“They provoked Him to jealousy with strange gods, with abominations they provoked Him to anger. They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.” (Deuteronomy 32:16-17)
“Because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever!” (Romans 1:25)
“Say: ‘O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.” (Aal-’Imran 3:64)
False Gods, False Prophets, and Their False Religion of Eugenics
Nazism, Yuval Noah Harari and Human Imperial Hubris
1) The False God: An Augmented Ubermensch
Israeli historian and author of the well known book Sapiens, Yuval Noah Harari has been a regular World Economic Forum feature at Davos.
Considering it is no longer in much doubt that Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum has been attempting to lead a global palace coup against the nation state, it has become imperative to scrutinise the words and legacy of this false-prophet of technocracy, Harari.
Here is Yuval Noah Harari on the opportunity that Covid provides for the world’s elite:
“Covid is critical because this is what convinces people to accept, to legitimise, total biometric surveillance. We want to stop this epidemic, we need not just to monitor people, we need to monitor what’s happening under their skin…
…What we have seen so far, it’s corporations and governments collecting data about where we go, who we meet, what movies we watch. The next phase is the surveillance going under our skin…
…We now see mass surveillance systems established even in democratic countries which previously rejected them, and we also see a change in the nature of surveillance. Previously, surveillance was mainly above the skin, now it’s going under the skin. Government’s want to know not just where we go, or who we meet. Above all they want to know what is happening under our skin. What’s our body temperature, what’s our blood pressure, what is our medical condition?...
...Now humans are developing even bigger powers than ever before. We are really acquiring divine powers of creation and destruction. We are really upgrading humans into gods. We are acquiring for instance the power to reengineer life...
…I know that in recent years we saw populist politicians undermining deliberately the trust that people have in important institutions like universities, like respectable media outlets. These populist politicians told people that scientists are this small elite, disconnected from the real people...
…I mean, all this story about Jesus rising from the dead and being the son of God, this is fake news...
…humans are now hackable animals, you know the whole idea that humans have you know, this..soul or spirit and they have free will and nobody knows what’s happening inside me, so ‘whatever I choose, whether in the election or whether in the supermarket, this is my free will’ that’s over.”
Such dangerous hubris knows no bounds:
“The biggest question in maybe economics and politics of the coming decades will be what to do with all these useless people…the problem is more broader, what to do with them and how will they find some sense of meaning in life, when they are basically meaningless, worthless? My best guess at present is a combination of drugs and computer games as a solution..it’s already happening, under different types of different headings, you see more and more people spending more and more time or solving their inner problems with drugs and computer games. Both legal drugs and illegal drugs…you look at Japan today, and Japan is maybe 20 years ahead of the world in everything, and you see all these new social phenomenon of people having relationships with virtual spouses and you have people who never leave the house and just live through computers..I think, once you are superfluous you don’t have power. Again we are used to the age of the masses of the 19th and 20th century, where we saw all these successful massive uprisings revolutions, revolts, so we are used to thinking about the masses as powerful, but this is basically a 19th century and 20th century phenomenon..I don’t think that the masses, even if they somehow organise themselves, stand much of a chance, we are not in Russia of 1917, or in 19th century Europe..What we are talking about now is like a second industrial revolution. But the product this time will not be textiles or machines or vehicles or even weapons, the product this time will be humans themselves. We are basically learning to produce bodies and minds. Bodies and minds are going to be, I think the two main products of the next wave of all these changes.. that is optional, and again if you think about it from the viewpoint of the poor, it looks terrible..”
And if that wasn’t bad enough:
“We are probably one of the last generations of homo sapiens, because in the coming generations, we will learn how to engineer bodies and brains and minds. Now how exactly will the future masters of the planet look like? This will be decided by the people who own the data. Science is replacing evolution by natural selection, with evolution by intelligent design. Not the intelligent design of some God above the clouds, but our intelligent design, and the intelligent design of our clouds, the iBM cloud, the Microsoft cloud, these are the new driving forces of evolution. And at the same time, science may enable life, after being confined for 4 billion years to the limited realm of organic compounds, science may enable life to break out into the inorganic realm.”
As should be clear, Harari works with the WEF to advocate mass data harvesting in the guise of predicting it. This is in order to to facilitate the “meaningless and worthless” human “hackable animal”, with no free will, controlled by “masters” who will own our data, while we “own nothing, eat bugs and be happy”.
2) The False Prophet: Yuval Noah Harari
Upon hearing his above words, some beautifully naive people insist that Harari is actually warning against the dystopian vision he’s portraying. To support their wishful thinking, they cite that Harari has cautioned against national governments as well as corporates from having this much power. And they are correct. He has.
But be wary of globalists who criticise nation states and their governments. They do so not because they are defending people against government, but because they believe that unelected transnational global institutions - like the UN and WEF - should replace the nation state, after already having corrupted the latter so that people want to be rid of it. The aim is to turn people against the nation state so that they turn instead to global institutions. This is how they seek to usher in their New World Order.
Harari is using our concern for surveillance to gain us onside emotionally. Once achieved, he then posits an even worse solution than the problem being identified. He is simply hoping that his sophistry bamboozles us from realising it. This deceit mostly works. Because most people are trusting, and not evil.
Harari elaborates:
“That’s the problem, I mean we need institutions actually more, but there is this wave of distrust against them. Now, it doesn't mean we need the old institutions. It doesn’t mean that we have to stick with the old media. Maybe we need new media institutions, which will be more diverse, which will give more people a chance to voice their opinions, but in the end we will need to build these institutions. The idea that we can just do without them, that we’ll have just this free market of ideas and anybody can say anything, and we don’t want institutions to kind of stand in the middle, and curate and decide what is reliable and what is not reliable, this doesn’t work, it’s been tried so many times in history. You know, if you look at religious history, to take a counter example, so you have in Christianity, again and again these people coming and saying, ‘you know, we don’t want the Catholic Church, this institution, let’s just every person can read the bible for himself and know the truth, what is more simple than that, why do we need an institution, and you have the Reformation, the protestant Reformation. And within twenty years or fifty years, they realise that when you let every person read the bible for themselves you get 100 different interpretation, radically different. So eventually someone comes and says ‘No, these are the correct interpretations’ and you get the Lutheran church. And after 100 years, someone says ‘wait, but the whole idea of the Reformation was to get rid of the Church so we don’t want the Lutheran church. Let every person just read the bible and understand by themselves.’ And you have chaos. And after 50 years, you have the Baptist church, and this church, and that.. you always go back to institutions. So it’s the same with the kind of information explosion that we have right now.“
And who will control these “new institutions” that control all your data by surveilling “under your skin”?
Here it is in Harari’s own words for a Financial Times article that has conveniently been made free for you to read. The entire article relies on Harari’s usual trick. He spends a great deal of time describing the problem - so that we may be grateful - only to be able to get us on board at the end with his idea of ‘the solution.’
“..we should establish a powerful global system to monitor and prevent pandemics. In the age-old war between humans and pathogens, the frontline passes through the body of each and every human being. If this line is breached anywhere on the planet, it puts all of us in danger. Even the richest people in the most developed countries have a personal interest to protect the poorest people in the least developed countries...The skeleton of such a global anti-plague system already exists in the shape of the World Health Organization and several other institutions. But the budgets supporting this system are meagre, and it has almost no political teeth. We need to give this system some political clout and a lot more money, so that it won’t be entirely dependent on the whims of self-serving politicians. As noted earlier, I don’t believe that unelected experts should be tasked with making crucial policy decisions. That should remain the preserve of politicians. But some kind of independent global health authority would be the ideal platform for compiling medical data, monitoring potential hazards, raising alarms and directing research and development.”
And there you see it in black and white. Harari’s solution to the problem of mass data harvesting - that he has already identified for you - is to take that power from the nation state and hand it to none other than the World Economic Forum.
This move would apparently solve the problem of the “meaningless and worthless” human, a “hackable animal” with no free will controlled by “masters” who will own our data while we “own nothing, eat bugs and be happy, by handing it over to his friend, Klaus Schwab.
Great.
3) The False Religion: Eugenics
The final chapters of Harari’s book 'Homo Deus' contain his ‘Dataist Movement’ manifesto, wherein he speculates on the end of Homo Sapiens (humans). In it, he calls ‘Dataism’ a religion.
Harari really doesn’t try to hide his views for those who care to see: “When cars replaced horse drawn carriages, we didn’t upgrade the horses, we retired them. Perhaps it’s time to do the same with homo sapiens.”
But bio-engineering, or biologically editing humans, is another word for Eugenics. This disease of the mind - raised in our past by ‘progressive’ thinkers totally enamoured by scientific evolution and social Darwinism - has reared its despicable head again, but this time in the name of Harari’s false religion: “Dataism”.
As you shall see, progressive, left-wing, science-revering internationalists have historic form on this topic of eugenics. Harari and his Globalists are no different.
Placing the famous British socialist George Bernard Shaw in the photo next to the title ‘Eugenics’ above is no accident. Here he is telling us what he thinks:
“You must all know half a dozen people at least, who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say ‘sir’ or ‘madam’ now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can’t justify your existence, if you’re not pulling your weight in the social group, if you’re not producing as much as you consume or preferably more, then, clearly we cannot use the big organisation of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can’t be of very much use to yourself.”
Interestingly, ten years ago Jonathan Freedland worried openly in the Guardian about whether the left would ever be able to rid itself of its fascination with eugenics:
17th February 2012: “Among those is one of the grisliest skeletons in the cupboard of the British intellectual elite..It is eugenics, the belief that society's fate rested on its ability to breed more of the strong and fewer of the weak. So-called positive eugenics meant encouraging those of greater intellectual ability and ‘moral worth’ to have more children, while negative eugenics sought to urge, or even force, those deemed inferior to reproduce less often or not at all. The aim was to increase the overall quality of the national herd…
..Such talk repels us now, but in the prewar era it was the common sense of the age. Most alarming, many of its leading advocates were found among the luminaries of the Fabian and socialist left, men and women revered to this day. Thus George Bernard Shaw could insist that ‘the only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man’, even suggesting, in a phrase that chills the blood, that defectives be dealt with by means of a ‘lethal chamber’..
..Such thinking was not alien to the great Liberal titan and mastermind of the welfare state, William Beveridge, who argued that those with ‘general defects’ should be denied not only the vote, but ‘civil freedom and fatherhood’. Indeed, a desire to limit the numbers of the inferior was written into modern notions of birth control from the start. That great pioneer of contraception, Marie Stopes – honoured with a postage stamp in 2008 – was a hardline eugenicist, determined that the ‘hordes of defectives’ be reduced in number, thereby placing less of a burden on ‘the fit’. Stopes later disinherited her son because he had married a short-sighted woman, thereby risking a less-than-perfect grandchild…
..I'm afraid even the Manchester Guardian was not immune. When a parliamentary report in 1934 backed voluntary sterilisation of the unfit, a Guardian editorial offered warm support, endorsing the sterilisation campaign ‘the eugenists soundly urge’. If it's any comfort, the New Statesman was in the same camp…
..the eugenics movement's definition of ‘unfit’ was not limited to the physically or mentally impaired. It held, he writes, ‘that most of the behavioural traits that led to poverty were inherited. In short, that the poor were genetically inferior to the educated middle class.’ It was not poverty that had to be reduced or even eliminated: it was the poor…Hence the enthusiasm of John Maynard Keynes, director of the Eugenics Society from 1937 to 1944, for contraception, essential because the working class was too "drunken and ignorant" to keep its numbers down…
..The harder truth is that they were drawn to eugenics for what were then good, leftwing reasons..They believed in science and progress, and nothing was more cutting edge and modern than social Darwinism. Man now had the ability to intervene in his own evolution. Instead of natural selection and the law of the jungle, there would be planned selection. And what could be more socialist than planning, the Fabian faith that the gentlemen in Whitehall really did know best?”
Freedland had raised this topic before for the Guardian, commenting on an archived piece:
“All over Scandinavia, people are facing up to the stain now spreading across their snow-white self -image, as they discover that their governments spent decades executing a chilling plan to purify the Nordic race, nurturing the strong and eradicating the weak. Each day victims of forced sterilisation, now deep in middle age, have stepped forward to tell how they were ordered to have “the chop”, to prevent them having children deemed as racially defective as themselves…
..more than 60,000 Swedish women sterilised from 1935 until as late as 1976. What has shocked most observers is that all this was committed not by some vile fascistic regime, but by a string of welfare-minded, Social Democratic governments. Indeed, the few voices of opposition came from Swedish conservatives…The bottom line is bleak but clear. Eugenics, the art and science of breeding better men, is not just the historical problem of Germany and now Scandinavia, nor even of the jackbooted right. It took root right here in Britain – pushed and argued by the left. Indeed, contempt for ordinary people and outright racism were two of the defining creeds of British socialism…
..The trouble began with Charles Darwin. His breakthrough work, The Origin of Species, did not restrict its impact to the academy and laboratories. Instead it transformed the very way mankind understood itself in the 19th century, its message fast spilling over into the realm of political ideas. Suddenly the religious notion that all life was equally sacred was under attack. Human beings were like any other species – some were more evolved than others. The human race could be divided into different categories and classes. When Karl Marx took on the task of charting human development and defining the class structure, he acknowledged his debt – dedicating an early edition of Das Kapital to none other than Charles Darwin..
..From the beginning, socialism regarded itself as the natural ally, even the political version, of science. Just as biologists sought to understand animals and plants, so scientific socialism would master people…In this context, there was only contempt for ordinary people, who were regarded as “sub-men” to be tended and looked after – via the welfare state – like a bovine herd…”
Alas, the US is no different.
Break Free with Karen Hunt reports:
“The American eugenics movement received extensive funding from various corporate foundations including the Carnegie Institution, Rockefeller Foundation, and the Harriman railroad fortune…
..From 1909 to 1979, around 20,000 sterilizations occurred in California state mental institutions under the guise of protecting society from the offspring of people with mental illness… Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, supported sterilization of those who were deemed unfit to reproduce..
..a 2011 CDC report finding that while ‘black women make up 14 percent of the childbearing population … 36 percent of all abortions were obtained by black women.’
..In December 2020, the World Economic Forum unveiled its bioengineering framework in a presentation called ‘3 Scenarios for How Bioengineering Could Change Our World in 10 Years.’
Edible vaccines grown in plants and CRISPR gene-editing were some of the highlights. The presentation was based off a World Economic Forum sponsored academic paper called Bioengineering Horizon Scan 2020.
Inspiration came from Matthew Liao, a bioethicist at NYU, who presented a proposal back in 2012 titled ‘Human Engineering and Climate Change.’
To lower birth rates, Liao suggests that lower class women should start consuming smart drugs to enhance their cognitive abilities since smarter women have less children.
He also suggested that “another possible human engineering solution is to use cognition enhancements such as Ritalin and Modafinil to achieve lower birth-rates.”
4) National Socialism, Nazism and Eugenics
As the above demonstrates, globalist false prophets today are openly ruminating on how to hack humans for optimisation, while distinguishing them from "worthless” people. This is not new. The still celebrated socialist internationalist luminaries of yesterday suffered from the very same hubristic illness.
And from them emerged the one person who took this diseased thinking to its logical conclusion: the National Socialist Adolf Hitler.
“For years, leftists, historians and everyone else have drawn a veil over Adolf Hitler’s naming of his creed National Socialism. It has been dismissed as a perverse PR trick of the Fuhrer’s, as if Nazism and socialism represented opposite faiths. The same view has infused the left’s understanding of the genocides committed in the name of communism, whether by Stalin or Pol Pot, as if those men were merely betraying the otherwise noble theory whose cause they proclaimed. But the early history of British socialism tells a different story. It suggests that socialism – with its unshakable faith in science, central planning and the cool wisdom of the rational elite – contained the seeds of the atrocities that were to come later…”
Then, it was called eugenics. Today it is called bio-engineering. Do not be fooled. Bio-engineering is simply eugenics by another name.
Those advocating it today are not only advocating for an idea that was last attempted under Nazism, but in Ukraine they are insisting that we all explicitly support and cheer on such Nazism. As in history, today’s globalist advocates for bio-engineering (eugenics) have been supporting and arming Nazis while encouraging the oblivious public to cheer them on via state-issue propaganda.
Even corporatist media have had no choice but to admit their recent advocacy and support for Nazism in Ukraine, despite the following convoluted ‘sorry-not-sorry’ headline:
Freedland surmises:
“Progressives face a particular challenge, to cast off a mentality that can too easily regard people as means rather than ends. For in this respect a movement is just like a person: it never entirely escapes its roots.”
5) The Sage Who Saw The Scam
The late great British Philosopher Roger Scruton, who had spent time as an underground anti-Communism activist inside the Soviet Union, had the materialist globalist Yuval Noah Harari sussed from the start.
“It is testimony to Harari’s literary skill that he is able to combine his biological determinism with deferential nods toward the prevailing liberal orthodoxies. In fact, he defines himself as a liberal universalist, who sees nations, tribes, and exclusive communities as obstacles to the new world order.”
It will come as no surprise that Roger Scruton was fiercely slandered by the modern left, right up until he passed away.
When evil comes disguised as progress, celebrated in ignorance as righteous, when the truth triggers vitriol and disgust, as the good are slandered and silenced, and when the sick are hailed as heroes, while the natural state of things is ridiculed, then truly we are in dangerous times.
d
