley in which he clearly articulated his vision of a planned future society: “In the past, we can say that all revolutions have essentially aimed at changing the environment in order to change the individual. Today, we are faced with the approach of what may be called the ultimate revolution, the final revolution where man can act directly on the mind body of his fellows. The nature of the ultimate revolution which we are now facing is precisely this; that we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy that always existed and presumably will always exist, to get people to actually love their servitude. First of all, to standardize the population, to iron out inconvenient human differences. To create mass produced models of human beings, arranged in some kind of a scientific class system. The number of predictions which were purely fantastic when I made them 30 years ago, have come true or are in the process of coming true; not through terror but through making life much more enjoyable than it normally does. Enjoyable to the point where human beings come to love the state of things that by any reasonable human standard they ought not to love. And this, I think is perfectly possible. One of the more recent developments in the sphere of neurology is the implantation of electrodes in the brain. This of course is being done on a large scale in the behavior of rats.” Quoted in Estulin (2015), p. 185.

156. Daniel Estulin, Tavistock Institute: Social Engineering the Masses (Trine Day, 2015), pp. 94-98, 201.

157. Ibid., pp. 200-201.

158. For a brief summary of Singularity ideology, see “Ray Kurzweil says We'll Reach IMMORTALITY by 2030: The Singularity IS NEAR” (ADIGO, February 2023):

159. “Clip – SoftBank – The Vision Fund, AI and The Singularity” (Alison McDowell, 2023):

160. Quoted in Byk, “Transhumanism: from Julian Huxley to UNESCO,” JAHR 12(1), 2021, p.151.

161. Nick Bostrom, “A History of Transhumanist Thought,” Journal of Evolution & Technology 14(1), April 2005, p. 8.

162. David Salinas Flores, “The nanomafia: nanotechnology’s global network of organized crime,” International Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Journal 3(3), 2018, pp. 273-277. Emphasis mine.

163. Asa Boholm, “Nanotechnology, Anthropomorphic Matter and Human Machinery,” Journal of the Association of Social Anthropologies 1(9), November 2014.

164. “Panel Discussion on Technology and the Future of Democracy” (Athens Democracy Forum, 2021):

165. Yuval Noah Harari, “Dataism Is Our New God,” New Perspective Quarterly (May 2017): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/npqu.12080.

166. “Will the Future Be Human? – Yuval Noah Harari” (World Economic Forum, 2018):

167. Ilana Rachel Daniel, “Israel: Leading the Way to Transhumanism” (Children’s Health Defense, 2023): https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/shows/good-morning-chd/israel-leading-the-way-to-transhumanism/. Emphasis mine.

168. Henry Makow, Zionism: A Conspiracy Against Jews (June 27, 2004): https://www.henrymakow.com/000482.html.

169. Arthur Balfour, “Balfour Declaration; Letter from Balfour to Rothschild re: declaration of

sympathy with Jewish Zionists” (Nov. 2, 1917), Lionel Walter Rothschild Collection: https://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/library/1917-11-02-Balfour-Declaration-Letter-from-Arthur-Balfour-to-Lord-Rothschild-British-Foreign-Office-Nov-02-1917.pdf. See also “Jacob Rothschild…Interview” (2019):

170. See American Intelligence Network Report (May 1, 2023): https://fbcoverup.com/docs/library/2023-05-01-Without-the-Scofield-Bible-Zionist-Israel-would-never-have-happened-Anonymous-Patriots-May-01-2023.pdf.

171. See John Julius Norwich, A History of Venice (Alfred A. Knopfe, 1982), pp. 18, 51.

172. See Alexander James: https://archive.org/details/TheHiddenHistoryOfMoneyFeudalOrderUsurySecrets (p. 683).

173. “Pope Francis Launches the Council for Inclusive Capitalism With the Vatican” (uCatholic, 2020):  https://ucatholic.com/news/pope-francis-launches-the-council-for-inclusive-capitalism-with-the-vatican/.

174. “The Council for Inclusive Capitalism with the Vatican, A New Alliance Of Global Business Leaders, Launches Today” (Dec. 8, 2020): https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/the-council-for-inclusive-capitalism-with-the-vatican-a-new-alliance-of-global-business-leaders-launches-today-806426881.html.

175. Alex Newman,  “Pope Joins Rothschilds and Mega-banks for ‘Inclusive Capitalism’” (Dec. 13, 2020): https://thenewamerican.com/pope-joins-rothschilds-and-mega-banks-for-inclusive-capitalism/.

176. “Here’s the pope’s prescription for resetting the global economy in response to COVID-19” (World Economic Forum, Oct. 9, 2020): https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/here-s-the-pope-s-prescription-for-resetting-the-global-economy-in-response-to-covid-19/. 

177. Fr. Brian W. Harrison, “The 1963 Vatican Enthronement of Lucifer: A ‘Windswept House’ Update” (May 3, 2021): https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/5379-the-1963-vatican-enthronement-of-lucifer-a-windswept-house-update.

178. See relatedly, Robert Bauval and Chiara Hohenzollern, The Vatican Heresy: Bernini and the Building of the Hermetic Temple of the Sun (Bear & Company, 2014); Geerhardus Vos (1975 [1948]), pp. 42-44.

179. John Coleman (1992), pp. 161-162. Emphasis mine. See also “The Revelations of Dr. Richard Day”: https://drrichardday.wordpress.com/audio/.