by Phillip D. Collins ©, Jan. 10th, 2005
In the dark past of human civilization, the ruling class controlled humanity largely through religious institutions and mysticism. However, the turn of the century witnessed the epistemic transformation of the elite’s religious power structure into a “scientific dictatorship.” The history and background of this “scientific dictatorship” is a conspiracy, created and micro-managed through the historical tide of Darwinism, which has its foundations in Freemasonry. In this article, we shall examine the evolutionary alchemy of eugenics, from Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood to William Sims Bainbridge’s Transhumanism.
The Alchemical Transformation of Man
A common misnomer that has been circulated by academia’s anointed historians is that the alchemists of antiquity were attempting to transform lead into gold. In truth, this was a fiction promulgated by the alchemists themselves to conceal their ultimate objectives . . .the transformation of man into a god. Among one of the various occult organizations that aspired to complete this alchemical mission was Freemasonry. Providing a summation of Masonry’s supreme goal, Masonic scholar W.L. Wilmshurst writes:
“This – the evolution 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.” (Wilmshurst, p. 47, 1980)
According to this alchemical mandate, humanity is a gradually developing deity requiring scientific assistance in its evolution. In Mystic Masonry, 32nd degree Mason J.D. Buck reiterates this theme of man as a progressively apotheosizing organism: “Humanity, ‘in-toto’, then, is the only Personal God” (Buck, p. 136, 1990). Of course, the concept of evolution would later be disseminated on the popular level as Darwinism and become the veritable cornerstone of contemporary science.
Before its popularization, evolutionary theory was the intellectual property of Masonry. Freemason Erasmus Darwin, Charles’ grandfather, “originated almost every important idea that has since appeared in evolutionary theory” (Darlington, p. 62, 1959). It is hardly a coincidence that many of Charles Darwin’s chief promoters were Freemasons, not the least of which being T.H. Huxley. It is even less of a coincidence that Charles Darwin’s cousin, Sir Francis Galton, would become one of the early expediters of Masonry’s alchemical agenda.
Eugenics: Alchemically Engineered Apotheosis
Sir Francis Galton could be considered an early evolutionary alchemist. His own cousin’s theory of evolution was one of his chief inspirations. In Memories of My Life, Galton wrote:
“The publication in 1859 of the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin made a marked epoch in my own mental development, as it did in that of human thought generally. Its effect was to demolish a multitude of dogmatic barriers by a single stroke, and to arouse a spirit of rebellion against all ancient authorities whose positive and unauthenticated statements were contradicted by modern science.” (Galton, Memories of My Life, p. 287)
Viewing evolutionary theory in conjunction with the alchemical mandate for man’s consciously engineered apotheosis, one inevitably recognizes a belief system that exhibits all of the characteristics of a religion. This revelation is most clearly illustrated by Galton’s statements in Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development:
“The chief result of these Inquiries has been to elicit the religious significance of the doctrine of evolution. It suggests an alteration in our mental attitude, and imposes a new moral duty. The new mental attitude is one of a greater sense of moral freedom, responsibility, and opportunity; the new duty which is supposed to be exercised concurrently with, and not in opposition to the old ones upon which the social fabric depends, is an endeavor to further evolution, especially that of the human race.” (Galton, Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development, p. 337, 1883)
That Galton recognized the “religious significance of evolution” is no accident. Throughout the years, this Masonically inspired religion of emergent deities has resurfaced under various appellations. Wagar enumerates its numerous manifestations:
“Nineteenth- and early twentieth-century thought teems with time-bound emergent deities. Scores of thinkers preached some sort of faith in what is potential in time, in place of the traditional Christian and mystical faith in a power outside of time. Hegel’s Weltgeist, Comte’s Humanite, Spencer’s organismic humanity inevitably improving itself by the laws of evolution, Nietzsche’s doctrine of superhumanity, the conception of a finite God given currency by J.S. Mill, Hastings Rashdall, and William James, the vitalism of Bergson and Shaw, the emergent evolutionism of Samuel Alexander and Lloyd Morgan, the theories of divine immanence in the liberal movement in Protestant theology, and du Nouy’s telefinalism – all are exhibits in evidence of the influence chiefly of evolutionary thinking, both before and after Darwin, in Western intellectual history. The faith of progress itself – especially the idea of progress as built into the evolutionary scheme of things – is in every way the psychological equivalent of religion.” (Wagar, pp. 106 – 7, 1961)
This emergent deity, Man (spelled with a capitalized M to denote his purported divinity), would be fully enthroned through the efforts of alchemists themselves. Galton would reintroduce the concept of alchemy under the appellation of eugenics, a term derived from Greek for “well born.” The basic precepts of eugenics were delineated in Galton’s Hereditary Genius, a racist polemic advocating a system of selective breeding for the purposes of providing “more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing over the less suitable” (Galton, Hereditary Genius, p. 24, 1869). According to Galton, society should be eugenically regimented. The framework of such a society would be a caste system where status was assigned according to genetic superiority. In an article in the January 1873 edition of Fraser’s Magazine, Galton stated:
“I do not see why any insolence of caste should prevent the gifted class, when they had the power, from treating their [lower caste] compatriots with all kindness, as long as they maintained celibacy. But if these continued to procreate children, inferior in moral, intellectual, and physical qualities, it is easy to believe that the time may come when such persons would be considered as enemies to the State, and to have forfeited all claims to kindness.” (qutd. in Chase, pp. 100, 1977)
Galton hoped that such societal regimentation would promote “eugenically sound” breeding amongst the citizenry. Summarizing Galton’s objectives, Allan Chase explains: “What Galton was talking about here was the power to breed people as we breed pigs” (Chase, p. 101, 1977). Of course, as George Orwell opined in Animal Farm, some pigs are more equal than others. According to Galton’s cousin and racialist progenitor, Charles Darwin, the pigs of higher stock were the Anglo-Saxons. This becomes evident in Darwinian Josiah Strong’s manifesto, America’s Destiny. Quoting Darwin, Strong wrote:
“’At the present day,’ says Mr. Darwin, ‘civilized nations are everywhere supplanting barbarous nations, excepting, where the climate opposes a deadly barrier; and they succeed mainly, though exclusively, through their arts, which are the products of the intellect.’ He continues: ‘Whether the extinction of inferior races before the advancing Anglo-Saxon seems to the reader sad or otherwise, it certainly appears probable…Is there room for reasonable doubt that this race, unless devitalized by alcohol and tobacco, is destined to dispossess many weaker races, assimilate others, and mold the remainder, until, in a very true and important sense, it has Anglo-Saxonized mankind?’.” (Strong, pp. 165 – 80, 1885)
Of course, it comes as no real surprise that such thinking underpinned the racialist policies of Nazi Germany, which was a scientific dictatorship edified by Darwinian evolution. It comes as even less a surprise that Leonard Darwin, son of Charles, was vice-president of both the 1912 and 1921 International Eugenics Congresses. The first of these two meetings was the outgrowth of a 1911 gathering of the International Society for Racial Hygiene, a predominantly German organization. That Germany would see the full enactment of eugenical policies is hardly a coincidence.
Planned Parenthood: The Racist Legacy of Margaret Sanger
Although the Nazis’ eugenical Holocaust of WWII constituted an enormous public relations disaster for proponents of eugenics, the movement would later resurface under the banner of population control and radical environmentalism. Researchers Tarpley and Chaitkin document this transmogrification:
“The population control or zero population growth movement, which grew rapidly in the late 1960s thanks to free media exposure and foundation grants for a stream of pseudoscientific propaganda about the alleged ‘population bomb’ and the ‘limits to growth,’ was a continuation of the old prewar, protofascist eugenics movement, which had been forced to go into temporary eclipse when the world recoiled in horror at the atrocities committed by the Nazis in the name of eugenics. By mid-1960s, the same old crackpot eugenicists had resurrected themselves as the population-control and environmentalist movement. Planned Parenthood was a perfect example of the transmogrification. Now, instead of demanding the sterilization of the inferior races, the newly packaged eugenicists talked about the population bomb, giving the poor ‘equal access’ to birth control, and ‘freedom of choice’.” (Tarpley & Chaitkin, p. 203, 1992)
Indeed, Planned Parenthood successfully carried the banner of eugenics into the post-WWII era. Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger, a virulently racist woman who touted the slogan: “Birth Control: to create a race of thoroughbreds.” Her manifesto, entitled The Pivot of Civilization, thoroughly delineates the mission of Planned Parenthood and its allied organizations in the eugenics movement. In this treatise, which featured an introduction written by Freemason and Fabian socialist H.G. Wells, Sanger reveals the true motives underpinning the promotion of birth control:
“Birth Control, which has been criticized as negative and destructive, is really the greatest and most truly eugenic method, and its adoption as part of the program of Eugenics would immediately give a concrete and realistic power to that science… as the most constructive and necessary of the means to racial health.” (Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization, p. 189, 1922)
Sanger believed that society’s tolerance of “morons,” “human weeds,” and the “feeble-minded’ was encouraging dysgenics. To remedy this purported genetic threat, Sanger unabashedly promoted the implementation of authoritarian measures:
“The emergency problem of segregation and sterilization must be faced immediately. Every feeble-minded girl or woman of the hereditary type, especially of the moron class, should be segregated during the reproductive period…. we prefer the policy of immediate sterilization, of making sure that parenthood is absolutely prohibited to the feeble-minded.” (Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization, pp. 101 – 102, 1922)
Understand, these are the words of a so-called “proponent of reproductive rights.” Moreover, Sanger desired to see the establishment of a gulag system within America for the internment of the “feeble-minded.” In an issue of Birth Control Review, she wrote:
“To apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted… to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives…. ” (Sanger, “Plan of Peace,” Birth Control Review, pp. 107-8, 1932)
Although Sanger’s gulag system was not formally enacted in the United States, her vision saw horrible fulfillment in Nazi Germany. It comes as little surprise that Planned Parenthood’s board of directors included Nazi supporters such as Dr. Lothrop Stoddard, author of a racist tract entitled The Rising Tide of Color Against White Supremacy. In fact, Birth Control Review acted as a conduit for the dissemination of Nazi propaganda in America. In April of 1933, Dr. Ernst Rudin, Hitler’s director of genetic sterilization and a founder of the Nazi Society for Racial Hygiene, published an article in Birth Control Review. Entitled “Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need,” the article presented the following appeal:
“The danger to the community of the unsegregated feeble-minded woman is more evident. Most dangerous are the middle and high grades living at large who, despite the fact that their defect is not easily recognizable, should nevertheless be prevented from procreation…. In my view we should act without delay.” (Rudin, “Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need,” Birth Control Review, pp. 102-4, 1933)
Of course, in Rudin’s native country, the “feeble-minded” did not remain “unsegregrated” for very long. The same year that Sanger’s publication printed Rudin’s article, Ernst collaborated with Heinrich Himmler on Germany’s 1933 sterilization law. This genocidal edict stipulated the sterilization of all Jews and “colored” German children. Eventually, the “undesirables” were collected, segregated, and systematically murdered. The final result of the Nazi eugenics program was the Holocaust, which claimed six million lives.
Yet, how many people would have been segregated for orderly disposal according to Sanger’s vision? Upon examination of army statistics, Sanger concluded that:
“…nearly half – 47.3 per cent – of the population had the mentality of twelve-year-old children or less – in other words that they are morons.” (Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization, p. 263, 1922)
Sanger expressed dismal hopes for a vast segment of the population, declaring that: “only 13,500,000 will ever show superior intelligence” (Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization, p. 264, 1922). Thus, only a meager 13.5% of the population would be permitted to procreate. The rest would be segregated for orderly disposal. Evidently, Sanger’s holocaust would have even dwarfed Hitler’s Final Solution.
In typical Darwinian fashion, Sanger showed little mercy towards the weak. In fact, Margaret expressed a distinct aversion towards the poor. Chapter Five of her book is entitled “The Cruelty of Charity.” Reiterating Malthus’ proposal to “disclaim the right of the poor to support,” she wrote:
“Organized charity itself is….the surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding and is perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents and dependents.” (Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization, p. 108, 1922)
Sanger particularly loathed:
“…a special type of philanthropy or benevolence,….which strikes me as being more insidiously injurious than any other…. to supply gratis medical and nursing facilities to slum mothers.” (Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization, p. 114, 1922)
According to Margaret, such an investment of time, effort, resources, and love represented the height of futility:
“…. we are paying for and even submitting to the dictates of an ever increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all…..” (Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization, p. 187, 1922)
Planned Parenthood retains an active role in the scientific dictatorship’s project of eugenical regimentation today. Despite revelations of Nazi atrocities constituted a public relations disaster for the organization, Planned Parenthood survived and continues to tangibly enact Sanger’s vision. In fact, so-called “conservative, pro-life, pro-family, Christian” President George Bush Sr. pledged his whole-hearted support to the group. Researchers Tarpley and Chaitkin explain:
“Although Planned Parenthood was forced, during the fascist era and immediately thereafter, to tone down Sanger’s racist rhetoric from ‘race betterment’ to ‘family planning’ for the benefit of the poor and racial minorities, the organization’s basic goal of curbing the population growth rate among ‘undesirables’ never really changed. Bush publicly asserted that he agreed ’1,000 percent’ with Planned Parenthood.” (Tarpley & Chaitkin, p. 195, 1992)
Transhumanism: Techno-Eugenics and the End of Humanity
Today, Galton’s agenda of biological totalitarianism has resurfaced as the World Transhumanist Association. However, equipped with nanotechnology and genetic engineering, this movement presents a technologically augmented form of eugenics. Richard Hayes, executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society, elaborates:
“Last June at Yale University, the World Transhumanist Association held its first national conference. The Transhumanists have chapters in more than 20 countries and advocate the breeding of ‘genetically enriched’ forms of ‘post-human’ beings. Other advocates of the new techno-eugenics, such as Princeton University professor Lee Silver, predict that by the end of this century, ‘All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry [will be] controlled by members of the GenRich class… Naturals [will] work as low-paid service providers or as laborers…’” (Hayes, 2004)
Here is the vision of the Transhumanist movement… Huxley’s Brave New World where the new class distinction is genetic. Yet, just how long shall the GenRich class tolerate the existence of its biological subordinates? Hayes continues:
“What happens then? Here’s Dr. Richard Lynn, emeritus professor at the University of Ulster, who, like Silver, supports human genetic modification: ‘What is called for here is not genocide, the killing off of the population of incompetent cultures. But we do need to think realistically in terms of the ‘phasing out’ of such peoples….Evolutionary progress means the extinction of the less competent’.” (Hayes, 2004)
This is a frightening proposition indeed. C. Christopher Hook delineates the philosophy underpinning Transhumanism:
That we are biological creatures is simply our current status, transhumanists believe, but it is not necessary for defining who we are or who we should be. Bart Kosko, a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Southern California, puts it more bluntly in his book Heaven in a Chip (2002): “Biology is not destiny. It was never more than tendency. It was just nature’s first quick and dirty way to compute with meat. Chips are destiny.”
British roboticist Kevin Warwick put it this way: “I was born human. But this was an accident of fate-a condition merely of time and place.” This sounds startingly reminiscent of what nihilist Frederick Nietzsche wrote in Thus Spake Zarathustra: “I teach you the overman. Man is something to be overcome” (Hook, 2004).
Like Nietzsche’s overman, the roboman of Warwick and Kosko represents yet another incarnation of Adam Weishaupt’s “inner Areopagites: man made perfect as a god-without-God” (Billington, p. 97, 1980).
A central feature of Darwinism has been the belief in great extinctions. That belief remains firmly embedded within the crusade of the Transhumanist movement. Hook elaborates:
“Katherine Hayles, a professor of English at the University of California, Los Angeles, says in How We Became Posthuman (1999) that ‘in the posthuman, there are no essential differences, or absolute demarcations, between bodily existence and computer simulation, cybernetic mechanism and biological organism, robot technology and human goals.’ She concludes her book with a warning: ‘Humans can either go gently into that good night, joining the dinosaurs as a species that once ruled the earth but is now obsolete, or hang on for a while longer by becoming machines themselves. In either case … the age of the human is drawing to a close’.” (Hook, 2004)
According to the Darwinian doctrine of the Transhumanist movement, mankind is the next species slated for extinction. How does the GenRich class intend to regulate the rest of the “dysgenics” until their ultimate extinction? Transhumanist ideologue and Deputy Director of the National Science Foundation’s Division of Information and Intelligent Systems William Sims Bainbridge provides the answer:
“Techniques such as genetic engineering, psychoactive drugs and electronic control of the brain make possible a transformation of the species into docile, fully-obedient, ‘safe’ organisms.” (Bainbridge, 1982)
In other words, the pharmacological totalitarianism of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. Chemically numbed and anesthetized, the “dysgenics” will resign themselves to extinction in the posthuman era. Meanwhile, the eugenical alchemists of the elite continue to write the final chapter of the evolutionary script and they have left no room for humanity in the last pages.
- Bainbridge, William Sims, “Religions for a Galactic Civilization,” excerpted from Science Fiction and Space Futures, edited by Eugene M. Emme. San Diego: American Astronautical Society, pages 187-201, 1982.
- Billington, James H, Fire in the Minds of Men: Origins of the Revolutionary Faith, Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1980.
- Chase, Allan, The Legacy of Malthus, Knopf: distributed by Random House, 1977.
- Darlington, “The Origin of Darwinism,” Scientific American, May 1959
- Galton, Francis, Hereditary Genius, Macmillan, London, 1869.
- Galton, Francis, Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development, New York, MacMillan and Co., 1883.
- Hayes, Richard, “Selective Science,” February 12, 2004.
- Hook, C. Christopher, “The Techno Sapiens Are Coming,” January 2004.
- Huxley, Thomas, Evolution and Ethics and Other Essays, New York: Appleton, 1896.
- Rudin, Ernst, “Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need,” Birth Control Review, Volume XVII, Number 4, April 1933.
- Sagan, Carl, Cosmos, Random House, New York, 1980.
- Sanger, Margaret, The Pivot of Civilization, Brentano’s Press, NY, 1922.
- Sanger, Margaret, “Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, Volume XVI, Number 4, April 1932.
- Strong, Josiah, Our Country, New York, 1885.
- Tarpley, Webster & Anton Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, Executive Intelligence Review, Washington D.C., 1992.
- Wagar, W. Warren, H.G. Wells and the World State, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1961.
- Wilmshurst, W.L., The Meaning of Masonry, Gramercy Books, New York 1980.
About the Author
Phillip D. Collins acted as the editor for The Hidden Face of Terrorism. He has an Associate of Arts and Science. Currently, he is studying for a bachelor’s degree in Communications at Wright State University. During the course of his seven-year college career, Phillip has studied philosophy, religion, and classic literature. He co-authored the book, The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century, is
available online here.