|
The
Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship
Part
One: Illuminating the Occult Origin of Darwinism
by
Phillip Collins
As
antiquity gave way to modern history, the religious power
structure shifted to an autocracy of the knowable, or
a 'scientific dictatorship.' Subtly and swiftly, the ruling
class seized control of science and used it as an 'epistemological
weapon' against the masses. This article will show that
the history and background of this 'scientific dictatorship'
is a conspiracy, created and micro-managed by the historical
tide of Darwinism, which has its foundations in Freemasonry.
The
Epistemological Cartel
In
The Architecture of Modern Political Power, Daniel
Pouzzner outlines the tactics employed by the elite to
maintain their dominance. Among them is: 'Ostensible control
over the knowable, by marketing institutionally accredited
science as the only path to true understanding' (Pouzzner,
75). Thus, the ruling class endeavors to discourage independent
reason while exercising illusory power over human knowledge.
This tactic of control through knowledge suppression and
selective dissemination is reiterated in the anonymously
authored document Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars:
Energy
is recognized as the key to all activity on earth. Natural
science is the study of the sources and control of natural
energy, and social science, theoretically expressed as
economics, is the study of the sources and control of
social energy. Both are bookkeeping systems. Mathematics
is the primary energy science. And the bookkeeper can
be king if the public can be kept ignorant of the methodology
of the bookkeeping. All science is merely a means to an
end. The means is knowledge. The end is control (Keith,
Secret and Suppressed, 203).
The
word 'science' is derived from the Latin word scientia,
which means 'knowing.' Epistemology is the study of the
nature and origin of knowledge. This elite monopoly of
the knowable, which is enforced through institutional
science, could be characterized as an "epistemological
cartel." The ruling class has bribed the 'bookkeepers'
(i.e., natural and social scientists). Meanwhile, the
masses practically deify the 'bookkeepers' of the elite,
and remain 'ignorant of the methodology of the bookkeeping.'
The unknown author of Silent Weapons for Quiet
Wars provides an eloquently simple summation: 'The
means is knowledge. The end is control. Beyond this remains
only one issue: Who will be the beneficiary?' (Keith,
Secret and Suppressed, 203). (See entire document
at: http://www9.pair.com/xpoez/money/silent.html)
In
Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley more succinctly
defined this epistemological cartel:
The
older dictators fell because they could never supply their
subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles,
and mysteries.
Under
a scientific dictatorship, education will really work'
with the result that most men and women will grow up to
love their servitude and will never dream of revolution.
There
seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific
dictatorship should ever be overthrown (Huxley, Brave
New World Revisited, 116).
This
is the ultimate objective of the elite: an oligarchy legitimized
by arbitrarily anointed expositors of 'knowledge' or,
in Huxley's own words, a 'scientific dictatorship.'
The
New Theocracy
How
did the 'scientific dictatorship' of the twentieth century
begin? In earlier centuries, the ruling class controlled
the masses through more mystical belief systems, particularly
Sun worship. Yet, this would all change. In Saucers
of the Illuminati, Jim Keith documents the shift from
a theocracy of the Sun to a theocracy of 'science':
Since
the Sun God (and his various relations, including sons
and wives) were, after several thousands years of worship,
beginning to fray around the edges in terms of believability,
and a lot commoners were beginning to grumble that this
stuff was all made up, the Illuminati came up with a new
and improved version of their mind control software that
didn't depend upon the Sun God or Moon Goddess for ultimate
authority (Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati, 78).
Priests
and rituals were soon supplanted by a new breed of 'bookkeepers'
and a new 'methodology of bookkeeping.' Keith elaborates:
As
the Sun/Moon cult lost some of its popularity, 'Scientists'
were quick to take up some of the slack. According to
their propaganda, the physical laws of the universe were
the ultimate causative factors, and naturally, those physical
laws were only fathomable by the scientific (i.e. Illuminati)
elite (Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati,
78-79).
This
consciously induced paradigm shift facilitated the emergence
of the elite's new theocracy. The official state-sanctioned
religion of this theocracy was 'scientism': the belief
that the investigational methods of the natural sciences
should be ecumenically imposed upon all fields of inquiry.
This form of epistemological imperialism is not to be
confused with legitimate science. Researcher Michael Hoffman
makes this distinction in his book Secret Societies
and Psychological Warfare:
Science,
when practiced as the application of man's God-given talents
for the production of appropriate technology on a human
scale, relief of misery and the reverential exploration
and appreciation of the glory of Divine Providence as
revealed in nature, is a useful tool for mankind. Scientism
is science gone mad, which is what we have today (Hoffman,
49).
Hoffman
further elaborates on the folly of scientism:
The
reason that science is a bad master and dangerous servant
and ought not to be worshipped is that science is not
objective. Science is fundamentally about the uses of
measurement. What does not fit the yardstick of the scientist
is discarded. Scientific determinism has repeatedly excluded
some data from its measurement and fudged other data,
such as Piltdown Man, in order to support the self-fulfilling
nature of its own agenda, be it Darwinism or 'cut, burn
and poison' methods of cancer 'treatment' (Hoffman, 49).
It
must be understood that this new institution of knowing
is a form of mysticism like its religious precursors.
Contemporary science is predicated upon empiricism, the
idea that all knowledge is derived exclusively through
the senses. Yet, an exclusively empirical approach relegates
cause to the realm of metaphysical fantasy. This holds
enormous ramifications for science. Do we really know
what causes anything?
Although
temporal succession and spatial proximity are self-evident,
causal connection is not. Affirmation of causal relationships
is impossible in science. What is perceived as A
causing B could be merely circumstantial juxtaposition.
Given the absence of known cause, all of a scientist's
findings must be taken upon faith. This is all one can
deduce while working under the paradigm of radical empiricism.
Thus, the elite merely exchanged one form of mysticism
for another.
Returning
to Pouzzner's previous statement, 'ostensible control
over the knowable' is achieved through the promulgation
of 'institutionally accredited science' (Pouzzner, 75).
Now, the elite had to meet two requirements to insure
their epistemological dominance: a science specifically
designed for their needs and an institution to accredit
and disseminate it.
The
British Royal Society
The
new secular church and clergy of the elite originated
within the walls of the British Royal Society. The creators
of the Royal Society were also members of the Masonic
Lodge. According to Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln in Holy
Blood, Holy Grail:
Virtually
all the Royal Society's founding members were Freemasons.
One could reasonably argue that the Royal Society itself,
at least in its inception, was a Masonic institution -
derived, through Andrea's Christian Unions, from the 'invisible
Rosicrucian brotherhood' (Baigent, et al, 144).
Jim
Keith makes it clear that the Masonic Lodge 'has been
alleged to be a conduit for the intentions of a number
of elitist interests' (Keith, Casebook on Alternative
Three, 20). In service to the elite, the Royal Society
Freemasons would re-sculpt epistemological notions and
disseminate propaganda. Jim Keith provides a brief summation
of the Royal Society's role in years to come: 'The British
Royal Society of the late seventeenth century was the
forerunner of much of the media manipulation that was
to follow' (Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati, 79).
Before
the advent of the British Royal Society, science (i.e.,
the study of natural phenomena) and theology (i.e., the
study of God) were inseparable. The two were not separate
repositories of knowledge, but natural correlatives. In
Confession of Nature, Gottfried Wilhelm
Leibniz established the centrality of God to science.
According to Leibniz, the proximate origins of 'magnitude,
figure, and motion,' which constitute the 'primary qualities'
of corporeal bodies, 'cannot be found in the essence of
the body' (de Hoyos).
Linda
de Hoyos reveals the point at which science finds a dilemma:
The
problem arises when the scientist asks why the body fills
this space and not another; for example, why it should
be three feet long rather than two, or square rather than
round. This cannot be explained by the nature of the bodies
themselves, since the matter is indeterminate as to any
definite figure, whether square or round. For the scientist
who refuses to resort to an incorporeal cause, there can
be only two answers. Either the body has been this way
since eternity, or it has been made square by the impact
of another body. 'Eternity' is no answer, since the body
could have been round for eternity also. If the answer
is 'the impact of another body,' there remains the question
of why it should have had any determinate figure before
such motion acted upon it. This question can then be asked
again and again, backwards to infinity. Therefore, it
appears that the reason for a certain figure and magnitude
in bodies can never be found in the nature of these bodies
themselves.
The
same can be established for the body's cohesion and firmness,
which left Leibniz with the following conclusion:
Since
we have demonstrated that bodies cannot have a determinate
figure, quantity, or motion, without an incorporeal being,
it readily becomes apparent that this incorporeal being
is one for all, because of the harmony of things among
themselves, especially since bodies are moved not individually
by this incorporeal being but by each other. But no reason
can be given why this incorporeal being chooses one magnitude,
figure, and motion rather than another, unless he is intelligent
and wise with regard to the beauty of things and powerful
with regard to their obedience to their command. Therefore
such an incorporeal being be a mind ruling the whole world,
that is, God (de Hoyos).
Of
course, this conclusion was antithetical to the doctrine
of the scientific dictatorship, which contended that 'the
physical laws of the universe were the ultimate causative
factors' (Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati, 78-79).
Metaphysical naturalism (i.e., nature is God) had to be
enthroned. Meanwhile, God's presence in the corridors
of science had to be expunged. To achieve this, the Royal
Society created a Gnostic division between science and
theology, thus insuring the primacy of matter in the halls
of scientific inquiry (Tarpley).
Blind
Reverence to Science
Indeed,
biases and presuppositions pervade the very fabric of
the elite's epistemic autocracy. Academia itself has become
the official church for this cult of epistemological selectivity.
Christian philosopher Ravi Zacharias personally encountered
the enormous prejudicial hurdles of scientism during a
casual conversation with a few scholars, wherein one scientist
makes a shocking confession:
I
asked them a couple of questions. 'If the Big Bang were
indeed where it all began, may I ask what preceded the
Big Bang?' Their answer, which I had anticipated, was
that the universe was shrunk down to a singularity.
I
pursued, 'But isn't it correct that a singularity as defined
by science is a point at which all the laws of physics
break down?'
'That
is correct,' was the answer.
'Then,
technically, your starting point is not scientific either.'
There
was silence, and their expressions betrayed the scurrying
mental searches for an escape hatch. But I had yet another
question.
I
asked if they agreed that when a mechanistic view of the
universe had held sway, thinkers like Hume had chided
philosophers for taking the principle of causality and
applying it to a philosophical argument for the existence
of God. Causality, he warned, could not be extrapolated
from science to philosophy.
'Now,'
I added, 'when quantum theory holds sway, randomness in
the subatomic world is made a basis for randomness in
life. Are you not making the very same extrapolation that
you warned us against?'
Again
there was silence and then one man said with a self-deprecating
smile, 'We scientists do seem to retain selective sovereignty
over what we allow to be transferred to philosophy and
what we don't' (Zacharias, 64).
This
'selective sovereignty,' vigorously enforced by the epistemic
autocracy of the elite, effectively marginalized dissenters
and consummated the apotheosis of the 'bookkeepers.' Hoffman
explains:
The
cryptocracy has successfully harnessed to its own ends
the huge potential for promoting secret political-occult
agendas to the public, by presenting them as unassailable
'objective scientific truth.' Since the bogey of 'science'
instills in secularists a sort of blind reverence, opponents
of political and occult agendas promoted through the propaganda
of scientism are quickly stigmatized as 'Neanderthal,'
especially with regard to their opposition to Darwinism,
a dogma proved false by Norman Macbeth in his magisterial
Darwin Retried and exposed as a cult by Gertrude
Himmelfarb in Darwin (Hoffman, 49).
Suddenly,
'ostensible control over the knowable' became the Divine
Providence of god-like 'bookkeepers.' Meanwhile, their
opponents became heretics and were 'burned at the stake'
(i.e., marginalized by academia and other secular institutions).
Hoffman states:
The
doctrine of man playing god reaches its nadir in the philosophy
of scientism which makes possible the complete mental,
spiritual and physical enslavement of mankind through
technologies such as satellite and computer surveillance;
a state of affairs symbolized by the 'All Seeing Eye'
above the unfinished pyramid on the U.S. one dollar bill
(Hoffman, 50).
With
the inculcation of the masses into scientism, the unfinished
pyramid is almost complete.
Evolution:
The Occult Doctrine of Becoming
With
the British Royal Society acting as their headquarters
of propaganda, the elite had created an institution to
provide credibility for their specially designed 'science.'
Now, they needed to introduce the 'science.' Recall that
the founding members of the Royal Society were all Freemasons.
Thus, whatever 'science' these men would design would
be derivative of Masonic doctrine. In The Meaning of
Masonry, W.L. Wilmhurst reveals the worldview underpinning
the new Masonic 'science':
This
- the evolution [emphasis added] of man into superman
- was always the purpose of the ancient Mysteries, and
the real purpose of modern Masonry is not the social and
charitable purposes to which so much attention is paid,
but the expediting of the spiritual evolution of those
who aspire to perfect their own nature and transform it
into a more god-like quality. And this is a definite science,
a royal art, which it is possible for each of us to put
into practice; whilst to join the Craft for any other
purpose than to study and pursue this science is to misunderstand
its meaning (Wilmhurst, 47).
Later
in the book, Wilmhurst reiterates this theme:
Man
who has sprung from earth and developed through the lower
kingdoms of nature to his present rational state, has
yet to complete his evolution [emphasis added]
by becoming a god-like being and unifying his consciousness
with the Omniscient - to promote which is and always has
been the sole aim and purpose of all Initiation (Wilmhurst,
94).
With
God's effective exile from science, man's position as
imago viva Dei (created in the image of the Creator)
was summarily relegated to obsolescence. Now, Freemasonry
could introduce its occult doctrine of 'becoming,' the
belief in man's gradual evolution towards apotheosis.
According
to Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, Erasmus
Darwin, grandfather of Charles Darwin, was the first to
promulgate the concept of evolution:
Dr.
Erasmus Darwin (1731 - 1802) was the first man in England
to suggest those ideas which later
were to be embodied in the Darwinian theory by his grandson,
Charles Darwin (1809 - 1882), who wrote in 1859 Origin
of Species (quoted in Daniel, 34).
The
Lunar Society
Erasmus
Darwin was the founder of the Lunar Society. According
to author Ian Taylor, the Lunar Society was active from
about 1764 to 1800 and its prominent influence 'continued
long afterwards under the banner of The Royal Society.'
The group's name owed itself to the fact that members
met monthly at the time of the full moon. The membership
of this group boasted such luminaries as John Wilkinson
(who made cannons), James Watt (who owed his notoriety
to the steam engine), Matthew Boulton (a manufacturer),
Joseph Priestly (a chemist), Josiah Wedgewood (who founded
the famous pottery business), and Benjamin Franklin. It
is with the Lunar Society that one begins to identify
Erasmus' ties to Freemasonry. (Taylor, 55)
Interestingly
enough, in an article by Lord Richie-Calder, Lunar Society
members were assigned the very esoteric appellation of
'merchants of light.' This was precisely the same description
used for the hypothetical society presented in Sir Francis
Bacon's New Atlantis (Taylor, 55). In her examination
of J.G. Findel's History of Freemasonry, Nesta
Webster made the following observation: 'Findel frankly
admits that the New Atlantis contained unmistakable allusions
to Freemasonry and that Bacon contributed to its final
transformation' (Webster, 120).
Researcher
Ian Taylor adds:
Webster
pointed out that one of the earliest and most eminent
precursors of Freemasonry is said to have been Francis
Bacon, who is also recognized to have been a Rosicrucian;
the Rosicrucian and Freemason orders were closely allied
and may have had a common source (Taylor, 445).
Still,
these are tenuous ties at best. Are there any sources
that firmly establish a Darwinian/Freemasonic connection?
Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry conclusively
confirms a link:
Before
coming to Derby in 1788, Dr. [Erasmus] Darwin had been
made a Mason in the famous Time Immemorial Lodge of Cannongate
Kilwinning, No. 2, of Scotland. Sir Francis Darwin, one
of the Doctor's sons, was made a Mason in Tyrian Lodge,
No. 253, at Derby, in 1807 or 1808. His son Reginald was
made a Mason in Tyrian Lodge in 1804. The name of Charles
Darwin does not appear on the rolls of the Lodge but it
is very possible that he, like Francis, was a Mason (quoted
in Daniel, 34).
In
1794, Erasmus wrote a book entitled Zoonomia, which
delineated his theory of evolution (Taylor, 58). Being
a Freemason, there is little doubt that Erasmus cribbed
liberally from the Lodge's occult doctrine of 'becoming.'
Before Erasmus had penned his precursory notions of progressive
biological development, Freemason John Locke (1632 - 1704)
extrapolated the Hindu doctrine of reincarnation into
the context of metaphysical naturalism and formulated
a theory of evolution (Daniel, 33-34).
The
British East India Company had imported the Hindu belief
in reincarnation to England where it would be adopted
by the British Royal Society. A prominent member of the
Royal Society, John Locke studied reincarnation extensively
and, working with the occult doctrine as an extrapolative
inspiration, developed his own evolutionary ideas. In
fact, Locke's theory of evolution received the support
of the male members of Darwin's family (Daniel, 33-34).
Two centuries later, this occult concept of 'becoming'
would be transmitted to Charles Darwin and On the
Origin of Species would be born.
Metaphysical
Naturalism: The Golem Reborn
Underpinning
the concept of metaphysical naturalism is the notion that
life originated with lifeless matter. This notion, dubbed
'spontaneous generation,' excludes the involvement of
a supernatural Creator. Thus, nature became a god creating
itself. Louis Pasteur, whose work established the Law
of Biogenesis, provided the most succinct summation of
this anthropomorphic mysticism:
To
bring about spontaneous generation would be to create
a germ. It would be creating life; it would be to solve
the problem of its origin. It would mean to go from matter
to life through conditions of environment and of matter
[lifeless material]. God as author of life would then
no longer be needed. Matter would replace Him. God would
need to be invoked only as author of the motions of the
universe (Dubos, 395).
Like
all of the 'false gods' of antiquity, the voracity of
this new deity was soon demolished. 'Spontaneous generation'
was proven impossible by the Law of Biogenesis. However,
this fact did not stop certain 'men of science' from chronically
deifying nature. For instance, Charles Darwin unconsciously
revealed his idolatrous impulses through statements like:
'natural selection picks out with unerring skill the best
varieties' (Hooykaas, 18).
Evident
in such statements is the idea that nature is sentient.
After all, only a sentient being holds discriminative
tastes and, therefore, 'picks out' the recipients of its
favor. Moreover, such statements reveal that 'nature'
itself is a sovereign deity acting as the ultimate arbiter
of life and death. This meme has metastasized, presenting
itself today as the Gaia Hypothesis. This hypothesis holds
that the biosphere is a self-creating, self-sustaining,
and self-regenerating entity. [Ed. Note: The Gaia Hypothesis
is a matter ripe for conspiracy research. In particular,
what are the possible connections between the new quantum
physics paradigm which asserts that the universe is one
big Mind and the idea that human beings create their own
reality?] Central to this thesis is the contention that
both the living and non-living are inseparable [Ed. Note:
or the new age concept that spirit and matter are not
separate but are at the extreme ends of a vibrational
continuum.] (Lovelock, 31-33).
Although
the concept of 'spontaneous generation' was proven scientifically
bankrupt years ago, many continue to resuscitate its corpse.
Why does this theme of lifeless matter spontaneously generating
life continue to emerge? The answer is because it has
been with man for a very long time. It is derivative of
the golem, an occult concept presented in the Hebraic
Kabbalah. Thirty-third Degree Freemason Albert Pike revealed
that: 'all the Masonic associations owe to it [the Kabbalah]
their Secrets and their Symbols' (Pike, 744). According
to this occult text, the golem was an artificially created
man whose life was the result of supernatural intervention.
The late Isaac Bashevis Singer, who studied the Kabbalah
extensively, explained:
'the
golem ' is based on faith ' that dead matter is not
really dead, but can be brought to life [emphasis
added]' What are the computers and robots of our time
if not golems? ' The Talmud tells us of an interpreter
by the name of Rava who formed a man by this mysterious
power' We are living in an epoch of golem-making right
now. The gap between science and magic ' is becoming narrower''
(Hoffman, 115).
Drawing
upon the esoteric doctrines of their occult heritage,
the Freemasonic members of the British Royal Society re-introduced
the golem to the public mind under the guise of 'metaphysical
naturalism.' Gradually, the corporeal machinations of
nature supplanted the miraculous Creator. Of course, these
machinations were only intelligible to anointed scientists
of the epistemic autocracy. Thus, the 'bookkeepers' of
the elite became the new expositors of 'miracles.' This
virtual deification of the 'bookkeepers' is evident in
Singer's later statements regarding the golem:
I
was interested in the golem ' from my early childhood.
I was brought up in the home of a rabbi, and his sermons
often spoke of miracles, by the Baal Shem Tov and other
wonder rabbis. ' I realized early in my life that science
and technology had actually created a civilization of
miracles. Science is one long chain of miracles.' (Hoffman,
116).
Recall
the words of Aldous Huxley in Brave New World Revisited:
'The older dictators fell because they could never supply
their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough
miracles [emphasis added], and mysteries.' The
new dictators do not intend to make the same mistake.
With the effective enshrinement of metaphysical naturalism,
the British Royal Society prepared to unleash their next
golem. However, this golem would be an artificially created
ape-man presented to the public imagination under the
appellation of Darwinism.
The
Darwin Project
In
the article 'Toward a New Science of Life,' EIR
journalist Jonathan Tennenbaum makes the following the
statement concerning Darwinism:
Now,
it is easy to show that Darwinism, one of the pillars
of modern biology, is nothing but a kind of cult, a cult
religion. I am not exaggerating. It has no scientific
validity whatsoever. Darwin's so-called theory of evolution
is based on absurdly irrational propositions, which did
not come from scientific observations, but were artificially
introduced from the outside, for political-ideological
reasons (Tennenbaum).
Given
Darwinism's roots in occult Freemasonry and its expedient
promotion of an emergent species of supermen (i.e., the
elite), this is a fairly accurate assessment. Charles
Darwin acted as the elite's apostle, preaching the new
secular gospel of evolution. Darwinism could be considered
a Freemasonic project, the culmination of a publicity
campaign conducted by the Lodge. Evidence for this contention
can be found in controversial Protocols of the Wise
Men of Sion.
Although
an examination of the Protocols and a critique
of their authenticity are not the purposes of this essay,
it is important to address the questions surrounding their
origins. After all, the Protocols have been employed
throughout history in numerous genocidal campaigns against
the Jews. However, the authors of Holy Blood, Holy
Grail provide evidence that the document may be Masonic
in origin:
It
can thus be proved conclusively that the Protocols
did not issue from the Judaic congress at Basle in
1897. That being so, the obvious questions is whence they
did issue. Modern scholars have dismissed them as a total
forgery, a wholly spurious document concocted by anti-Semitic
interests intent on discrediting Judaism. And yet the
Protocols themselves argue strongly against such
a conclusion. They contain, for example, a number of enigmatic
references - references that are clearly not Judaic. But
these references are so clearly not Judaic that they cannot
plausibly have been fabricated by a forger, either. No
anti-Semitic forger with even a modicum of intelligence
would possibly have concocted such references in order
to discredit Judaism. For no one would have believed these
references to be of Judaic origin.
Thus,
for instance, the text of the Protocols ends with
a single statement. 'Signed by the representatives of
Sion of the 33rd Degree.' Why would an anti-Semitic
forger have made up such a statement? Why would he not
have attempted to incriminate all Jews, rather than just
a few - the few who constitute 'the representatives
of Sion of the 33rd Degree'? Why would he not
declare that the document was signed by, say, the representatives
of the international Judaic congress? In fact, the 'representatives
of Sion of the 33rd Degree' would hardly seem
to refer to Judaism at all, or to any 'international Jewish
conspiracy.' If anything, it would seem to refer to something
specifically Masonic. And the thirty-third degree in Freemasonry
is that of the so-called Strict Observance - the system
of Freemasonry introduced by Hund at the behest of his
'unknown superiors,' one of whom appears to have been
Charles Radclyffe (Baigent, et al, 192-3). Baigent,
Leigh, and Lincoln conclude:
There
was an original text on which the published version of
the Protocols was based. This original text was not a
forgery. On the contrary, it was authentic. But it had
nothing whatever to do with Judaism or an 'international
Jewish conspiracy.' It issued, rather, from some Masonic
organization or Masonically oriented secret society that
incorporated the word 'Sion' (Baigent, et al, 194).
Given
the Masonic language, one can completely discard the racist
contention that the Protocols constitute evidence
of an 'international Jewish conspiracy.' Nevertheless,
the document holds some authenticity:
The
published version of the Protocols is not, therefore,
a totally fabricated text. It is, rather, a radically
altered text. But despite the alterations certain vestiges
of the original version can be discerned' (Baigent, et
al, 195).
The
remnant vestiges of the original text strongly suggest
Masonic origins. Having established the Masonic authorship
of the Protocols, one may return to issue at hand:
Freemasonic involvement in the promotion of Darwinism.
Consider the following excerpt from the Protocols,
which reads distinctly like a mission statement:
For
them [the masses or cattle] let that play the principal
part which we have persuaded them to accept as the
dictates of science (theory). It is with this object in
view that we are constantly, by means of our press, arousing
a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals
of the goyim [the masses or cattle] will puff themselves
up with their knowledge and without any logical verification
of it will put into effect all the information available
from science, which our agentur specialists have
cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating
their minds in the direction we want.
Do
not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty
words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for
Darwinism [emphasis added], Marxism, and Nietzsche-ism
(reprint in Cooper, 274-5).
In
addition to establishing the Lodge's official sanction
of Darwinism, this excerpt also reveals a direct relationship
between Marxism, Nietzsche-ism, and evolutionary theory.
This relationship shall be examined in part
two of this article on this website (www.biped.info).
It
was the grandfather of Aldous Huxley, T.H. Huxley, who
would act as the 'official spokesman for the recluse Darwin'
(White, 268). Many years later, Aldous would propose a
'scientific dictatorship' in Brave New World Revisited.
Whether Aldous made this proposition on a whim or was
penning a concept that had circulated within the Huxley
family for years cannot be determined. Given the family's
oligarchical tradition, the latter assertion remains a
definite possibility. Yet, there may be a deeper Freemasonic
connection, suggesting that the concept of a 'scientific
dictatorship' may have originated within the Lodge.
T.H.
Huxley was a Freemason and, with no apparent achievements
to claim as his own, was made a Fellow of the Royal Society
at the age of 26 (Daniel, 34). T.H. Huxley tutored Freemason
H.G. Wells, who would later teach Huxley's two grandsons,
Julian and Aldous. Both Julian and Aldous were Freemasons
(Daniel, 147). Given this continuity of Freemasonic tutelage
within the Huxley family, it is a definite possibility
that the Huxlian concept of a 'scientific dictatorship'
is really Masonic. Considering Freemason H.G. Wells' endorsement
of a 'scientific dictatorship,' which he called a 'Technocracy,'
this is highly likely.
The
rest is history. With the publicity campaigns of the Royal
Society and the avid defense of evolution apologist T.H.
Huxley, Darwin's theory would be disseminated and popularized.
The seed had taken root and, in the years to come, numerous
permutations of the elite's 'scientific dictatorship'
would emerge.
Continued
in Part Two on this site (www.biped.info).
Recommended
Reading
The
Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination
of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century
by Phillip Collins
References
Baigent,
Michael, Richard Leigh, & Henry Lincoln, Holy Blood,
Holy Grail, Delacorte Press, New York, 1982.
Carr,
William Guy, Pawns in the Game, Omni/Christian
Book Club, Palmdale, California, 1958.
Carlson,
Ron, Ed Decker, Fast Facts on False Teachings,
Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, Oregon, 1994.
Clarke,
Arthur C., Childhood's End, Ballantine Books, New
York, 1953.
Chambers,
Claire, The SIECUS Circle: A Humanist Revolution,
Western Islands, Appleton, Wisconsin, 1977.
Cooper,
William, Behold a Pale Horse, Light Technology
Publishing, Sedona, Arizona 1991.
Daniel,
John, Scarlet and the Beast: Volume II, JKI Publishing,
Tyler, Texas, 1994.
de
Hoyos, Linda, 'The Enlightenment's Crusade Against Reason,'
The New Federalist; American Almanac, February
8, 1993.
Dubos,
Rene', Louis Pasteur: Freelance of Science, Charles
Scribner's Sons, New York, 1976 (Reprint).
Editors
of Executive Intelligence Review, Dope Inc., Washington,
D.C. 1992.
Hoar,
William P., Architects of Conspiracy, Appleton,
WI: Western Islands, 1984.
Hoffman,
Michael, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare,
Independent History & Research, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho,
2001.
Hooykaas,
Reijer, Religion and the Rise of Modern Science,
Chatto and Windus, London, 1972 (Reprint).
Huxley,
Aldous, Brave New World Revisited, Bantam Books,
New York 1958.
Huxley,
Julian, UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy,
Public Affairs Press, Washington D.C., 1947.
Galton,
Francis, Hereditary Genius, Macmillan, London,
1869.
Keith,
Arthur, Evolution and Ethics, Putnam, New York,
1947.
Keith,
Jim, Casebook on Alternative Three, Illuminet Press,
Lilbum, Georgia 1994.
Keith,
Jim, Mind Control, World Control, Adventures Unlimited
Press, Kempton, Illinois, 1997.
Keynes,
John, Essays in Biography, Macmillan, Toronto,
Canada, 1933.
Keith,
Jim, Saucers of the Illuminati, Illuminet Press,
Lilbum, Georgia 1999.
Keith,
Jim, Secret and Suppressed, Feral House, Portland,
Oregon 1993.
Lovelock,
James, Ages of Gaia NY. Norton Co. 1988.
Malthus,
Thomas, An Essay on the Principle of Population as
it Affects the Future Improvement of Society, Reeves
and Turner, London, 1887 (Reprint).
Marrs,
Texe, Dark Majesty, Living Truth Publishers, Austin,
Texas, 1992.
Marrs,
Texe, Circle of Intrigue, Living Truth Publishers,
Austin, Texas 1995.
Pike,
Albert, Morals and Dogma, L.H. Jenkins, Inc., Richmond,
Virginia, 1942.
Pouzzner,
Daniel, The Architecture of Modern Political Power:
The New Feudalism, http://www.mega.nu:8080, 2001.
Reed,
Douglas, The Controversy of Zion, Dolphin Press,
South Africa, 1978.
Scott,
Walter, The Life of Napoleon Bonaparte, Vol. 2,
Ballantyne, Edinburgh, 1827.
Still,
William, New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret
Societies, Huntington House Publishers, Lafayette,
Louisiana, 1990.
Sutton,
Antony, America's Secret Establishment, Liberty
House Press, Billings, Montana 1986.
Sutton,
Antony, The Secret Cult of the Order, Veritas Publishing
Company PTY. Ltd., Bullsbrook, Western Australia 1983.
Taylor,
Ian T., In the Minds of Men: Darwin and the New World
Order, TFE Publishing, Minneapolis, MN 1999.
Tarpley,
Webster, 'How the Venetian System Was Transplanted Into
England,' The New Federalist, June 3, 1996.
Tennenbaum,
Jonathan, 'Towards a New Science of Life,' Executive
Intelligence Review, Vol. 28, Number 34, Sept.
7, 2001.
Webster,
Nesta, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements,
Christian Book Club of America, Hawthorn, California,
1924.
White,
Carol, The New Dark Ages Conspiracy, The New Benjamin
Franklin House, New York 1980.
Wilmhurst,
W.L., The Meaning of Masonry, Gramercy Books, New
York 1980.
Zacharias,
Ravi, Jesus Among Other Gods, Word Publishing,
Nashville, Tennessee, 2000.
|