by Phillip D. Collins ©, Feb. 24th, 2005

In part two of this article, we trace the thread of the concept of ‘survival of the fittest’ from Condorcet to Malthus, to Spencer, to Wallace and to Darwin; elucidate the ‘predictive programming’ contained in science fiction novels; and illuminate the extraterrestrial connection, specifically the Freemasonic import of Sirius, the Dog Star.

Science Fiction: A Means of Predictive Programming

Aldous Huxley first presented the ‘scientific dictatorship’ to the public imagination in his book Brave New World. In Dope, Inc., associates of political dissident Lyndon LaRouche claim that Huxley’s book was actually a ‘mass appeal’ organizing document written ‘on behalf of one-world order’ (Dope, Inc., 538). The book also claims the United States is the only place where Huxley’s ‘science fiction classic’ is taught as an allegorical condemnation of fascism. If this is true, then the ‘scientific dictatorship’ presented within the pages of his 1932 novel Brave New World is a thinly disguised roman a’ clef – a novel that thinly veils real people or events – awaiting tangible enactment.

Such is often the case with ‘science fiction’ literature. According to researcher Michael Hoffman, this literary genre is instrumental in the indoctrination of the masses into the doctrines of the elite:

“Traditionally, ‘science fiction’ has appeared to most people as an adolescent genre, the province of time-wasting fantasies. This has been the great strength of this genre as a vehicle for the inculcation of the ideology favored by the Cryptocracy. As J.H. Towsen points out in Clowns, only when people think they are not buying something can the real sales pitch begin. While it is true that with the success of NASA’s Gemini space program and the Apollo moon flights more serious attention and respectability was accorded ‘science fiction,’ nonetheless in its formative seeding time, from the late 19th century through the 1950s, the predictive program known as ‘science fiction’ had the advantage of being derided as the solitary vice of misfit juveniles and marginal adults.” (Hoffman, 205)

Thus, ‘science fiction’ is a means of conditioning the masses to accept future visions that the elite wish to tangibly enact. [Ed. Note: SF also widely uses Darwinian notions and language to project a fantastic future. This is another area of potential research.] This process of gradual and subtle inculcation is dubbed ‘predictive programming.’ Hoffman elaborates: ‘Predictive programming works by means of the propagation of the illusion of an infallibly accurate vision of how the world is going to look in the future’ (Hoffman, 205). Memes are instilled through the circulation of ‘mass appeal’ documents under the guise of ‘science fiction’ literature. Once subsumed on a cognitive level, these memes become self-fulfilling prophecies, embraced by the masses and outwardly approximated through the efforts of the elite.

If the concept of ‘predictive programming’ seems fantastic, consider the case of H.G. Wells. Wells was mentored by T.H. Huxley, grandfather of Aldous. In turn, Wells would tutor Aldous and his brother, Julian. All of these men were members of the Freemasonic Lodge (the significance of which will be revealed shortly). Wells would author several ‘mass appeal’ tracts disguised as science fiction novels. Most notable of these novels was The Shape of Things to Come. Researcher Jim Keith offered the following assessment of Wells’ The Shape of Things to Come:

“Interestingly, deceptively, the book is presented as a work of science fiction, but within its pages is Wells’ best guess of how the New World Order would come to pass, from a 1930s perspective.”

While primarily a work of propaganda that pushes the one-world worldview of Wells and other internationalists during the first half of this century, the book is particularly revealing in that it also exposes many of the strategies that are to be employed (Keith, Mind Control, World Control, 13).

Of course, not all of Wells’ prophecies were 100% accurate. In his examination of The Shape of Things to Come, Keith concluded that:

“Wells was no prophet as regards to his timeline, only a science fiction writer privy to the plans of men with an interest in promoting the coming of the dictatorial world-state. His crystal ball is somewhat cloudy on certain details.”

– Keith, Mind Control, World Control, 16

However, Wells’ novel did exhibit a strange degree of precision. Jim Keith enumerated the various instances of uncanny accuracy in Wells’ The Shape of Things to Come. Among one of the synchronicities Keith found in the text was Wells’ description of the elite’s primary apparatus for the amalgamation of the world’s economic systems:

“Not surprisingly Wells places the City of London – the international center of banking culture – and its financial credit as responsible for knitting together world economic life over the previous hundred years. With these innovations in communications and finance, but also with the frustrations and wars inherent (so he says) in the existence of independent national states and sovereignties, came about the gradual dawning of the idea of the World-state.”

– Keith, Mind Control, World Control, 14

Another instance of uncanny accuracy was Wells’ prognostications concerning a second global war and a proliferation of infectious diseases:

“Wells has World War II beginning in 1940 in Poland, over an imagined slight taken by a Nazi over the actions of a Pole of Jewish origin. He characterizes World War II as it was, as an orgy of violence, and has the fighting end in 1949 – staying remarkably close to the actual dates of the conflict – only to be followed by another scourge, that of rampant disease, ‘The Raid of the Germs.’”

Given the present-day climate of AIDS, Ebola, Mad Cow disease, and other resistant viral strains – and the persistent rumors of the military engineering of those same diseases – perhaps Wells’ dating in this particular should have been moved forward a few years (Keith, Mind Control, World Control, 16).

One of the most elucidating revelations found in The Shape of Things to Come was the group that Wells claimed would be central to the formation of a one-world government:

“Wells places responsibility for the creation of the New World Order in the lap of scientists of the future
[emphasis added], the group he dubs the ‘Technocracy’.”

– Keith, Mind Control, World Control, 16

Wielding ‘ostensible control over the knowable,’ the scientists of this ‘Technocracy’ would implement a Fabian strategy of ‘gradual ideological assimilation’ (Keith, World Control, Mind Control, 16-17). Incrementally, this network of scientists would engineer the amalgamation of nation-states into a global government. Again, the Huxlian theme of a ‘scientific dictatorship’ emerges. This is the future that the masses have been conditioned to accept through predictive programming.

The Sirius Connection

In Morals and Dogma, 33rd Degree Freemason Albert Pike bestows special honor upon Sirius, a heavenly body that ‘still glitters in our Lodges as the Blazing Star’ (Pike, 486). Indeed, Sirius represents a foundational axiom of the Masonic Craft. Pike explains that the star is: ”an emblem of the Divine Truth, given by God to the first men, and preserved amid all the vicissitudes of ages in the traditions and teachings of Masonry’ (Pike, 136). As Pike continues, he reveals that Sirius has also held numerous other appellations: ‘The Blazing Star in our Lodges, we have already said, represent Sirius, Anubis, or Mercury, Guardian and Guide of Souls’ (Pike, 506).

Whatever its name, the star represents an entity of great esoteric significance to Freemasonry:

“In the old Lectures they said: ‘The Blazing Star or Glory in the centre refers us to that Grand Luminary the Sun, which enlightens the Earth, and by its genial influence dispenses blessings to mankind’.” (Pike, 506)

A little later, Pike reiterates: ”the Blazing Star has been regarded as an emblem of Omniscience, or the All-Seeing Eye, which to the Ancients was the Sun’ (Pike, 506). Recall that, before the external characteristics of the oligarchs’ control apparatus were cosmetically altered to present a ‘scientific dictatorship,’ the elite ruled through institutionalized Sun worship (Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati, 78-79). Within these statements, Pike provides a brief glimpse of the god of Freemasonry. Although the topographical features of its theocracy have changed, the deity has remained the same and his identity is associated with the star called Sirius.

According to Pike, Sirius was responsible for imparting numerous innovations to mankind:

“He was Sirius or the Dog-Star, the friend and counselor of Osiris, and the inventor of language, grammar, astronomy, surveying, arithmetic, music, and medical science; the first maker of laws; and who taught the worship of the Gods, and the building of temples.” (Pike, 376)

It is interesting to note that, among his various contributions, this Freemasonic deity was responsible for the introduction of several forms of science. Does Sirius also represent the Lodge’s ‘ostensible control over the knowable?’ Is the Dog-Star a symbol of the elite’s ‘scientific dictatorship?’ Michael Hoffman further elaborates on the identity of Sirius:

“The mythical Satanic bringer of civilization to earth was supposed to be an alien from the star system Sirius, around whom the Egyptians and all subsequent Hermetic systems constructed their elaborate and obsessive religio-astronomic observances. This star Sirius also served as an astronomic secret code, an allegory of the illusory quality and inherent ‘trickiness’ of the material world.” (Hoffman, 26-27)

This Freemasonic mythology of extraterrestrial intervention in human evolution may be poised for a return. Given the impossibility of spontaneous generation, Darwinism has faced a major obstacle to its unquestioned primacy. Recognizing this obstacle, scientific materialist Francis Crick presented a theory bearing an uncanny resemblance to the Sirius myth. According to Crick, technologically advanced extraterrestrials ‘seeded’ the earth with life billions of years ago. Whether Crick was privy to the occult doctrines of the elite or was simply following the natural course of Darwinism’s memetic metastasis, one thing is certain, he and other proponents of similar ‘extraterrestrial intervention’ theories are paving the way for the re-introduction of Freemasonic mysticism to mainstream science.

There is a distinct possibility that the agentur of the elite are already in the process of facilitating the re-introduction of this myth. With the voracity of Darwinism in question, the effectiveness of this meme has been declining and, with it, the influence of the ruling class. Of course, this is something that the elite cannot allow to happen. Consider the following account of Linda Moulton Howe. During a meeting with Richard Doty, an intelligence officer with the United States military, Howe was presented with a briefing paper regarding alien visitation. In its body, Howe read an interesting claim regarding the crumbling theory of Darwinism: ‘It stated that all questions and mysteries about the evolution of Homo sapiens on this planet had been answered and that project was closed’ (Howe, 151).

How convenient! By what means did these extraterrestrials facilitate the evolutionary process? Reiterating the basic contentions of Crick, the paper stated that:

“’these ETs have come at various intervals in the earth’s history to manipulate DNA in already existing terrestrial primates and perhaps in other life forms as well. To the best of my memory, the time intervals for this DNA manipulation specifically listed in the briefing paper were 25,000, 15,000, 5,000, and 2,500 years ago.” (Howe, 151)

Faced with the impossibility of spontaneous generation and the inexorable collapse of Darwinism, the elite could now be invoking an ‘extraterrestrial intervention’ myth cribbed from their own doctrines. Given Richard Doty’s military intelligence connections, this remains a very real possibility. The Freemasonic doctrine of Sirius has circulated within military intelligence groups for quite some time. According to researcher James Shelby Downard, there exists a cult of Sirius adherents at the highest levels of the CIA (Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati, 49). Researcher Jim Keith elaborates:

“He cites as one of their ritual locations the telescope viewing room of the Palomar Observatory in California. There, he says, the adepts of the Sirius-military intelligence cult enact rituals in the telescopically-focused light of the Dog Star, in imitation of the Egyptian priesthood, astral rays bathing the viewing chamber and the participants when the telescope is aimed Sirius-ward.”

– Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati, 49

Keith proceeds to cite the case of military intelligence officer Michael Aquino:

“Utter madness? Tell that to Colonel Michael Aquino of U.S. military intelligence, the admitted head of the satanic Temple of Set, a deity [Set] identified in occultism with Sirius. Aquino makes no bones about the fact that he is the head of his offshoot of Anton LaVey’s Church of Satan, known to draw many of its leaders from military circles. Again, we see the strange conjunction of Sirius, occultism, and military intelligence.”

– Keith, Saucers of the Illuminati, 49

Those who comprise this ‘strange conjunction’ could also be responsible for the perpetration of a disinformation campaign, derivative of Masonic doctrine and designed to maintain the waning dominance of Darwinism.

Darwinism Dismantled

Providing a complete and comprehensive delineation of the various concepts constituting Darwinism is a daunting task. The theory itself is a dense amalgam of ‘isms,’ thinly veiled occult concepts, philosophical doctrines, and ideologies. Again, Tennenbaum’s statement that Darwinism ‘is based on absurdly irrational propositions, which did not come from scientific observations, but were artificially introduced from the outside, for political-ideological reasons’ seems succinct and accurate. Yet, with what outside sources do these ‘absurdly irrational propositions’ find their proximate origins?

One of the major influences on Darwin was Thomas Malthus, an Anglican clergyman who had received the blessings of French deist Jean-Jacques Rousseau and radical empiricist David Hume (Keynes, 99). Malthus authored Essay on the Principle of Population, a treatise premised upon the thesis: ‘Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetic ratio’ (Malthus, 6). Although Malthus articulated his observations in succinct mathematical equations, the labyrinthine and complex machinations comprising the natural order typically defy such overly simplistic reductionism. Nonetheless, Malthus concluded that society should adopt certain social policies to prevent the human population from growing disproportionately larger than the food supply.

Malthus’ genocidal policies specifically targeted the poor. For instance, one of his proposals suggested the implementation of the following measures:

“Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlement in all marshy and unwholesome situations. But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders.” (Malthus, 412)

Through the promotion of hygienically unsound practices amongst impoverished populations, Malthus believed that the ‘undesirable elements’ of the human herd could be naturally culled by various maladies. The spread of disease could be further assisted through discriminative vaccination and zoning programs. Yet, amongst one of Malthus’ most shocking proposals was his suggestion concerning children:

“We are bound in justice and honour formally to disclaim the right of the poor to support. To this end, I should propose a regulation be made declaring that no child born’ should ever be entitled to parish assistance’ The [illegitimate] infant is comparatively speaking, of little value to society, as others will immediately supply its place’ All children beyond what would be required to keep up the population to this [desired] level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the deaths of grown persons.” (Malthus, 411, 430-1)

The dictum underpinning Malthus’ logic would later be reiterated as ‘survival of the fittest.’ According to researcher Ian Taylor, the metastasis of this dictum ‘can be traced from Condorcet to Malthus, to Spencer, to Wallace, and to Darwin’ (Taylor, 65).

Another one of the many constituent worldviews comprising Darwinism is Hegelianism. According to philosopher Georg Hegel, a pantheistic world spirit was directing ‘an ongoing developmental (evolutionary) process in nature, including humanity,’ which bodied itself forth as a ‘dialectical struggle between positive and negative entities.’ This conflict always resulted in a ‘harmonious synthesis’ (Taylor, 381-2). The same dialectical framework is present in Darwinism.

In Circle of Intrigue, occult researcher Texe Marrs reveals the Hegelian structure intrinsic to Darwinian evolution. The organism (thesis) comes into conflict with nature (antithesis) resulting in a newly enhanced species (synthesis), the culmination of the evolutionary process (Marrs, Circle of Intrigue, 127). Of course, in such a world of ongoing conflict, violence and bloodshed are central to progress. Thus, Darwin’s theory ‘gave credence to the Hegelian notion that human culture had ascended from brutal beginnings’ (Taylor, 386).

Yet, Darwinism’s roots go deeper than Hegelianism, returning to an esoteric source that has been there since the beginning. Hegel’s ideas did not originate with himself, but Fichte (Sutton, America’s Secret Establishment, 34). Who was Fichte? Antony Sutton reveals that he was a ‘Freemason, almost certainly Illuminati, and certainly promoted by the Illuminati’ (Sutton, America’s Secret Establishment, 34). In fact, Hegel’s dialectical logic reiterates the Masonic dictum :Ordo Ab Chao (Order out of chaos). Again, it seems that the bedrock upon which Darwinism rests is Freemasonry, a channel for elitist interests.

The French Revolution: An Abortive Scientific Dictatorship

According to academia’s officially sanctioned historians, the French Revolution was little more than a rebellion of the commoner against a corrupt aristocracy and religious institution. However, in Essays on the French Revolution, Lord Acton made an interesting observation:

“The appalling thing in the French Revolution is not the tumult but the design. Through all the fire and smoke we perceive the evidence of calculating organization. The managers remain studiously concealed and masked; but there is no doubt about their presence from the first.” (Reed, 136)

Who were the ‘studiously concealed and masked managers’ that orchestrated the French Revolution? In Morals and Dogma, Albert Pike revealed that it was Freemasonry that ‘aided in bringing about the French Revolution’ (Pike, 24). Indeed, the French Revolution represented the first full-scale attempt to tangibly enact the Masonic vision of a ‘scientific dictatorship.’

The Lunar Society, which was the precursor to the Freemasonic Royal Society, was intimately connected to the revolutionary movement in France. Freemason Benjamin Franklin acted as the ‘shuttle diplomat between the French and English Utopian idealists.’ The son of James Watt was accused of being a French agent by Edmund Burke in the British House of Commons. Joseph Priestley had pledged his wholehearted support to the revolutionary French National Assembly. Fellow Lunar Society member James Keir hosted a dinner to commemorate the fall of the Bastille. Most notably, Freemason and Lunar Society founder Erasmus Darwin actively supported the Jacobins (Taylor, 56).

Who were the Jacobins? William Hoar reveals that they were ‘agents of the Bavarian-bred Illuminati who operated out of the Club Breton” (p. 2).

The French Revolution exhibited all of the hallmarks of a ‘scientific dictatorship’:

  • A humanistic philosophy emphasizing man’s evolutionary ascent towards apotheosis: After the Legislative Assembly rejected God as the object of man’s worship and praise, the National Convention paraded a woman representing Athena from the convention hall to the chapel of Notre Dame. There, the Goddess of Reason took her place on the high altar (Scott, 306). In a Masonic context, this ritualistic enthronement of human reason represented the unification of man’s consciousness with the Omniscient, which is the ultimate end of evolution (Wilmhurst, 94). In other words, human reason became the ultimate source of moral precepts and man became God.

  • A Malthusian depopulation campaign: Under the direction of Illuminist Robespierre, the new revolutionary government began carrying out a massive depopulation campaign that became known as the Terror. While Robespierre’s goal of eliminating 15 million ‘useless eaters’ was never realized, the Terror was successful in claiming the lives of some 300,000 Frenchmen, 297,000 of which were members of the lower and middle working classes. It should come as little surprise that Thomas Malthus was educated under the combined tutelage of two supporters of the French Revolution: Gilbert Wakefield and Lunar Society member Joseph Priestley (Taylor, 59).

  • A Hegelian framework: Recall the Hegelian structure intrinsic to evolution (Marrs, 127). In hopes of accelerating France’s evolution towards a ‘scientific dictatorship,’ the architects of the revolution promulgated a classic Hegelian dialectic: the bourgeoisie against the proletariat. The synthesis of these two polar extremes resulted in the subversion of individualism and the maintenance of class stratification.

Of course, the rest is history. The revolution swiftly degenerated into a bloodbath and many of the conspirators were slaughtered by the very mobs they had created. Yet, the esoteric symbol of this abortive ‘scientific dictatorship’ remains. Long after she was enthroned in the cathedral of Notre Dame, Athena was transplanted upon new shores. Occult researcher Texe Marrs explains in Dark Majesty:

Today, statues of this Illuminist Goddess of Reason are found throughout the U.S.A.; one stands astride the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C. Another is atop the dome of the Capitol building in Austin, Texas. Her statue has been erected in town squares and city parks. But the most fantastic idol of the Goddess of Reason, the most majestic statue of the pagan lady who bears the torch of light, who illuminates, uplifts, and frees mankind, is found in New York’s harbor.

Towering above the shimmering but polluted waters, she holds in her outreached arm and hand a torch of fire and light. A gift of the Masonic Order, the modern inheritors of the Illuminati heritage, the Statue of Liberty was sculptured by Frederic Bartholdi, a member of the Masonic Lodge of Alsace-Lorraine in Paris, France. The statue is an esoteric idol of great significance to the secret societies plotting the New World Order.

Did the French Revolution truly end or did it simply change venues? Has America been designated the new headquarters of the elite’s next ‘scientific dictatorship?’ One thing is certain, although she is no longer worshipped in the cathedral of Notre Dame, the Goddess of Reason has never relinquished her crown.

The Rise of the Modern Scientific Dictatorship

Darwinism shares the Hegelian framework with two other belief systems. In The Secret Cult of the Order, Antony Sutton states: ‘Both Marx and Hitler have their philosophical roots in Hegel’ (Sutton, 118). It is here that one arrives at the Hegelian nexus where Darwin, Marx, and Hitler intersect. Recall that Nietzsche-ism, Darwinism and Marxism were all mentioned together in the Protocols of the Wise Men of Sion. This was no accident. Nazism (a variant of fascism) sprung from Nietzsche-ism (Carr, XIV). Communism sprung from Marxism. Both were based upon Hegelian principles. Moreover, both were ‘scientific dictatorships’ legitimized by the ‘science’ of Darwinism. Ian Taylor elaborates:

“However, Fascism or Marxism, right wing or left – all these are only ideological roads that lead to Aldous Huxley’s brave new world [i.e. scientific dictatorship], while the foundation for each of these roads is Darwin’s theory of evolution. Fascism is aligned with biological determinism and tends to emphasize the unequal struggle by which those inherently fittest shall rule. Marxism stresses social progress by stages of revolution, while at the same time it paradoxically emphasizes peace and equality. There should be no illusions; Hitler borrowed from Marx. The result is that both Fascism and Marxism finish at the same destiny – totalitarian rule by the elite.” (Taylor, 411)

The interest of both Hitler and Marx in Darwinian evolution is a matter of history. While he was living in London, Karl Marx attended lectures on evolutionary theory delivered by T.H. Huxley. Recognizing the odd synchronicity between the communist concept of class war and the Darwinian principle of natural selection, Marx sent Darwin a copy of Das Kapital in 1873. Enamored of evolution, Marx asked Darwin the permission to dedicate his next volume to him six year later. Troubled by the fact that it would upset certain members of his family to have the name of Darwin associated with an atheistic polemic, Charles politely declined the offer (Taylor, 381).

Numerous authors have established firm connections between Darwinism and Hitler’s Nazism. Darwinian Arthur Keith documented the strong links between Hitler’s racialist goals and the doctrine of evolution (Taylor, 409). In fact, in Evolution and Ethics, Keith candidly stated: ‘The German Fuhrer as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution’ (Keith, Evolution and Ethics, 230).

In an analysis of Mein Kampf, contemporary author Werner Maser reveals that Darwin was the crucible for Hitler’s ‘notions of biology, worship, force, and struggle, and of his rejection of moral causality in history.’ Finally, researcher Alfred Kelly provides a comprehensive history of Darwinism’s popularization in Germany (Taylor, 409).

Returning to the Hegelian nexus that binds Darwinism, Marxism, and Nazism, both the fascist and communist ‘scientific dictatorships’ represented tangible enactments of the dialectical framework resident in evolutionary theory. Marx was greatly influenced by Hegel (Taylor, 381). The concept of class struggle, which paralleled Darwinian natural selection, resulted from Marx’s redirection of the Hegelian dialectic towards the socioeconomic realm. The proletariat (thesis) comes into conflict with the bourgeois (antithesis), resulting in a classless Utopia (synthesis). Marx, however, rejected the concept of a world spirit and relocated the revolution’s causal source within the proletariat itself.

The same Hegelian framework was resident within Hitler’s genocidal Final Solution. The German people (thesis) came into conflict with the Jew (antithesis) in hopes of creating the Aryan (synthesis). In both the case of communism and Nazism, the results were enormous bloodbaths. This is the natural consequence of Darwinian thinking and the legacy of the ‘scientific dictatorship.’

In applying the ideas of Darwin, both communists and fascists have murdered millions. Both of these groups find their origins in the elite (the Illuminati), who are still pursuing the same objectives today. According to the Darwinian mantra of ‘survival of the fittest,’ victory will demand bloodshed. Humanity may stand to inherit the ‘scientific dictatorship’s’ bloody legacy in the very near future.

Eugenics and the Coming Global Scientific Dictatorship

Integral to Aldous’ Brave New World is the practice of eugenics, which is closely aligned with Darwinism. Eugenics finds its origins with Darwin’s cousin, Sir Francis Galton. Galton first introduced the concept of eugenics in 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, 24). In truth, Galton was not the originator of this concept. Sordid traditions of selective breeding and inbreeding had long been practiced by the ruling class to maintain the ‘genetic purity’ of their future stock. Galton merely assigned this tradition the appellation of ‘eugenics’ and popularized it as a legitimate science.

In fact, this very same tradition was practiced by Darwin himself. In hopes of maintaining the ‘genetic superiority’ of his bloodline, Darwin married the youngest granddaughter of his maternal father. Researcher Ian Taylor reveals the results of this inbreeding project:

“Darwin’s idea of inbreeding to produce superior stock can be seen to be a complete disaster in the case of his own ten children. Of the ten, one girl, Mary, died shortly after birth; another girl, Anne, died at the age of ten years; his eldest daughter, Henrietta, had a serious and prolonged breakdown at fifteen in 1859. Three of his six sons suffered such frequent illness that Darwin regarded them as semi-invalids while his last son, Charles Jr., was born mentally retarded and died in 1858, nineteen months after birth.” (Taylor, 127)

Yet, in spite of eugenics’ historical failure, the concept was vigorously promulgated within the scientific community. In 1901, the statistics department of London’s University College became the headquarters for the Eugenics Education Society. Motivated by Galton’s vision of a future utopia ruled by a genetically engineered elite, the Eugenics Society would grow into a successful political movement. Aldous Huxley’s eugenically regimented ‘scientific dictatorship’ presented in Brave New World was drawing closer to realization. Given his role in the tangible approximation of Aldous’ roman a’ clef, it is appropriate that one of the many accolades the scientific community bestowed upon Galton was the Huxley medal (Taylor, 405).

However, the agenda of eugenical regimentation required an international machination by which it could be promulgated globally. That international machination was the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Julian Huxley, brother of Aldous, was the first director general of UNESCO and penned the organization’s manifesto in 1947. Entitled UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy, this document presents the following mission statement:

“Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.” (Huxley, UNESCO)

As the unthinkable becomes thinkable, the fictional becomes factual and Brave New World becomes a reality. In 1977, author Claire Chambers clearly delineated the UN’s role as a global scientific dictatorship:

“ Since its inception, the U.N. has advanced a world-wide program of population control, scientific human breeding [i.e., eugenics], and Darwinism.” (Chambers, 3)

In Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley prognosticated: “the twenty-first century’ will be the era of World Controllers” (Huxley, 25). Aldous Huxley’s ‘scientific dictatorship’ may not be confined to the pages of classic literature for much longer.

References

About the Author

Phillip D. Collins acted as the editor for The Hidden Face of Terrorism. He has also written articles for Paranoia Magazine, MKzine, News With Views, B.I.P.E.D.: The Official Website of Darwinian Dissent and Conspiracy Archive. 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 also co-authored the book, The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship: An Examination of Epistemic Autocracy, From the 19th to the 21st Century, which is
available online here
.