by Phillip D. Collins ©, Aug. 31st, 2005

Recently, the London Zoo welcomed a new addition to its collection of animals: man. Sequestered within the zoo’s bear enclosure, eight scantly dressed human beings “monkeyed around for the crowds” (Vinograd, no pagination). Affixed to the entrance to the exhibit was a sign reading: “Warning: Humans in their Natural Environment” (no pagination). Associated Press journalist Cassandra Vinograd describes the rationale underpinning the exhibit:

Tom Mahoney, 26, decided to participate after his friend sent him an e-mail about the contest as a joke. Anything that draws attention to apes, he said, has his support.

“A lot of people think humans are above other animals,” he told The Associated Press. “When they see humans as animals, here, it kind of reminds us that we’re not that special.” Mark Ainsworth, 21, heard about the Human Zoo on the news.

“I’ve lived in this country for nine years and have never come to a zoo,” said Ainsworth. “This exhibit made us come to the zoo. Humans are animals too!” (no pagination)

These sentiments echo an older philosophy, one that dates back roughly 6000 years and comprises the ruling class religion of today. At the core of this religion is the concept of transformism, which espouses an occult belief in the inherent mutability of humanity. Freemasonry is one of many repositories for this religious tradition. In Masonluktan Esinlenmeler (translated Inspirations from Freemasonry), Master Mason Selami Isindag synopsizes this occult faith:

Masonry is not godless. But the concept of God they have adopted is different from that of religion. The god of Masonry is an exalted principle. It is at the apex of the evolution. By criticizing our inner being, knowing ourselves and deliberately walking in the path of science, intelligence and virtue, we can lessen the angle between him and us. Then, this god does not possess the good and bad characteristics of human beings. It is not personified. It is not thought of as the guide of nature or humanity. It is the architect of the great working of the universe, of its unity and harmony. It is the totality of all the creatures in the universe, a total power encompassing everything, an energy. Despite all this, it cannot be accepted that it is a beginning this is a great mystery. (73; emphasis added)

Thus, the occult religion is evolutionary in character. Darwinian evolution, which was promulgated vigorously by the early Masonic Royal Society, is but one more incarnation of the elite’s doctrine of transformism. Later, Isindag presents the following portrait of man:

From the point of view of evolution, human beings are no different from animals. For the formation of man and his evolution there are no special forces other than those to which animals are subjected. (137)

This is the exact same Weltanschauung being semiotically communicated by the “human” exhibit at the London Zoo. Polly Willis, a spokesperson for the zoo, candidly admitted that this was the intended psychological effect: “Seeing people in a different environment, among other animals … teaches members of the public that the human is just another primate” (Vinograd, no pagination). The London Zoo’s bestial exhibit represents one more volley in an ongoing Weltanschauungskrieg. It constitutes a semiotic inculcation of the public into the ruling class religion. A core precept of this religion is the contention that man is nothing more than animal.

This is, by no means, the first time human beings have been caged to promote an oligarchical agenda. George Herbert (“Bert”) Walker, great grandfather of President George W. Bush, hosted a similar event. Webster Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin recount the details surrounding Bert’s “Human Zoo”:

Back in 1904, Bert Walker, David Francis, Washington University President Robert Brookings and their banker/broker circle had organized a world’s fair in St. Louis, the Louisiana Purchase Exposition. In line with the old Southern Confederacy family backgrounds of many of these sponsors, the fair featured a “Human Zoo”: live natives from backward jungle regions were exhibited in special cages under the supervision of anthropologist William J. McGee. (19)

Like Bert Walker’s “Human Zoo” of 1904, the recent exhibit at the London Zoo is an outward expression of the power elite’s supremacy doctrine. It originated with the occult pantheism of the ancient Mystery Religions and was scientifically dignified by racialist ideologue Charles Darwin. While this supremacy doctrine was initially racialist in character, it has expanded its bestial view of man to encompass all those outside the power elite’s insular clique.

Race: The New Class Distinction

Accompanying the view of man as an animal is the advocacy of a hierarchical society. A central feature of Darwin’s evolutionary theory is natural selection. Ian Taylor observes that “the political doctrine implied by natural selection is elitist, and the principle derived according to Haeckel is ‘aristocratic in the strictest sense of the word'” (411). The caste system of such a political doctrine is racial and the criterion for superiority is arbitrarily determined by whatever race happens to hold socioeconomic primacy. It is this instance, it was the Anglo-Saxon who represented racial perfection. This remained consistent with the racialist doctrine of Freemasonry. This doctrine was thoroughly delineated in the September 1950 issue of New Age Magazine, the official journal of the Supreme Council, 33rd Degree Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. The author of the article, C. William Smith, opines:

Looking back into history, we can easily see that the Guiding Hand of Providence has chosen the Nordic people to bring in and unfold the new order of the world. Records clearly show that 95 percent of the colonials were Nordics… Anglo-Saxons. Providence has chosen the Nordic race to unfold the “New Age” of the world… a “Novus Ordo Seclorum.” (551)

T.H. Huxley, Darwin’s official spokesman, was a member of the Masonic Lodge and Alfred Milner’s Round Table Group. Both of these organizations were Anglophilic in character and their racialist rhetoric found a voice in Darwin. Darwin’s emphasis upon race as an integral factor in humanity’s evolution is virtually undeniable. The full title of Darwin’s seminal tract on evolution was On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. This title prompts two disturbing questions. Exactly which race enjoys the “favour” of natural selection? More importantly, which race does not? In The Descent of Man, Darwin reveals natural selection’s “favoured race” and the unfortunate people destined for extinction:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphic apes… will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. (178)

Widespread promulgation of this racist philosophy was made possible by the media circus of the Scopes Monkey Trial. John Scopes, who violated Tennessee’s ban on the teaching of evolution, taught from a book entitled A Civic Biology Presented in Problems. Authored by George William Hunter, the book presented the following racialist contention:

At the present time there exist upon the earth five races or varieties of man, each very different from the other in instincts, social customs, and, to an extent, in structure. These are the Ethiopian or negro type, originating in Africa; the Malay or brown race, from the islands of the Pacific; The American Indian; the Mongolian or yellow race, including the natives of China, Japan, and the Eskimos; and finally, the highest type of all, the caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America. (196)

With this supremacy doctrine effectively enshrined in academic institutions, the new class distinction of race attained a semblance of scientific credibility. This mentality would contribute to the power elite’s efforts to erect a scientific dictatorship in the West. Fragmented by racial discord, the American people were incapable of mobilizing against their true enemy… the ruling class. Meanwhile, the growing “break between man and his nearest allies” mentioned by Darwin was actually a widening chasm between the oligarchs and the common man. In reality, the “anthropomorphic apes” were all those with the misfortune of not inhabiting the same layer of socioeconomic stratum as the ruling class.

Pax Britannia: An Anglophile’s Scientific Dictatorship

It seems very appropriate for such a bestial Weltanschauung to be promulgated in London. The British Isles was the very birthplace of Darwinism. It was also the crucible of an Anglophile scientific dictatorship known as Pax Britannia. As was the case with communism and fascism, the background of this scientific dictatorship was steeped in Freemasonry and its occult doctrine of evolution. In 1870, John Ruskin “hit Oxford like an earthquake,” proselytizing students in the imperialistic gospel of the British Empire (Quigley 130). In Tragedy and Hope, Dr. Carroll Quigley provides a brief summation of this gospel:

Ruskin spoke to the Oxford undergraduates as members of the privileged ruling class. He told them that they were possessors of a magnificent tradition of education, beauty, rule of law, freedom, decency, and self-discipline, but that this tradition could not be saved, and did not deserve to be saved, unless it could be extended to the lower classes in England itself and to the non-English masses throughout the world. If this precious tradition were not extended to these two great majorities, the minority of upper class Englishmen would ultimately be submerged by these majorities and the tradition lost. To prevent this, the tradition must be extended to the masses and to the Empire. (130)

Among one of the undergraduates who wholeheartedly embraced this message was Cecil Rhodes, who would keep his longhand copy of Ruskin’s inaugural lecture for thirty years (Quigley 130-31). However, while this message comprised the nucleus of Rhodes’ Weltanschauung, there were two other significant belief systems that would shape Cecil’s vision: Freemasonry and Darwinism. Having already established the Masonic origins of Darwinism, it comes as little surprise that the two would find an intersection within the man of Cecil Rhodes. Indeed, Freemasonry and Darwinism are natural correlatives. The two seem to be inextricably linked. Where one goes, the other seems to invariably follow.

In June 1877, Rhodes became a life member of Freemasonry’s Apollo Chapter at Oxford University (Rotberg 90). There have been questions of whether or not Rhodes regarded his membership in the Lodge as a “serious venture” (Rotberg 90). Author Robert Rotberg elaborates:

At a banquet marking his induction, the story goes, he became angry at some criticism and, not untypically, shocked the assembled brethren of the Order by babbling away about the mystic cult secrets of the 33rd Degree Rite into which he had been admitted. (90)

Indeed, Rhodes candidly admitted his derision for a group devoted “to what at times appear the most ridiculous and absurd rites without an object and without an end” (qutd. in Rotberg 90). However, despite disagreements with the organization, exposure to the Lodge “presumably helped shape Rhodes’ ‘Confession of Faith,’ the later wills, and the protean thinking which led ultimately to the scholarships” (91). Rhodes’ “Confession of Faith” articulated his vision for a British world government or, as it has been called in more Anglophilic language, a Pax Britannia.

Predictably, the Freemasonic influence on Rhodes was accompanied by its natural correlative: Darwinism. The primary transmitter of Darwinian thought to Rhodes was William Windwood Reade, author of The Martyrdom of Man. Rotberg explains:

William Windwood Reade, the then-obscure British Darwinian, influenced Rhodes’ search for understanding. An unsuccessful novelist, Reade visited West Africa twice in the 1860s, the second time while Rhodes was in Natal, and published The Martyrdom of Man in 1872. Begun as an attempt to revise England’s accepted and critical view of the contribution of Africans to human civilization, The Martyrdom became a universal history of mankind, with long sections on Rhodes’ favorite mysteries: ancient Egypt, Rome, Carthage, Arab Islam, and early Christianity. The Martyrdom consisted of the kind of late nineteenth-century pseudo-science that appealed to Rhodes. It was larded with philosophically impressive arguments about the true “meaning” of man based on the post-Hegelian as well as neo-Darwinian notion that man’s suffering on earth (his martyrdom) was essential (and quasi-divinely inspired) in the achievement of progress. Man was perfectable, but only by toil. He could not be saved, nor would his rewards be heavenly, for Reade was a pre-Tillichean Gnostic who believed in God’s existence but, at the same time, not in deism and certainly not in the accessibility of an anthropomorphic Christian God. The rewards of man were in continuing and improving the human race. “To develop to the utmost our genius and our love, that is the only true religion,” wrote Reade. Reade was Rhodes’ Ayn Rand or Antoine Saint Exupery. Or perhaps his Jules Verne, too, for Reade prophesied a locomotive force more powerful than steam, the manufacture of flesh and flour chemically, travel through space, and the discovery by science of a destructive force which would be so horrible as to end all wars. Rhodes read Reade only shortly after its publication and later said that it was a “creepy book.” He also said, mysteriously, that it had “made me what I am.” (99-100)

The impact of Reade’s work on Rhodes was unmistakable. Inspired by Freemasonry and the theistic Darwinism of Reade, Rhodes began the construction of his Anglophile scientific dictatorship. Rhodes established his scientific dictatorship in South Africa, where he monopolized the diamond fields through DeBeers Consolidated Mines (Quigley 130-31). Instrumental in the formation of this diamond cartel were Lord Rothschild and Alfred Beit, who provided Rhodes with financial support (Quigley 130-31). Yet, the borders of Rhodes’ African empire did not end there. Cecil also:

rose to be prime minister of the Cape Colony (1890-1896), contributed money to political parties, controlled parliamentary seats both in England and South Africa, and sought to win a strip of British territory across Africa from the Cape of Good Hope to Egypt and to join these two extremes together with a telegraph line and ultimately with a Cape-to-Cairo Railway.(Quigley 130-31)

Meanwhile, fettered by colonial slavery and cloistered in abject poverty, native Africans lived under the yolk of this Anglophile “scientific dictatorship.” Of course, according to the Darwinian doctrine of Pax Britannia, this was the natural order of things. After all, in the evolutionary ladder, the Negro occupied a lower rung than did the Caucasian.

Peters’ “Warrior”: The New Anthropomorphic Ape

In Evolution and Ethics, Darwinian Arthur 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” (Evolution and Ethics, 230). As was previously established in this article, the evolutionary Weltanschauung infers a hierarchical societal framework. Such was the case with the scientific dictatorship of Nazi Germany. In Hitler Speaks, the Fuehrer claimed that mankind was evolving into two distinct forms: “I might call the two varieties the god-man and the mass animal… Man is becoming God–that is the simple fact. Man is God in the making” (qutd. in Keith, Casebook on Alternative Three, 151). In hopes of eugenically regulating the population of the “mass animals,” the national security apparatus of Nazi Germany turned in on its own people.

Likewise, the ruling class of today, which wield substantial control over the military establishment, are employing state machinations in a war against those they consider “mass animals.” An article in Parameters Magazine, the official publication of the Army War College, most painfully illustrates this reality. The article is entitled “The New Warrior Class” and is authored by Ralph Peters, a particularly smug Army Major with a penchant for unabashedly elitist rhetoric.

Peters begins the tract with the following remarks:

The soldiers of the United States Army are brilliantly prepared to defeat other soldiers. Unfortunately, the enemies we are likely to face through the rest of this decade and beyond will not be “soldiers,” with the disciplined modernity that term conveys in Euro-America, but “warriors”–erratic primitives of shifting allegiance, habituated to violence, with no stake in civil order. Unlike soldiers, warriors do not play by our rules, do not respect treaties, and do not obey orders they do not like. Warriors have always been around, but with the rise of professional soldieries their importance was eclipsed. Now, thanks to a unique confluence of breaking empire, overcultivated Western consciences, and a worldwide cultural crisis, the warrior is back, as brutal as ever and distinctly better-armed. (no pagination)

Who are the “erratic primitives” that constitute the “new warrior class?” Peters states: “Most warriors emerge from four social pools which exist in some form in all significant cultures” (no pagination). He proceeds to enumerate the four social pools and their respective warrior offspring:

First-pool warriors come, as they always have, from the underclass (although their leaders often have fallen from the upper registers of society). The archetype of the new warrior class is a male who has no stake in peace, a loser with little education, no legal earning power, no abiding attractiveness to women, and no future. With gun in hand and the spittle of nationalist ideology dripping from his mouth, today’s warrior murders those who once slighted him, seizes the women who avoided him, and plunders that which he would never otherwise have possessed. (no pagination)

In other words, the “first-pool” of “erratic primitives” is composed of unattractive and patriotic males who suffer the misfortune of occupying a lower layer of socioeconomic stratum. Bear in mind, Peters is serious. Inherent in such a contention is credence to the Darwinian concept of sexual selection. Like male birds that must flaunt their plumage in order to sexually attract potential mates, men must now meet a demanding aesthetic criteria or be deemed unfit to breed. Men who take issue with such a shallow criteria are summarily deemed a “threat” to be expunged through force. Also inherent in this contention is credence to the Malthusian economics of Herbert Spencer. Lower income means a lower form of life and, thus, relegates one to the category of “worthless eater.” Finally, Peters’ disdain for the “spittle of nationalist ideology” echoes the globalist sentiments of the power elite.

Peters identifies the “second pool warriors” as:

…society’s preparatory structures such as schools, formal worship systems, communities, and families are disrupted, young males who might otherwise have led productive lives are drawn into the warrior milieu. These form a second pool. For these boys and young men, deprived of education and orientation, the company of warriors provides a powerful behavioral framework. (no pagination)

These younger “anthropomorphic apes” are potential recruits for the “warriors.” They, too, must be expunged. Reiterating his globalist contentions, Peters proceeds to identify patriots as the next class of “warrior”:

The third pool of warriordom consists of the patriots. These may be men who fight out of strong belief, either in ethnic, religious, or national superiority or endangerment, or those who have suffered a personal loss in the course of a conflict that motivates them to take up arms. (no pagination)

This particular variety of “anthropomorphic ape” would probably oppose the amalgamation of its respective nation-state into a global government. Therefore, it must be eradicated as well. Finally, Peters reveals the fourth “pool” of “mass animals”:

Dispossessed, cashiered, or otherwise failed military men form the fourth and most dangerous pool of warriors. Officers, NCOs, or just charismatic privates who could not function in a traditional military environment, these men bring other warriors the rudiments of the military art–just enough to inspire faith and encourage folly in many cases, although the fittest of these men become the warrior chieftains or warlords with whom we must finally cope. (no pagination)

These soldiers of the “obsolete military paradigm” have no place in the new society. The duty of the new soldier no longer involves the protection of nation, family, or the traditional way of life. Now, the new soldier’s duty is to impose the will of the elite upon the “mass animals.” Gestapo officer Werner Best most succinctly voiced this mandate: “As long as the police carries out the will of the leadership, it is acting legally” (Shirer 271). This is the philosophy that is now being promulgated within our own armed services.

The Enlarging Cage

With the opening of the London Zoo’s “human” exhibit, the masses have been further psychologically conditioned to accept the view of man as an animal. As this view becomes more entrenched in the public mind, so does the feasibility of a stratified society governed by a technocratic elite. The cage in which humans were so casually displayed at the London Zoo semiotically gesticulates towards a larger enclosure. That enclosure is global in scope, encompassing the entire world. The “mass animals,” “erratic primitives,” “warriors,” and “anthropomorphic apes” that it was built to hold are you and I.

There have been various appellations applied to the common man by the power elite. While Darwin invoked the label of “anthropomorphic ape,” the actual derogation he had in mind was even less attractive. It is an ugly word that has poured forth from the lips of racists for years. Although it was once bestowed exclusively upon people of African ancestry, the title has been expanding its borders to include larger portions of the human race. Researcher and PBS journalist Tony Brown comments on the growing elasticity of this obscene racial derogation:

The new world in which the only color of freedom is green demands a new “nigger.” New conditions dictate that the new class of niggers cannot be race based. You are now a nigger when you don’t know that you are being robbed of your money and your freedom. Niggers get no respect, die in wars so other people can profit (the Vietnam War produced an $80 billion profit for the companies that sold products to the military), and their human rights confiscated on a daily basis and their property taken from them by the statists every April 15. (156)

In the New World Order, you and I qualify as “niggers.” The “masters” occupy corporate boardrooms and regal offices. As their supremacy doctrine metastasizes and subsumes our thoughts, their yoke weighs heavier upon our shoulders. According to their elitist Weltanschauung, we are all “anthropomorphic apes” to be domesticated.

Sources Cited

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
.