Image: Researchgate
Will we see biotechnology serve the interests of humanity under a multipolar paradigm that cherishes national sovereignty, human life, family, and faith? As much as it might cause us a fair deal of displeasure and even an upset stomach to consider such ideas as the hold eugenics has on our presently troubled era, I believe that ignoring such a topic really does no one any favors in the long run.
This is especially serious, as leading World Economic Forum darlings like Yuval Harari flaunt such concepts as “the new global useless class” which Artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, automation and the Fourth Industrial Revolution is supposedly ushering in. Other Davos creatures like Klaus Schwab call openly for a microchipped global citizenry capable of interfacing with a global web with a single thought while Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg promote ‘neuralinks’ to “keep humanity relevant” by merging with computers in a new epoch of evolutionary biology.
Leading Darwinian geneticists like Sir James Watson and Sir Richard Dawkins openly defend eugenics while a technocracy consolidates itself in a governing station using a “Great Reset” as an excuse to usher in a new post-nation state era.
If there is something fundamentally evil lurking behind these processes which has any connection to the Anglo-American rise of fascism and eugenics nearly a century ago, then let’s at least have the courage to explore that possibility. It was after all, only by looking at this ugliness 80 years ago, that patriots were able to take appropriate measures to prevent a bankers’ technocratic dictatorship in 1933 and again during WW2.. so perhaps a similar display of courage to think the unthinkable might be worth the effort for those who might find themselves in a similar situation today.
What Didn’t Happen at Nuremburg?
Seventy six years ago, as the allies were consolidating their victory over the Nazi machine and as the “Nuremburg Tribunals” were quickly being arranged, a new strategy was set into motion by the very same forces that had put vast energy, money and resources into the rise of fascism as “the miracle solution” of post-WWI economic chaos that had spread across Europe and the USA.
It is among the greatest scandals of our age that the Wall Street- City of London machine that financed Hitler and Mussolini as battering rams for a new world order were never actually brought to justice. Although Franklin Roosevelt managed to put a leash on Wall Street between 1933-1945, while setting the world stage for a beautiful post-war vision of win-win cooperation, the darker forces of the financier oligarchy who wanted only to establish a global unipolar system of governance not only avoided punishment, but wasted no time to regain their lost hegemony before the war had come to a close.
The Role of Sir Julian Huxley
One of the conceptual grand strategists of this process was a man named Julian Sorrel Huxley (1887-1975). Celebrated as a biologist, and social reformer, Julian was a devout life-long member of the British Eugenics Society serving alongside John Maynard Keynes as secretary and later as its president.
Julian was a busy man, who along with his brother Aldous, worked hard to fill the very large shoes of their grandfather Thomas (aka: Darwin’s bulldog). While simultaneously managing the post-WW2 eugenics movement, Julian found himself setting into motion the modern environmental movement as founder of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature in 1948, co-founding the World Wildlife Fund in 1961, created the term “transhumanism” and also founding an immensely influential United Nations body called UNESCO (abbreviated for the United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization) in 1946 which he ran as Director General from 1946-1948.
The mandate for the new organization was set out clearly in Huxley’s 1946 UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy:
“The moral for UNESCO is clear. The task laid upon it of promoting peace and security can never be wholly realised through the means assigned to it- education, science and culture. It must envisage some form of world political unity, whether through a single world government or otherwise, as the only certain means of avoiding war… in its educational programme it can stress the ultimate need for a world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization.”
To what end would this “world political unity” be aimed? Several pages later, Huxley’s vision is laid out in all of its twisted detail:
“At the moment, it is probable 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, mental instability and disease proneness, which already exist in the human species will prove too great a burden for real progress to be achieved. Thus 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 examined 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.”
After the world got the chance to see what a eugenics program looked like under the full support of a fascist social engineer, it would be no exaggeration to say that it lost a good deal of popularity in the eyes of a world population still very much connected to traditional cultural institutions like Christianity, patriotism and respect for sacredness of life.
Even though thirty U.S. States and two Canadian provinces had legalized eugenics policies (including forced sterilization of the unfit) between 1907-1945, the statistical science and political application of eugenics ground to a screeching halt by the end of World War 2 and as Huxley iterated in his manifesto, something new had to be done.
A Word on Tavistock
Huxley also worked very closely with London’s Tavistock Clinic that received funding from both Rockefeller and Macy Foundations throughout the 1930s-1950s. Led by a psychiatrist named Brigadier General John Rawlings Rees, Tavistock can be best understood as the “psychiatric branch of the British Empire” established in 1921 which innovated psychiatric techniques using mixtures of Pavlovian behaviorism and Freudian theories to influence group behavior in a variety of ways.
Early on, the clinic explored the extreme mental conditions of shell shock victims who suffered cases of psychological deconstruction during the terrors of trench warfare recognizing the high degree of malleability in these subjects. As outlined by a brilliant 1996 EIR report by L. Wolfe, the idea behind Tavistock’s was always driven by a goal to figure out how the brain might be “depatterned” and deconstructed in order to be reconstructed anew like a blank slate with the hopes that this insight into individuals might be replicated later among broader social groups, and even whole nations.
Many of this research was applied in the form of MK Ultra within the USA and will be the subject of a future report.
G. Brock Chrisholm: Tavistockian Czar of World Health
One prominent psychiatrist who spent years working with Rees at Tavistock was a Canadian named G. Brock Chrisolm.
In 1948, Christolm founded a UN-affiliated body called the World Health Organization (WHO) with the aim of promoting mental and physical health of the world. A noble endeavor carrying much responsibility and power requiring a leader with exceptional insight into the nature of sickness and health. Sadly, based upon his own sick views of the nature of mankind and society, Chrisholm was certainly the wrong man for the job.
Among the greatest causes of war and mental sickness in Chrisholm’s mind were not to be found in imperialism or economic injustice, but rather in society’s belief in right and wrong. Writing in 1946 Chrisholm laid out the purpose of “good” psychotherapy and education saying: “the reinterpretation and eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the certainties of old people- these are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy”.
But it wasn’t simply the “concept of right and wrong” or “faith in the certainties of old people” which had to be eradicated, but monotheistic religion, family, and patriotism. Speaking eight years later, Chrisholm said: “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism and religious dogmas”.
The World Goes Mental
Once UNESCO and the WHO were firmly in place, a third organization was created to drive the funding, and the practice of global mental health.
As outlined by historian Anton Chaitkin, funded primarily by the Macy Foundation, the World Federation of Mental Health (WFMH) was created in 1948. The Macy Foundation itself which was created in 1930 under the leadership of General Marlborough Churchill (cousin to Winston) who had been in charge of covert military intelligence from 1919-1929 in the form of the “Black Chamber”. His new foundation was a part of the Rockefeller machine and used as a conduit to pour money into “health sciences” with a focus on eugenics.
The U.S. technical coordinator to the conference that created the WFMH made the new organization’s origins clearly known. Nina Ridnour wrote “the World Federation for Mental Health… had been created upon the recommendation of the United Nations World Health Organization and UNESCO because they needed a non-governmental mental health organization with which they could cooperate.”
And just who would become the first Director General of the WFMH?
While still acting as the head of London’s Tavistock Clinic, Brigadier General John Rawlings Rees was put in charge of the new body by none other than arch-racist Montagu Norman (head of the Bank of England) who had created the operation out of his National Association for Mental Health run out of his London Thorpe Lodge home.
Describing this strategic battle plan to reform society, Rees said:
“If we prepare to come out into the open and to attack the social and national problems of our day, then we must have the shock troops, and these cannot be provided by psychiatry based wholly in institutions. We must have mobile teams of psychiatrists who are free to move around and make contacts with the local area.”
The idea of mobile teams of psychiatric shock troops was an idea advanced by leading grand strategist Lord Bertrand Russell who had written in 1952’s “Impact of Science on Society”:
“I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology…. Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called “education.” Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the press, the cinema, and the radio play an increasing part…. It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.”
The Bi-Polar Cold War and a New Global Paradigm
Over the ensuing years, UNESCO, the WHO and WFMH worked in tandem to coordinate hundreds of influential sub organizations, universities, research labs, and covert science including the CIA’s MK Ultra in order to bring about the desired “mentally healthy” society cleansed of its connections to Christianity, faith in truthfulness, national patriotism or family.
By 1971, the world was ripe for a big change.
The baby boomer targets of this vast social engineering experiment had been inundated by a vast arsenal of cultural warfare on every level. While LSD was spread across campuses of America, and assassinations of western leaders who resisted the new age of wars in Southwest Asia became the norm, the baby boomers watched as their loved ones returned from Vietnam in body bags. “Not trusting anyone over 30” became the new wisdom as love of country was suffocated under the unnatural spread of Anglo-American imperialism abroad and COINTEL PRO-style operations at home.
When the CFR and Trilateral Commission unpegged the U.S. dollar from the gold reserve, a new age of deregulation, consumerism and radical materialism was ushered in causing the baby boomer generation to quickly transmogrify into the 1980s hyper-materialist “me” generation.
On an ecological level, a new ethic of “conservationism” had begun to move from the fringes into the mainstream replacing the former pro-industrial ethic of the producer-creator society that had historically governed the best of western civilization.
Chief among the creators of this new conservation ethic which replaced the idea of “protecting humanity from empire” with “protecting nature from mankind”, was none other than Julian Huxley himself. During the same year that he co-founded the World Wildlife Foundation, Huxley drafted the Morges Manifesto (1961) as the organizing manifesto for the modern ecology movement pitting human civilization in stark contrast to the supposedly closed, mathematical equilibrium of nature.
Huxley co-founded the WWF with arch Malthusians Prince Philip “I want to be reincarnated as a deadly virus” Mountbatten and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands.
Holdren’s Planetary Regime
By the mid-1970s, one of the leading neo-Malthusians of that era, Paul Ehrlich mentored a young protégé named John Holdren and together they produced a stomach-turning manual called Ecoscience in 1977 where the pair wrote:
“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all-natural resources, renewable or non-renewable, at least insofar as international implications exist.
Thus, the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.
The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”
Considering that these words were written just three years after Henry Kissinger’s NSSM-200 report that transformed U.S. foreign policy doctrine from pro-development to pro-population reduction, Holdren’s 1977 words should not be taken lightly.