He has also written a paper on the subject: “Kabbalah and Freemasonry” by W. Kirk MacNulty, 32°
The means [toward utopia] - dictatorship of the proletariat, hidden or open rule of the technocrat, the cultural engineer, the planner, Robert Owen, H. G. Wells, Etienne Cabet, B. F. Skinner - is often, indeed usually, quite definitely the work of an elite.
by Phillip D. Collins ©, Aug. 29th, 2005
In the previous installment in this series, we established the centrality of war to the elite’s occult doctrine of transformism. This occult doctrine has presented itself under numerous appellations, but its core theme has remained the same: humanity is gradually evolving towards apotheosis. The most recent incarnation of this doctrine is Darwinism, which depicts life as an enormous struggle to survive. On the microcosmic level, this struggle is bodied forth by the competition between species. On a macrocosmic level, this struggle manifests itself as war between nations. In hopes of facilitating the purported evolutionary ascent of man, the power elite has instigated war after war. In this installment, we shall examine how the ruling class manufactured World War I.
Europe’s Descent into War
In a 1982 interview, Reece Committee staff director Norman Dodd discussed startling revelations made during the minutes of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace:
by Erik G. Magro ©, Aug. 16th, 2005
The Victorian Age in England was a time of dramatic changes, new inventions, the Industrial Revolution, and an introduction to new ideologies, all of which would transform the way significant portions of society lived and thought of life forever. The overwhelming external changes in daily life during this period would match in intensity the nature of changes happening in the internal lives of the public. Charles Darwin, as a naturalist, helped usher in this change after a long voyage to the South Seas where he observed several widely unknown species. In 1859, a year after his return, he presented his observations in a book, The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. In it he deduced from their widely diverse natures a common thread that linked all species to a single ancestor; the Theory of Evolution as he called the phenomenon soon became a household word and stirred up massive controversy and debate, still resounding today. The implications of Darwin’s theory created a deep divide in culture, a conflict of natural versus supernatural order. Not only did it offer an alternate account of the genesis of life from the Old Testament, but it also gave a sense of moral freedom from the divine Creator and His judgment; it became a cause unto itself in society among leaders in political and industrial circles, effecting science and academia. Darwinism, as the collection of theories was called, changed the course of man’s history forever.
In the immediate aftermath of unleashing the evolution theory to the public, the common man was faced with a choice of how to look at life and live it. Among those exposed to these choices were some of the most important men in the business community, men who could, with their influence of wealth and power, determine the lifestyles of the middle class population by means of their product prices, work policies, and wages in the factories they owned. A staunch supporter of evolution, Herbert Spencer, developed the social application of Darwinism, which was highly influential on the practices of such powerful moguls. The ideology was known as Social Darwinism and made use of the models Darwin used to describe evolution in nature, namely, survival of the fittest and natural selection. These orders of development were the philosophical basis that publicly justified the methods factory owners were already applying in their businesses to stay competitive. As leaders of industry, they believed they had the right to impose whatever treatment they saw fit for those below them on the social ladder.
Media Roots presents American Anthrax, a documentary comprised of news footage that establishes, by history’s own narration, how everything you’ve been told about the Anthrax Attacks is a lie. Conceptualized, edited and produced by Robbie Martin, co-host of Media Roots Radio.
by Erik G. Magro ©, Aug. 16th, 2005
On July 26, 1894 in Surrey, England, Aldous Leonard Huxley was born into a well-established, prominent family with a rich history of distinguished intellectuals on both sides who were highly esteemed among the English aristocracy. His father was Dr. Leonard Huxley, the venerated scientist and writer, and his grandfather, Thomas Henry Huxley, was the famously outspoken biologist who helped develop the theory of evolution alongside Charles Darwin. Huxley’s brother, Sir Julian Huxley, was also a distinguished biologist and eugenics advocate who would go on to charter and become the first Director-General of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); his unique position in the world council helped provide Huxley with priceless insight for many literary works (Martin). At sixteen, Huxley nearly went blind due to an eye illness that altered his path in life from a scientist to a writer. His literary career began at Oxford where he met writers like Lytton Strachey and Bertrand Russell and had a relationship with D. H. Lawrence. He published his first book in 1916, The Burning Wheel; a collection of poems followed by three more poem anthologies (Pradas). In his twenties, Huxley wrote for a series of magazines, namely, Athenaeum, House and Garden, and Vogue, but he would gain notoriety for his novels during this time. In 1921, Crome Yellow, was published followed by two comedies, Antic Hay (1923) and Those Barren Leaves (1925), which would earn him acclaim from critics for the important social issues he raised. Proceeding works include essays examining philosophical and cultural issues and novels reflecting his background influences in science. His personal best-selling novel was Point Counter Point (1928), but his highest literary achievement is the visionary future look at a spiritually bereft society in a one-world technocratic state in his classic novel, Brave New World (1932).
First Published at ConspiracyArchive.com on Aug. 5th, 2005 [Part Two Here]
A Metaprogrammer at the Door of Chapel Perilous
In the literature that concerns the Illuminati relentless speculation abounds. No other secret society in recent history – with the exception of Freemasonry – has generated as much legend, hysteria, and disinformation. I first became aware of the the Illuminati about 14 years ago. Shortly thereafter I read a book, written by Robert Anton Wilson, called Cosmic Trigger: Final Secret of the Illuminati. Wilson published it in 1977 but his opening remarks on the subject still ring true today:
Briefly, the background of the Bavarian Illuminati puzzle is this. On May 1, 1776, in Bavaria, Dr. Adam Weishaupt, a professor of Canon Law at Ingolstadt University and a former Jesuit, formed a secret society called the Order of the Illuminati within the existing Masonic lodges of Germany. Since Masonry is itself a secret society, the Illuminati was a secret society within a secret society, a mystery inside a mystery, so to say. In 1785 the Illuminati were suppressed by the Bavarian government for allegedly plotting to overthrow all the kings in Europe and the Pope to boot. This much is generally agreed upon by all historians.1 Everything else is a matter of heated, and sometimes fetid, controversy.
It has been claimed that Dr. Weishaupt was an atheist, a Cabalistic magician, a rationalist, a mystic; a democrat, a socialist, an anarchist, a fascist; a Machiavellian amoralist, an alchemist, a totalitarian and an “enthusiastic philanthropist.” (The last was the verdict of Thomas Jefferson, by the way.) The Illuminati have also been credited with managing the French and American revolutions behind the scenes, taking over the world, being the brains behind Communism, continuing underground up to the 1970s, secretly worshipping the Devil, and mopery with intent to gawk. Some claim that Weishaupt didn’t even invent the Illuminati, but only revived it. The Order of Illuminati has been traced back to the Knights Templar, to the Greek and Gnostic initiatory cults, to Egypt, even to Atlantis. The one safe generalization one can make is that Weishaupt’s intent to maintain secrecy has worked; no two students of Illuminology have ever agreed totally about what the “inner secret” or purpose of the Order actually was (or is . . .). There is endless room for spooky speculation, and for pedantic paranoia, once one really gets into the literature of the subject; and there has been a wave of sensational “ex-poses” of the Illuminati every generation since 1776. If you were to believe all this sensational literature, the damned Bavarian conspirators were responsible for everything wrong with the world, including the energy crises and the fact that you can’t even get a plumber on weekends. (pp. 3-4)
That short excerpt is perhaps the most honest and succinct introduction to the Illuminati as you’ll ever come across. So it is more than a bit ironic that Wilson, throughout the rest of the text, proceeds to perpetuate and expand upon similar myths, and in the process manages to take it to a whole new level.2 In the end, the Illuminati had mystified Wilson as much as anyone in the preceding centuries.
by Phillip D. Collins ©, July 25th, 2005
“A democracy which makes or even effectively prepares for modern, scientific war must necessarily cease to be democratic. No country can be really well prepared for modern war unless it is governed by a tyrant, at the head of a highly trained and perfectly obedient bureaucracy.”– Aldous Huxley
The Alchemy of Warfare
As I have established in previous articles, Darwinism was but one more permutation of an ancient occult doctrine of transformism. This occult belief originated in Mesopotamia roughly 6000 years ago and was actively promulgated by the various Mystery cults. It also comprises the ruling class religion of today. At the heart of the doctrine is the claim that man is gradually evolving towards apotheosis. Throughout the years, the religion of apotheosized man has recycled itself under numerous appellations. Darwinism was but one more installment in this seamless ideational continuum. In this series, I am going to examine one of the chief facilitators of man’s purported evolution: war.
In his book Evolution and Ethics, Darwinian Sir Arthur Keith wrote:
If war be the progeny of evolution–and I am convinced that it is–then evolution has “gone mad,” reaching such a height of ferocity as must frustrate its proper role in the world of life–which is the advancement of her competing “units”, these being tribes, nations, or races of mankind. There is no way of getting rid of war save one, and that is to rid human nature of the sanctions imposed on it by the law of evolution. Can man … render the law of evolution null and void? … I have discovered no way that is at once possible and practicable. (105)
by Phillip D. Collins ©, July 12th, 2005
I recently took a college course in the history of philosophy. The instructor, who happens to be an extremely intelligent woman, was going to examine Foucault. I was eager to study Foucault and seized the opportunity. His Marxist proclivities aside, Foucault’s views concerning the carceral system were certainly of merit and valuable to my research. Yet, there was another philosopher on the menu. In the halls of orthodox academia, his reputation precedes him. His name is Friedrich Nietzsche. I prepared myself for what was guaranteed to be yet another exercise in anti-Christian rhetoric.
Enraptured by his vitriolic hatred for Christianity and enshrinement of moral anarchism, academia has consistently defended Friedrich Nietzsche as one of history’s “misunderstood” philosophers. Cribbing from the standard litany of apologetics, many argue that Hitler somehow “misrepresented” or “distorted” Nietzsche’s ideas. Is this genuinely the case? Of course, during their migration from abstraction to tangible enactment, ideas can become contaminated by any number of factors. To be sure, internal contention amongst adherents, the personal idiosyncrasies of individual analysts, and the manifestly unpredictable nature of reality itself makes an idea’s journey towards tangible enactment very problematic.
Yet, was Nietzscheism’s journey toward tangible enactment so bastardized by Hitler that it was virtually unrecognizable? Was Nazism nothing like what Nietzsche had in the mind? Again, only an examination of the delicate segues between abstraction and tangible enactment can answer this question. In The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, William Shirer recounts Hitler’s frequent sojourns to the Nietzsche museum in Weimar (100). Commenting on Hitler’s veneration for Nietzsche, Shirer writes:
There was some ground for this appropriation of Nietzsche as one of the originators of the Nazi Weltanschauung. Had not the philosopher thundered against democracy and parliaments, preached the will to power, praised war and proclaimed the coming of the master race and the superman–and in the most telling aphorisms? (100)
This is an accurate portrayal.
What he doesn’t go into detail, however, is the fact that morality and virtue were catch words for the Enlightenment back in the 18th century. Adam Weishaupt of the Bavarian Illuminati, for instance, was obsessed with these concepts. A moral and virtuous man, according to the radical enlightenment philosophers, was one who had the intelligence and ability to successfully dispense with the old regime’s insistence upon revelation, superstition and tradition.
Karl Marx was the inevitable result.