While it may displease us, even nausea, to consider ideas such as the influence of eugenics on our troubled times, I believe that ignoring such a subject does no one in the long run.
It is all the more serious that the darlings of the World Economic Forum, like Yuval Harari, tout concepts such as “the new useless world class” as artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, automation and the fourth industrial revolution. are supposed to inaugurate.
Other Davos creatures, like Klaus Schwab, are openly calling for the creation of a global citizen equipped with a microchip, able to interface with a global network using a single thought, while Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg promote “neuralinks” to “maintain the relevance of humanity” by merging with computers in the new era of evolutionary biology.
Prominent Darwinian geneticists like Sir James Watson and Sir Richard Dawkins openly defend eugenics while a technocracy consolidates its takeover by using the “Grand Reset” as an excuse to usher in a new post-nation-state era.
If there is something fundamentally wrong behind these processes that has any connection to the Anglo-American rise of fascism and eugenics almost a century ago, then let’s at least have the courage. to explore this possibility. After all, it was only by looking at this ugliness 80 years ago that the Patriots were able to take the appropriate steps to prevent a technocratic dictatorship of bankers in 1933 and again in World War II … so perhaps a similar display of courage to think the unthinkable might be worthwhile for those who might find themselves in a similar situation today.
What did not happen in Nuremberg ?
Seventy-six years ago, as the Allies consolidated their victory over the Nazi machine and the “Nuremberg Tribunals” were quickly put in place, a new strategy was implemented by the same forces that had devoted much energy, money and resources to the rise of fascism as a “silver bullet” to the post-war economic chaos that had spread across Europe and the United States.
One of the biggest scandals of our time is that the Wall Street and City of London machine, which funded Hitler and Mussolini to make them rams of a new world order, has never been brought to justice. . Although Franklin Roosevelt managed to put a leash on Wall Street between 1933 and 1945, while also setting the stage for a fine post-war vision of win-win cooperation, the darker forces of the financial oligarchy, which wanted only to establish a global unipolar system of governance, not only avoided punishment, but wasted no time in regaining their lost hegemony.
The role of Sir Julian Huxley
One of the great conceptual strategists of this process was a man named Julian Sorrel Huxley (1887-1975). A renowned biologist and social reformer, Julian was a lifelong devoted member of the British Eugenics Society, of which he served as secretary and later president alongside John Maynard Keynes.
Julian was a very busy man, who, along with his brother Aldous, worked hard to fill the extra large shoes for their grandfather Thomas (aka: Darwin’s Bulldog). While managing the post-war eugenics movement, Julian found himself promoting the modern environmental movement as a founder of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature in 1948, co-founder of the World Wide Fund for Nature in 1961, creator of the term “transhumanism” and founder of an extremely influential United Nations body called UNESCO in 1946, of which he was the Director General from 1946 to 1948.
The mandate of the new organization is clearly stated in Huxley’s book UNESCO: Its Purpose and Philosophy :
The moral for UNESCO is clear. Its task of promoting peace and security can never be fully achieved by the means assigned to it – education, science and culture. She must consider some form of world political unity, whether through a one world government or otherwise, as the only sure way to avoid war … in her educational program she can stress the need ultimate goal of world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the implications of transferring full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization.
What would this “world political unity” be aimed at? Several pages later, Huxley’s vision is laid out in all its twisted details:
For now, it is likely that the indirect effect of civilization is dysgenic instead of eugenic, and in any case it seems likely that the dead weight of genetic stupidity, physical weakness, instability mental health and disease propensity, which already exists in the human species, will prove to be too heavy a burden for any real progress to be made. So, while it is quite true that any radical eugenics policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it would be important for UNESCO to ensure that the problem of eugenics is considered with the utmost care. and that public opinion be informed of the issues at stake, so that what is unthinkable today can at least become thinkable.
After the world got a chance to see what a eugenics program backed by a fascist social engineer looked like, it wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that he has lost much of his popularity in the eyes of a global population. still very attached to traditional cultural institutions such as Christianity, patriotism and respect for the sanctity of life.
Although thirty US states and two Canadian provinces legalized eugenics policies (including the forced sterilization of unfit persons) between 1907 and 1945, statistical science and the political application of eugenics came to a halt at the end of the decade. World War II and, as Huxley says in his manifesto, something new had to be done.
A word about Tavistock
Huxley also worked closely with the Tavistock Clinic in London, which received funding from the Rockefeller and Macy Foundations in the 1930s-1950s. Headed by a psychiatrist named Brigadier General John Rawlings Rees, Tavistock can be understood as the “psychiatric branch of the British Empire”, established in 1921, which broke new ground in psychiatric techniques using mixtures of Pavlovian behaviourism and theories. Freudian to influence group behaviour in various ways.
From the start, the clinic explored the extreme mental conditions of shell shock victims who suffered psychological deconstruction during the terror suffered in the trench warfare, recognizing the high degree of malleability of these subjects. As L. Wolfe points out in a brilliant 1996 EIR report, Tavistock’s idea has always been motivated by the goal of understanding how the brain can be “untangled” and deconstructed in order to be reconstructed again like a blank slate; in the hope that this knowledge of individuals can later be replicated on larger social groups, or even entire nations. Much of this research has been applied in the form of MK Ultra in the United States and will be the subject of a future report.
Brock Chrisholm: The Tavistock czar of global health
A prominent psychiatrist, who spent years working with Rees in Tavistock, is a Canadian by the name of G. Brock Chrisolm.
In 1948, Christolm founded a UN-affiliated body, the World Health Organization (WHO), with the aim of promoting mental and physical health around the world. A noble enterprise that carried a lot of responsibility and power and required a leader with an exceptional vision of the nature of disease and health. Unfortunately, based on his own sick view of the nature of man and society, Chrisholm was certainly not the right man for the job.
In Chrisholm’s mind, the greatest causes of war and mental illness are not to be found in imperialism or economic injustice, but rather in society’s belief in right and wrong. In 1946 Chrisholm defined the goal of “good” psychotherapy and “good” education saying: “The reinterpretation and eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong which was the basis of the training. children, the substitution of intelligent and rational thought for faith in certainties for the elderly – these are the goals of virtually all effective psychotherapy ”.
It was not only the “concept of good and evil” or “faith in the certainties of the ancients” that had to be eradicated, but also monotheistic religion, family and patriotism. Speaking eight years later, Chrisholm said: “In order to achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family tradition, their national patriotism and their religious dogmas.”
The world is going crazy
With UNESCO and WHO firmly in place, a third organization was created to fund and put into practice global mental health.
As historian Anton Chaitkin points out, the World Federation of Mental Health (WSFM), funded primarily by the Macy’s Foundation, was established in 1948. The Macy’s Foundation itself was established in 1930 under the leadership of General Marlborough Churchill (Winston’s cousin), who had been in charge of the military secret service from 1919 to 1929, in the form of the “Dark Room”. His new foundation was part of the Rockefeller machine and served as a conduit for pouring money into “health sciences” with an emphasis on eugenics.
The US technical coordinator of the conference that created the WFMS made clear the origins of the new organization. Nina Ridnour wrote that “the World Federation for Mental Health … was created on the recommendation of the United Nations World Health Organization and UNESCO because they needed a non-governmental organization to mental health with which they could cooperate. ”
And who will be the first general manager of the FMSM?
While still the head of the Tavistock Clinic in London, Brigadier General John Rawlings Rees was put in charge of the new entity by none other than the archi-racist Montagu Norman (head of the Bank of England) , which had created the operation out of its National Association for Mental Health, managed from its London home in Thorpe Lodge.
Describing this strategic battle plan to reform society, Rees said:
If we are preparing to come out into the open and tackle the social and national problems of our time, we must have shock troops, and these cannot be provided by fully institutionalized psychiatry. We need to have mobile teams of psychiatrists who are free to travel and establish contact with the local area.
The idea of mobile teams of shock psychiatrists was an idea put forward by the great strategist Lord Bertrand Russell who wrote in 1952 in Impact of Science on Society :
I think the subject that will have the most importance politically is mass psychology ….. Its importance has been greatly increased by the development of modern methods of propaganda. Among these, the most influential is what is called “education”. Religion plays a role, although it is diminishing; the press, cinema and radio play an increasing role ….. Hopefully, over time, anyone will be able to persuade anyone of anything if they can catch the patient. still young and if the state provides him with the money and the equipment.
The Bipolar Cold War and a New Global Paradigm
In the years that followed, UNESCO, WHO and FMSM worked in tandem to coordinate hundreds of influential sub-organizations, universities, research laboratories and underground scientists, including MK Ultra of the CIA, in order to create the desired “mentally healthy” society, stripped of its ties to Christianity, faith in the truth, national patriotism or the family.
In 1971, the world was ripe for the big change.
The baby boomers, the targets of this vast experiment in social engineering, have been inundated with a vast arsenal of cultural warfare at all levels. As LSD spread across American campuses and assassinations of Western leaders resisting the new era of Southwest Asian wars became the norm, baby boomers watched loved ones return from Vietnam in body bags. “Trust No One Over 30” became the new wisdom as love of the motherland was stifled by the unnatural spread of Anglo-American imperialism abroad and COINTEL PRO style operations. inside the country.
When the CFR and the Trilateral Commission detached the US dollar from the government gold reserve, a new era of deregulation, consumerism and radical materialism was ushered in, resulting in the rapid transformation of the baby boom generation into a “generation. me ”hyper-materialist, as it appeared in the 1980s.
Ecologically, a new ethic of “conservationism” began to shift from the periphery to the mainstream, replacing the old pro-industrial ethic of producer-creator society that had historically ruled the best of Western civilization.
Among the creators of this new conservationist ethic, which replaced the idea of “protecting humanity from empire” with that of “protecting the nature of humanity”, was none other than Julian Huxley himself. The same year he co-founded the World Wildlife Foundation, Huxley wrote the Morges Manifesto (1961), an organizing manifesto for the modern ecological movement, which pits human civilization against the supposedly closed mathematical balance of nature. Huxley co-founded WWF with convinced Malthusian Prince Philip “I want to be reincarnated as a deadly virus” Mountbatten and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands.
Holdren’s Planetary Diet
In the mid-1970s, Paul Ehrlich, one of the leading neo-Malthusians of the time, took under his wing a young protégé by the name of John Holdren:
Perhaps these agencies, combined with UNEP and United Nations population agencies, could eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime – a sort of international super-agency for people, resources and the environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or not, at least to the extent that international implications exist. Thus, this Planetary Regime could have the power to control pollution not only of the atmosphere and the oceans, but also of freshwater bodies such as rivers and lakes which cross international borders or which flow into the oceans.
This Regime could also be a logical central agency to regulate all international trade, including all food on the international market. This Planetary Regime could be entrusted with the responsibility of determining the optimal population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating the shares of the different countries within their regional boundaries. Control of population size could remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce agreed limits.
Considering that these words were written just three years after Henry Kissinger’s NSSM-200 report, which transformed US foreign policy doctrine from a pro-development attitude to a pre.-development attitude. to population reduction, what Holdren said in 1977 should not be taken lightly.
The Human Genome project awakens sleeping monsters
In the decades that followed, Holdren befriended mathematician and Rhodes Scholar at Harvard Scholar Eric Lander, who led the Human Genome Project from 1995 to 2002. In 2003, Lander announced the successful unveiling of the fully sequenced human genome, stating: “The Human Genome project represents one of the most remarkable achievements in the history of science. Its culmination this month marks the start of a new era in biomedical research. Biology is in the process of transforming itself into an information science ”.
Commenting on the possibility of directing human evolution made possible by the Lander Human Genome Project and new developments in CRISPR mRNA technology then underway, Sir Richard Dawkins wrote in 2006:
In the 1920s and 1930s, scientists on the left and right would not have found the idea of custom babies particularly dangerous – although, of course, they would not have used that expression. Today, I suspect that the idea is too dangerous to be discussed comfortably, and my guess is that Adolf Hitler is responsible for this change … I wonder if, some 60 years after Hitler’s death, we could at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between selection for musical talent and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it’s okay to train fast runners and high jumpers, but not bring them up. I can think of some answers, and they are good, that would probably convince me eventually. But isn’t the time to stop being afraid to even ask the question?
It didn’t take long for Holdren to find himself wielding greater power than he ever imagined as the czar of science and architect of the ‘evidence-based’ governance agenda of Obama, which consisted of maximizing funding for green technologies to de-carbonize humanity within the framework of new systems of global governance. Lander worked closely with Holdren, as co-chair of Obama’s science council, as well as Whitehead Institute president David Baltimore, in establishing the Broad Institute at MIT and Harvard.
Together, Lander and Baltimore oversaw a major conference in 2015 on the “New Era of Biomedical Research” that unveiled a new gene-editing technology, known as CRISPR, involving the use of enzymes and RNAs found. in the e-parcels, having the ability to target DNA sequences and induce various mutations. While it is evident that this powerful technology offers potential benefit to humanity as a tool to eliminate inherited diseases in humans and in cultures, the incredible power of CRISPR to fundamentally alter DNA human can also cause unimaginable harm if put in the wrong hands.
At this “historic” December 2015 international summit on human gene editing, conference chair David Baltimore echoed Julian Huxley’s chilling words in his opening speech: “Over the years, the unthinkable has become conceivable. We are at the dawn of a new era in human history. ”
In January 2021, John Holdren congratulated Erik Lander on being named Joe Biden’s (White House’s director of science and technology policy) science tsar – the post previously held by Holdren. In this role, Lander oversaw the reactivation of all Obama-era science policies as part of a technocratic overhaul of the US government, in accordance with the World Economic Forum’s Grand Reset program. By using the vast power of the Emergency Authorization Act to bypass the FDA and pass gene therapy technologies off as “vaccines,” a new social experiment has begun. CRISPR technology is already being hailed as a key to solving new mutant strains of COVID-19 and is being used as a “vaccine” for certain tropical diseases as of this writing. The obvious link between yesterday’s eugenic organizations and the rise of modern mRNA operations associated with GAVI and Astra Zeneca of Oxford should be kept firmly in mind, as unveiled by investigative journalist Whitney Webb at beginning of this year.
Will this technology be used by the modern heirs of the Nazi eugenics in order to take up the torch from Dr Mengele or will this biotechnology serve the interests of humanity within the framework of a multipolar paradigm that respects the national sovereignty, human life, family and faith?
(This piece is taken with gratitude from strategic-culture.org).
(Panchmukha is interesting content floating on internet, brought by NewsBred for its readers. They don’t necessarily reflect our view but makes our platform diverse.)
