|
The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship
Part One: Illuminating the Occult Origin of Darwinism
by
Phillip Collins
http://www.biped.info/articles/collins1.html
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.
|
