March 9, 2014 (#1428)
"Cutting Through the Matrix" with Alan Watt
(Blurb, i.e. Educational Talk)
Poem Copyright Alan Watt March 9, 2014:
Inevitable Fate of Sanctioned Hate:
"Gowned Profs Sitting at the Plate,
Dishing Out to Soldiers Hate,
Hypocrisy, A One-Way Street,
Ensuring Disarmed Target's Defeat,
It's the Age of Conflict in Relations,
Of Authorized Funded Organizations,
Passive Sides Give No Opposition,
Attacked by Destroyers of Tradition,
Vanguard Leaders Howl and Leer,
On Payroll of the High Puppeteer,
Screaming Followers, Avant-Garde, Radical,
Funnelled by College into the Fanatical,
Fools Chant Nouveau Socialist Novenas,
Machiavelli-Created for Utopian Dreamers,
From Fringe of Battle, Emotive, Hectic,
Guided Symbiosis of the Dialectic,
Genderists' Cry of Freedom is Lame,
Demanding You as They Be the Same
New Puritans, All Drab like Ants,
Except Both Genders Wearing Pants,
God Help She of Feminine Beauty,
Tarred and Feathered, Hair Shorn Cruelly,
Self-Righteous Perpetrators of the Deed,
Ignorant of the Shadow Creed
Which Funds Them in this Mystic Dichotomy
Of Also Running, Promoting All Pornography,
Planned Synthesis Signed in Treaties Formal,
Where All Deviancy Declared New Normal,
C.G. Darwin's "Wild Men" Laugh at Pathos,
Toast Triumph of New Order Out of Chaos"
© Alan Watt March 9, 2014
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - March 9, 2014 (Exempting Music and Literary Quotes)
Hi folks, Iím Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix, in a blurb form of course, on March the 9th, 2014. Iíve mentioned many times in the past about the art of conology. Conology really is a science, a tremendous science on how to manage masses of people, not just individuals, by a form of mental trickery and linguistic trickery, etc. Plus the need of behaviorists and psychologists and anthropologists, even zoologists, all working together to find out what works with all animals, or higher mammals, which will obviously work with humans too. And unfortunately they do.
So itís well studied of course and all governments have been using experts in these fields, big batteries of experts all along to manage all of us. So do all the associate industries, or institutions as they like to call them, which are essential to governance, such as, not just the banking system but also the entertainment industry, the political industry. All these industries are institutions which we take for granted as being sort of independent and there to either benefit us or help us or even make us laugh. But they all work together, very much so. Thatís why youíll find all of these institutions get common money from the common people through taxations via the Pentagon or whatever it happens to be to make movies and so on. So the art is tremendous, tremendous, of managing millions and millions of people.
Now the United Nations of course, with all the treaties they sign too, and all their batteries of think tanks and experts and behaviorists and psychologists and neurologists and neuroscientists, etc., weíre all being managed perfectly well, with being nudged, or made to feel guilty about something we shouldnít be, all for big, big purposes which those who feel guilty donít even understand at times. Weíre being prompted and guided all along. Iíd love to spend hours and hours talking about just that aspect of it but along with this comes the agenda. Thereís only one agenda. Thereís only ever been one agenda for hundreds of years actually.
Iíve gone through the histories, for instance, of how the revolutions came along, especially the French Revolution is well noted because of the similarity of the later Communist or Soviet Revolution, the Bolshevik Revolution where basically an entire class of people were slaughtered. In fact, I think it was Trotsky who boasted about that, weíve eliminated a whole class of people, and of course they replaced it with their own; thatís what he was referring to. So revolutions are very, very important. And we are conditioned to think of bloody slaughters as revolutions. But most revolutions, as I say, are bloodless. They are social revolutions, cultural revolutions, which are well planned by the same techniques, often by the same think tanks behind them, the same money powers behind them to change our behavior and modify us all along the same paths of thinking in a form of political correctness or whatever it happens to be at that time.
Weíre lied to all the time naturally. Weíre lied to as children are lied to; in fact, itís the same technique. The noble lie is used, which means itís done for a good purpose. Thatís how the psychopaths can always rationalize whatever they do. It was for a good purposeÖ The victim is always blamed, you see, for the indoctrination theyíre getting. So thatís where we are today. We are wild animals supposedly. Weíre too stupid to think for ourselves and therefore an elite have to do all the thinking for us, because we canít be trusted to do the right thing. In fact, pretty well, Sunstein himself, one of the science czars in the US, said that in one of his own books, that the people canít be trusted to make the right decisions, so he put out the book called Nudge. Heís put out other ones too. Very, very shallow books because they donít want the public knowing the real in-depth science of mass management of your minds.
The revolutions of course were to also alter the society of their day into a common guidance, into a new system where they would, again, be conditioned, partly through fear and terror Ė which is the reign of terror they always have. And with the bloodless revolutions thereís always the threat eventually, if you donít conform to the political correctness, of even imprisonment, you know. First itís, you canít say this or even ask a question, and then it comes down to mass condemnation as the public themselves are trained to turn against you in a Pavlovian style. Itís a very simple technique to do. Iíve gone through it all before in talks and itís been well copied by many talkshow hosts; which is good, itís got it across the world, on how behaviorism is so well understood by those at the top, and conditioning processes as well.
Because the guys, two guys in fact that I mentioned years ago, who the United Nations World Health Organization employed to start the antismoking campaign, said that they would create social disapproval and they would start in the schools, and theyíd also have mass advertising campaigns on television as well. Plus they would get their massive lobbying groups to lobby governments to sign treaties into law so that every year theyíd up the antismoking laws, you canít smoke here, you canít smoke there, etc. etc. etc. Until youíll be in your own little pad, your own little room or house or whatever, and eventually you canít smoke there either. And if you smoke outside, they conditioned people years ago to start coughing when they saw you with a cigarette 50 yards away basically; thatís how they conditioned the children. Social disapproval coupled with Pavlovian training, you see, it works very, very well. And it has worked very well. So well in fact that the two guys who were employed to do that said a few years ago that they planned to be using this in other spheres of society for training the public on other ways of social approval and disapproval.
So when you think your opinions are yours, theyíre not yours at all. Iíve mentioned this many, many times. You go along with the herd, the common herd. Itís taboo actually to think really as an individual and youíre not allowed to have your own opinions, really, unless you just keep them to yourself in your own thoughts. Outside your thoughts then the crowd will, just like that movie, that strange movie they put out years ago, about the people who turned into pods, these aliens copied them and you saw them all turning and pointing to the ones who were still original people, and making strange sounds but all pointing to you. Well thatís how they condition the public, if you donít go along with something thatís politically correct and you donít parrot the PC terminology and phrases that they give you to parrot.
Most folk want to belong to their peer group. They donít want to risk dissension. They donít want finger-pointing. They want to be included in the group, not excluded in the group. So just like The Body Snatchers, I think it was called, thatís how theyíve conditioned the general public. Itís really taught initially in school, through groupthink, where everyone must eventually agree on the same outcome of any particular topic given to them, guided by the teacher naturally, or you get socially excluded.
In many talks in the past Iíve mentioned about how youíre trained to join groups, especially through university and college. Youíll find a lot of people go into what they think are radical groups, especially if they want to be avant-garde they join the radical group, you see, the cutting edge, for change. Itís drummed into them by the selected professors in the social sciences, who are put there for that very purpose in fact, and they churn them out. So they come out with these causes, you see, across the world; theyíre all standardized, you see. And it never dawns on those who are being used, why would the system be approving turning out what you would claim is a radical, you see? If youíre so radical and the system has approved you, you canít be radical at all, in a sense, otherwise youíd be fighting the system, the very people who put you out there and gave you good marks in all your different areas that you were studying, including revolutions and changing society and culture and everything else. These are approved objectives by those at the top. Theyíre all approved, you see. So youíre being used by someone for a purpose you donít understand... you donít understand. Not only that, youíre not going to be very happy because youíre going to go through life with a chip on your shoulder. Youíve been given the chip and you like it now. You will get certain friends of the same ilk all radically pushing towards what they think is some kind of fairness or justice or whatever, without asking, why is this being pushed by the system at the top? Who benefits from this ultimately?
You find that they all tie in with the same old revolutionary causes that have been going on for hundreds of years. Do you really think that an establishment, thatís all powerful Ė which it is by the way, only because we accept it as it is, and we are conned so well, and trained to accept it. Do you really think they would risk anything that wasnít in their particular interest? Do you?† Iíve gone through HG Wellsís stuff and many other propagandists for this particular institution that seems to be behind most of it, at least the coordination of it, and you find that he said that, the destruction of the family unit was of prime importanceÖ prime importance. It was the last vestige of a tribe, and a tribe will stand up for each other if theyíre attacked by any authority. It would be much easier, said Wells, when the government can speak right down to you, directly, as an individual and thereís no one, thereís no family to stand up for you, no tribe, no cousins or anything else. All those links are broken and youíre on your own. Itís far, far easier isnít it?
Today of course weíre all sitting... most folk watch TV, many on their own, or theyíre completely absorbed in their electronic gadgets, that are given, which monitor them and profile them constantly with any change in their personalities or interests. They know everything about you. Even the radicals are stamped as being safe, because they know exactly what they are and they are doing the approved things. Most folk never figure this out. Even when youíre looking to protest something, even against radicals, there are ready-made groups for you to join, which never get anywhere, never seem to get anywhere either, you go around in circles. If you start them yourself from the grassroots they will be infiltrated so quickly with people who come in, very nice and sociable Ė theyíre psychopaths actually, trained by government, they have thousands of them; because this is nothing new, even long before the Internet they were doing this kind of thing Ė and they will cause disruption eventually. Before you know it youíll be either falling apart, breaking up, or else theyíll have you turned 180 degrees until youíre championing ďsave mother earthĒ or something. This actually happened, I know this, to a couple of big groups.
So everything is taken care of, naturally. Power doesnít let itself be attacked. Power doesnít even let itself get attacked in the future. They act now and they nip things in the bud before anything can get off the ground that could be of any nuisance to them in any possible way. There are ready-made groups for you to join. Ready-made, tailor-made and you walk in and thereís a suit there to suit you, it will fit you, you can slip right into it. Your doctrine is all set out for you, your catchphrases, your slogans, all these things are made for you and youíll know the ropes. If youíre a good psychopath you can do well in these organizations because youíll learn all the slogans. Youíll have no problem about having to adopt a whole bunch of things you donít agree with to get the one thing you agree with through. Because thatís how they work in, say, the far left wing.
Itís actually impossible for a normal person to be for every single thing in a doctrine. So when you hear it all spouted then you know for a fact this is scientifically designed, run by a much higher authority than you think. And those who go along with it, believe you me, will be ruthless, utterly ruthless. If thereís any point, or any networking for instance, with any weird group thatís out there, or another weird group that they donít agree with, you will be out. Theyíre ruthless. And sometimes, like we saw in the Soviet system, if they come to power they are bloodthirsty, I mean ruthlessly bloodthirsty. Donít forget that ever.
So when you see a religious type belief to a political cause, like the far-far left, then youíre dealing with the same thing over and over again. But itís authorized from the top, what you think is probably the capitalist system. Because we know the capitalist system, the ones who rule all of that Ė and they have rulers by the way Ė gave you the communist system, the dialectic, to get a better society they can control, you know, under the fake guise of a one for all and all for one idea, this socialism they like to call it today. Itís the same system. The same system. Itís the reemergence of the Soviet system but itís actually the more improved, advanced Soviet merged with the West completely. Massive management by government agencies and authorities right down to the individual, right down to the birth of the child actually with its advocate given to them by the state in some countries like Scotland and England and Wales and other European countries, to make sure as that child is growing up they can constantly give them psychological tests, lots of chats with them, and readjust them. Adjust them if they have any self-thoughts, as Orwell would say, own-thoughts. If they donít just spout slogans and are happy with everything around them, then theyíll be adjusted, and medicated too no doubt as well.
This is an old idea. Itís happening today, as we live through it. Iíve always said, when you have the old agenda you donít have to toss it out the window because they had the whole future planned in the old agenda. And itís a long-term agenda. Most men, rememberÖ Men are short-term planners and thinkers. Women are much longer term planners... longer, way, way, way further than the guys. The guys like to plan things and build it right away. Women can work on something for a long time in the future. So the feminine technique was copied and used by those at the top. Theyíve studied us, as I say, for eons for goodness sake, and thatís awfully good. INTERGENERATIONAL changes, the Fabian technique is the best. And by using wars and various crises, because weíre ruled by crisis and worry, naturally. The threat of a war, real, cold or terroristic, or economical crashes, whatever it happens to be, keeping you in a state of fear and terror gives government more power, you see, through the appearance of all these crises, which mainly are bogus and fake.
Remember too, that the bulk of the population governing all of us, and thereís an awful lot of them today, and lots and lots of bureaucrats, millions of bureaucrats, and their families too, all getting awfully well looked after by the state. It all comes from you at the bottom. They donít want to toss it out the window. If they get rid of all of you, I mean where are their paychecks going to come from? Theyíre living higher off the hog than you are. They have way more benefits than youíll ever have, they call them privileges, because theyíre working for government. But all wealth comes from labor. All wealth comes from the bottom. So you are basically their food supply. And their lifestyle supply. And they have trained you to live lower than they do, even though they call themselves servants, public servants. So conology, remember, uses a lot of trickery through words and word associations, etc. etc.
But getting back to the groups... You think of all the different groups out there, and sometimes I get asked to speak at different groups, with their own particular cause. Thatís all they see is their own particular cause, generally straight out of university and theyíve been given their cause by the professors. So theyíve stuck, okay this is going to be my cause for life and so on and so on. They think theyíre radical, as I say, but theyíre approved. And what youíll find with most of these groups is, again, to destroy the old system, which they see as the old system of traditionalism, of any kind at all, any kind whatsoever, traditional. Theyíre all for government intervention into peopleís mindsets, childrenís mindsets, through different techniques. Theyíre very angry with any opposition whatsoever, I mean furiously angry. Furiously, as I say, itís always on the edge of the mass slaughter techniques that the Bolsheviks used. And never ever forget that. But itís approved by government. In fact, many of them get government grants to exist. Their meeting houses are often paid for. Their leaders are tax exempt, often, foundations; thatís what they come from. And government is quite happy with them. So they are working for government whether they know it or not, and a big agenda, a world agenda, which they think they understand but they donít in actual fact.
Now, radical people like that, what they want, what they really want is not freedom for people at all. Itís the opposite. Now, logic must be used in philosophy for instance, and reason. Logic and reason. Something which is logic and reason, using those techniques, must be consistent. It must be. So if theyíre really pushing for freedom theyíd have to accept that other people see freedom in a different light than they do. But they donít. The radicals donít see that. They hate anybody with any differing opinions. Under the guise of liberalism, for instance, they are the most intolerant people of all. Completely. They wonít stand for any alternate opinion. So how can they spout on about freedom? They want to destroy their enemies and eliminate enemies. Some people belonged to radical, what they callÖ what they call radical, and thatís such a joke. As I say, if itís authorized from university, how can it be radical? Do you think government wouldnít step in if it was any kind of threat whatsoever to a system that they run? Do you really think so? Of course they wouldnít. But it benefits somebody and itís not the ones pushing it.
But supposing you went into radical feminism, and youíve been filled with hatred by giving partial stories, selective stories, throughout your histories etc.; thatís how itís done, not all inclusive. And lots of these women think that every guy in the past went off to the pub every day and lived a life of luxury, dressed in lace and silk stockings and three-cornered hats. And nothing was further from the truth. Because up until really, really up until the 20th century, in lots of European countries, most folk were still regarded as serfs. And serfs really had no rights or property or anything else. And the guys died early because of the workload. And their diets were terrible for themselves and their families. They couldnít afford proper protein and so on; they were stunted growth. They did not have a life of luxury at all. Itís complete fiction.
You ever wondered that thereís no movies made about peasants, anywhere? Histories are always about the famous and those who are dressed in lace and all the rest of it. This is what history is about. You donít count, the proles donít count. They never have counted. Even today they donít; the proles donít count, you see, as Orwell said. But when youíre teaching people to be radical you give them a completely fake view of history, you see. And the radicals, what they really want is to impose their will and have their system imposed on everybody else, without exception... without exception. Theyíre not for freedom at all. They canít coexist with any alternate way, just their way. Thatís the truth of it, you see.
So youíre not using logic or reason here. If you were, just be radical and say, yeah we canít exist with you here. Donít go off using freedom and blah-blah-blah-blah-blah, freedom for all. And donít go off into being offended. If you want to be offended about anything, well, let all of your opponents, that you see as opponents, use the same techniques on you, and they can be offended at whatever youíre doing. Quite simple. If youíre all for freedom and equality then let it be across the whole board. But they wonít, you see. They wonít.
I think Albert Pike mentioned that too, and Mazzini did as well, that they would eventually unleashÖ eventually unleash the radicals and the atheists, the nihilists and the atheists, to accomplish the rest of the work, which really was to be fairly, fairly bloodless, mainly, again, through social changes, cultural changes and so on. Thatís where we are today as theyíre all being used. Theyíre all being used.
At the very, very top of course, the same guys who run the international corporations arenít bothered by them at all. They actually donate money to a lot of these groups, and the environmentalists and all the rest of it. Because they want laws passed, which are never what you think they are. Youíre not going to have the time to read through 10,000, 20,000 pages for a law. But their lawyers can do it all. And they benefit from all the laws that get passed, that restrict everybody else from living and by their own means at all, right down to a common person, until eventually they canít even collect firewood anymore to heat themselves. Theyíve got to be made totally dependent on a system for everything they need to live for. And the far lefties are all for that too, you see.
Itís wonderful how things really are. I mean, I think itís fascinating, really. So I tell people, never follow leaders because the big boys will train them, give them fantastic training, set them up to be your leaders, before they make the move where that leader is even necessary to appear, rather than let your own leaders pop out of nowhere from the grassroots that they canít control. Thatís standard technique. Standard, standard, standard, you see. But people never catch on.
Selected political leaders are put out there of course to carefully use these ready-made groups, authorized by the system, for ends, again, for their own ends naturally, but also for the new system. The same system is the new system; the new system has the same boys running it as they always did. Big power elites, etc., megacorporations, the ultra-ultra-ultra rich, and you think theyíre going to let you destroy their system? Of course theyíre not. But youíre certainly getting used to destroy all the rest of the people who maybe are against parts of the system. So youíll neutralize them. And youíll also divert them off having to oppose you, as you try to destroy their way of life for whatever it happens to be. Quite simple, isnít it? Very old technique and it works every time. Because people are emotive creatures as opposed to reasoning creatures, you see. Thatís why itís always emotive topics that they hit you with.
Now, those who do the reasoning, such as, say, Charles Galton Darwin... very interesting group of people, the Darwins. Because theyíre also intermarried with the Huxleys, if you go into their genealogies. Sir Thomas Huxley was the champion of Darwinism when Darwin died. He was the best pal of Darwin. He was called Darwinís bulldog. So intergenerationally these families, they classify themselves as the scientific elite working with the super-rich elite. They constantly, down through the generations, work on the same topics, same agendas, etc. Itís very interesting. Interesting too, when you go into the history of the Darwins and you find that from Charles onward they were completely intermarried for generations with one family. They were already selectively breeding with the Wedgwood family. The Wedgwood family also includes the Benn, Tony Wedgwood Benn, a politician in Britain. I think his daughterís taken over from him; and theyíre pushing the same agendas, what appears to be the far left causes, you see. But itís not really far left. Itís complete socialistic control of every individual in society; thatís what it really is. And it appears to be the same as communism.
Thatís why professor Carroll Quigley, who was all for this, who worked for the Council on Foreign Relations, also called the Royal Institute of International Affairs in Britain. He said that he worked for them, he was the historian for them, and they are often mistaken for communism because their goals are really the same. Well, if theyíre the same, they ARE the same, folks, you see. The capitalists, using also the scientific elite, work towards the same agenda as what you would think is communism, for total social control through multi layers of government, and condition children from school, from birth right on through school etc. Conditioning, conditioning, conditioning. It makes it easier for the top capitalists to run the world when youíre all under total control, when youíre all predictable.
Now, talking about Charles Galton Darwin, who was the physicist of the family, he worked on the Manhattan Project. But he was also an incredible eugenicist who was still pushing eugenics and eugenic control of the population after World War II when the eugenicists retreated for a while because of the racial purity laws of Germany, Nazi Germany, what happened in Germany. They donít want to mention of course what happened in the Soviet Union who were doing this kind of thing long before them. Because the Soviet system is protected by the darlings of the left. But this is what he said in his own book, Charles Galton Darwin, who actually made a lot of money making weapons of mass destruction because they love humanity so much. But he said here that:
(The Next Million Years by Charles Galton Darwin, 1952 edition.)
The restraint of the breeding of the feebleminded is important and it must never be neglected... (Alan: Now, remember these guys will put something on the books, they love to put things on the books by law and of course then they stretch it and stretch it and stretch it to be all inclusive of certain other areas. It says...) ...it must never be neglected but it cannot be regarded as a really effective way of improving the human race. If by analogy one wished to improve the breed of racehorses one might accomplish a little by always slaughtering the horse that finished last in every race. But it would be a much slower process than the actual one of sending the winner to the stud farm. (Alan: This guy also wanted to make it a law, if they could make it a law, kind of a wish list, so that women could only breed with those who were already stinking rich, wealthy and aristocrats, you see.)
Conscious of this criticism, eugenists have often attempted to define what are the good characteristics which should be positively encouraged, instead of only the negative ones that must be discouraged, but the results are disappointing. Lists of meritorious qualities such as good health, good physique, high intelligence, good family history, are compiled, and those possessing them are told that they should breed, but the statements lead nowhere in practice, for no one can be expected to assess his own merits and demerits in a balanced way. (Alan: Now doesnít that really take you back to, say, the GIRFEC program in Scotland, and they have one for England under a different name, and one for Wales, where the government has already, last year, given a state-appointed guardian or whatever to every child born in the country, that must assess them consistently from the age of about two months onwards. You see, itís already here, all that stuff. So here you have it. So in other words, you canít really assess yourself, you wouldnít be honest enough, or you would have a different view of yourself than others, especially the elite, so itís going to be done for you, you see, by experts, naturally. So he says hereÖ)
How, for example, is a man to weigh his own good health or good ability against a heredity made dubious, say, by an uncle who was insane, or again how is he to strike a balance between considerable artistic giftsóas he thinksótogether with a good family record, but quite bad health. It is clearly beyond anyone to decide these things for himself, and even then the matter is only half settled, since similar judgments are needed for both partners to the marriage. However helpful the literature may be which can be consulted, it is evident that subjective judgments on such matters are too difficult; with the best will in the world they would very often be made wrongly, because, however sincerely he tries, no man can be a good judge in his own case. (Alan: He should really clarify that because I mean, Charles Galton Darwin believed HE was a very suitable candidate to continue down through the ages with lots of offspring, etc. etc.)
The only imaginable way of overcoming these difficulties would be to set up a class of consultants who would prescribe what marriages were eugenically admissible and how large the consequent families should be. But this does not solve the difficulty; it only pushes it back a stage, for it leaves unanswered the question who are to be the consultants, and what principles are to guide them in settling the values of the different qualities of mankind. It comes back to just the difficulty I described in my fable, that a tame animal must have a master, and that therefore though it might conceivably be possible to tame the majority of mankind, this could only be done by leaving untamed a minority of the population. Moreover, this minority would have to be the group possessing the most superior qualities of all. (Alan: In other words, heís talking about the master race, which he believed he belonged to, you see. Iíve mentioned all this years ago if you go into the archives at cuttingthroughthematrix.com. I put all these books out years ago too. Lots of people have copied them. Lots of hosts have used them. And thatís good because it gets the word out about whatís really happening. But he says hereÖ)
These examples suggest the impossibility of taming mankind as a whole, but before accepting the principle fully, it is proper to examine a case where the exact contrary has happened; this is in the insect civilizations of the ants or termites. In applying the same term, civilization, to both ants and men, it is hardly necessary to say that I am drawing an analogy between things which are really of a very different quality. All species of ants (Alan: ...he says...) live in cities, and some species have developed agriculture, others animal husbandry; but all these practices are purely instinctive and individual to each species. On the other hand human civilization is an acquired character, based on education, (Alan: and so he goes on to say here...) and so is not inherent in man's nature. (Alan: In other words, this thing called civilization is based on education. Remember, education means indoctrination. See, your indoctrination gives you what they call civilization, itís not a natural thing. So the admission that itís not a natural thing. So the elite know this, that itís not a natural thing, this civilization. Neither is this thing, obviously, they call progress. What is progress? Progress is the continuing agenda, the planned agenda of their system, this thing called civilization. So it goes on to say hereÖ)
Nevertheless it may be worth while to follow out the analogy a little further. Admitting the different sense of the words, it may be said that all species of ants have made the third revolution (Alan: ...interesting eh...), the invention of cities, that some have made the second, agriculture, none the first or fourth, fire and science; but they have all added another revolution of their own, the complete control of the problem of sex. (Alan: Itís always been so important to these guys, control of all of that, you see.) The ants' nest has no rulers at all, for the queen is hardly more than an egg-laying mechanism, and they seem to get on perfectly well without civil servants or lawyers or captains of industry.
Why cannot man set up a community like an ants' nest? This would be the ideal of the anarchist, and hitherto it has held no promise at all of success, but with the help of recent and probable future biological discoveries, some sort of imitation by man of the ants' nest cannot be quite excluded from consideration. Thus the control of the numbers of the two sexes may become possible, and with the knowledge of the various sexual hormones it might also become possible to free the majority of mankind from the urgency of sexual impulse, so that they could live contented celibate lives, instead of the unsatisfied celibate lives that are the compulsory lot of such a large fraction of the present population of the world. (Alan: That was back in the 1950s of course. They used the sexual revolution to alter that one.) If these discoveries should be madeóand this is really by no means impossibleóman would be able to carry out the sex revolution which is the typical characteristic of the insect civilizations. The detail would of course have to be quite different, for instead of one queen there would have to be large numbers of fertile women to renew the population, whereas there might be one king, literally the father of his country. Also it is probable that on account of their greater physical strength, it would be the men who would be the workers.
Such an organization is certainly repellently unattractive to most of usóperhaps excepting some of the autocrats of the present worldóbut it is not this that excludes the possibility of it. There is no danger whatever of its happening, because of the inherent difference between vertebrate and insect, for the vertebrate is so very much more flexible than the insect in its behaviour. Most insects simply die if placed on an unfamiliar food plant, whereas the vertebrate will always try experiments if its normal diet fails. An insect can be used to prey on and destroy another one that has become a pest, and, when it has done so, the predator will die of starvation; in the same role a vertebrate predator would not die, but would start to destroy some other, perhaps beneficent, species. Now of all vertebrates man is preeminent in his willingness to try experiments, so that it is inconceivable that he should settle down into the inflexible unquestioning course of life that is typical of an insect. It would call for a quite radical change in his whole nature. It would not be a mere change into a new species of homo that would be needed, nor even a change into a new genus or family or order of the mammals. It would have to be a fundamental change into a new phylum of the animal kingdom, and that would not take a mere million years, but many hundreds of millions of years. (Alan: ...except for, unless, he says...)
There is no prospect of man's nature imitating an insect's, but it is much more nearly imaginable that his development should go, like that of the dogs, into a set of breeds each specialized for a particular purpose.
Now, in the book too, The Next Million Years, he goes into ďweĒ, meaning the elite themselves, could use hormones to alter the behavior of men and women. Well, we have all the bisphenol As and the xenoestrogens, all these artificial mimickers basically of estrogens, getting pumped into our bodies all the time, in our foods and from all the plastics that have been known since the 1890s contain this stuff. And also too, Iíve gone through the lectures where it hits the male fetus in the womb at the age of about 8 to 12 weeks, very important, if the motherís on a high dose of this stuff, then heís not going to have his proper accoutrements in the proper order, or at least in the proper dimensions you might say, that they should have developed into. They know all of this stuff too. These techniques are being used. He also mentioned using it, putting it into the water supply or putting it into inoculations and various other techniques for altering the behavior of men and women. He also knew too of course, that too much of this would affect the women and make them more aggressive actually. So, itís very interesting.
Now, a little secret about these books that go out there by these people, whenever they say something, like itís going to be like the future that all this will happen, theyíre already doing it. Theyíve always been this way. Itís the same now with geoengineering; theyíve been doing it since 1998 solidly across the world, on a regular basis. But they keep having these meetings pretending, theyíre discussing what would the effects be if they ever should do it. This is the standard technique of keeping you in a different reality of whatís happening. He saysÖ
At every turn the argument leads back to this question of the master breed. Nothing can be done in the way of changing man from a wild into a tame animal without first creating such a breed, but most people are entirely inconsistent in their ideas of what they want created. On the one hand they feel that all the world's problems would be solved if only there were a wise and good man who would tell everybody what to do, but on the other hand they bitterly resent being themselves told what to do. As to which of these motives would prevail, it seems at least probable that it would be the resentment, so that if the breed should arise in any manner, it would be extirpated before it could ever become well established. It is, however, imaginable, that there might be a part of the world in which the breed was accepted, and that this part should gain a superiority over the rest of the world, because it could develop various suitable breeds of specialists under the control and direction of the master breed, and by the exercise of the skills of these specialists it might overcome the other nations. So it is appropriate to look a little further into the matter. (Alan: ...he says. Later on, lower down that page it says, and thatís page 131, the 1952 edition, he saysÖ)
These would be of great value, but they would not be the master breed, and the question arises of a more precise prescription for what the qualities of the master breed are to be.
It is usually best to build on what one already has, rather than to start from nothing. So the natural procedure would be to begin with existing rulers, since these have already established themselves as acceptable to at least a good many of their fellow creatures. One would collect together, say, a hundred of the most important present rulersóamong them of course should be included a good many who exert secret influence without holding any overt office (Alan: ...thatís your Bill Gates, your Rockefellers, etc. etc. that heís talking about.) óand tell them to get on with the business of settling what the master breed should be. It is impossible to believe that any such body of men would ever reach agreement on any subject whatever; so this plan fails. (Alan: Thatís actually been very successful today.) In the search for the qualities of the master breed the next idea might be to appeal to the wisdom of our forefathers. Plato in his Republic devotes much attention to this very subject. Why not then find a Plato, give him his group of recruits, and let him educate them for thirty years according to his prescriptionó though perhaps fortifying it by the findings of modern educational theory; the result should be the master breed. But this will not do either, for Plato was not educating the master breed, he was educating the civil servant breed. It is not about these that there is any difficulty; it is the finding of someone to fill the role of Plato himself. It all comes back to the point that we do not know in the remotest degree what we want; for I do not count as an answer the one that would usually be proposed, which would be that the type required should be good and wise, while at the same time showing a special favour for the particular enthusiasms of the proposer. The reason for the impossibility of making a prescription for the master breed is that it is not a breed at all; to call it so is to change the sense of the word. Breeds are specialized for particular purposes, (Alan: Actually, the Bureaucrat is a breed. He is specialized for particular purposes.) but the essence of masters is that they must not be specialized. (Alan: Heís talking about the wild man.) They have to be able to deal with totally unforeseen conditions, and this is a quality of wild, not of tame, life. No prescription for the master breed is possible. (Alan: You canít put any impositions or restrictions on him.)
In these considerations I have been assuming the licence of supposing that we might be able really to change human nature in a heritable manner, and this is far beyond all probability. Returning now to more practical considerations, there seems no likelihood whatever of a master breed arising. (Alan: Well since then it apparently has.)
Of all animals man is the most ready to try experiments and there are always candidatesófar too many candidatesówho regard themselves as fit members for the master breed. This quality is a characteristic of a wild animal, and it will always prevent man from domesticating himself. He will always prevent the creation of the master breed, through which alone the rest of man could be domesticated. The evolution of the human race will not be accomplished in the ten thousand years of tame animals, but in the million years of wild animals, because man is and will always continue to be a wild animal.
Now, the big organizations, that some of his cousins attended, world conferences and so on, working on this very problem, came up with the idea of literally going ahead, and not through just simply persuasion to change societies across the planet, but by literally using chemicals, hormones, inoculations and so on to dumb down lots of the public already deemed to be inferior, which are the common proles, and to alter their sexual behavior, in many ways, not just through social changes which are promoted and encouraged and advertised and really pushed, but also through altering the makeup of your endocrine system basically, and your hormonal levels. In other words, you become fairly sterile. And too much estrogen in the male has obvious consequences as well, which are self-evident today. So itís been done. Itís already been done. Itís interesting, the Doublespeak throughout the books these guys put out because youíll find in other chapters little hints that these things were already being worked on and implemented in his day. Very interesting, as I say.
Donít you understand, this whole myth of democracy, this placebo we are given, this safety valve to blow off steam, is a joke? Itís a joke, folks. I mean, why do you bother voting for your country when your country is already internationally run, by international corporations, too, involved for their own benefit and not for your benefit? Where organizations like the United Nations set up by the Royal Institute of International Affairs, a private organization, CFR, which also set up the IMF and run that, which also set up the Bank for International Settlements and run that, all private organizations, why bother voting under this pretense of democracy when private organizations have set up the whole system that youíre voting for? Why? Weíre privately run. The world is privately run. Quite simple.
But now youíll see why these pressure groups of radicalized students are churned out of universities with their own particular causes; they think itís theirs but itís not of course. They will never figure out the end goal of all of this. And even if they could achieve their end goal, whatever chip thatís on their shoulder wonít be removed. It wonít be removed because the chip really is there and under the guise of their cause. The chipís got something else wrong with the person, generally, when theyíre really radical and angry and furious. But theyíre used and theyíre created and theyíre authorized and theyíre churned out in every generation, and theyíll never figure it out of course. Every one of them wants special status. Not equal status, special status, you see. So how can you have equality when some people are getting special status? How can you have equality?
So why go along with the pretense that you have it in the first place, of democracy, or any kind of freedom? If you had freedom no topic can be taboo. None. Zilch. None. Even if itís topics you donít like, or youíre afraid of, it shouldnít be taboo. If people want to discuss it, let them discuss it or ask the questions. And if you think that some topic sounds nutty or crazy, well donít worry about it. There should be a lot of other people too who will say, well itís nutty or crazy; just donít make laws to impose it on everybody else, thatís all.
Now, most folk, as I say, unfortunately, will never figure out the system. They get caught up inÖ Even after this talk and the many talks Iíve given over the years, with the next dayís news theyíll listen to, whatever they listen to, be scared stiff and go back into emotive responses to things. Thatís how youíre all controlled, through fear and emotion. A lot of people use the fear, fear, fear, fear, and at the end of an hourís talk theyíll sell you something for five minutes which is the antidote to the fear. Itís always awfully expensive, mind you. So apparently money will allay fear, you can buy things to allay fear, etc. etc. etc. And I have no time for that kind of thing at all. Itís disgusting. Itís a disgusting technique to create that kind of thing. Itís legal but itís disgusting. It tells you all you need to know about the person using it. It really does.
It would be like a salesman coming into your house trying to sell a vacuum cleaner. And youíve had vacuum cleaners over the years, different kinds of vacuum cleaners, and he gives you his sales pitch. And he sums up this person may buy one and may not. They know right away; they know within 30 seconds if youíre going to buy. And they have all these techniques which are used from psychology, that politicians also use on you, etc. And you follow into it. Anyway, if heís not getting what he wants from you, which is a sale, he can then use the next dirty trick, which is, oh, you know Iíve got a little video here I can pop in your computer and let you see it, and it will show you all the hidden mites and things that can seriously damage your health. And then he pops this thing in there and by God, thereís a child with asthma dying on a bed there, wheezing, and you say, oh my God this is awful. Yeah, and look at it, the house looks nice and clean. Generally theyíve got it picked as a house thatís so darn tidy, you know, itís been done with a whole professional crew and not your vacuum cleaner. But anyway, it doesnít matter. The whole point is to say, well look at this incredibly tidy house, and look at these mites under the microscope, everyoneís got them apparently. And then it goes into, thereís some doctor, some guy in a white coat Ė they always wear the stethoscopes hanging around their neck; thatís a badge of approval, you know, and I donít know why, trying to run with a stethoscope around your neck is not easy; they always fall off. But the fact is, this is the rubbish they condition the public with. So here comes the standard doctor with his badge of approval hanging around his neck and he says, oh yes, he says, and he goes in to give you a bit of anatomy and physiology and some of the biology. And he tells you of how it destroys the cells in the lungs and so on, the cilia, oh my God, they wonít work properly. And you see these blowups of damaged lung tissue, you know, generally from someone thatís been through World War I with being gassed with mustard gas, but they donít tell you that. Anyway, it has its effect. And by the time heís finished youíre ready to buy his vacuum cleaner. Simple techniques.
Therefore, when you listen to something like that, fear driven, and hereís the antidote, what does that tell you about the person pushing it? Is that a person with integrity? Is it? Thatís up to you to decide. Now, some folk get addicted to fear. Iíve known people who have bought underground shelters in the past, when that was getting pushed back in the 90s, because they thought there was going to be a nuclear war. And they thought that if it wasnít going to be a nuclear war, then thatís also when all the plague movies came out, like virus and blah-blah-blah, terrifying folk, you see. And the Masters who utilize fear get in on the act and theyíre selling these things like mini submarines that they bury under the garden, with a big, big backhoe and it costs you a fortune and all the rest of it. One guy I know even uses it now as a root cellar because of course heís never had to use it. So this is how it goes.
Think before you get panicked. Donít get panicked. If somebodyís trying to panic you thereís always an ulterior motive. Government runs the same way. Itís always, as I say, war, real war which they create, or the threat of a war, or a cold war which is fantastic because the R&D money and the taxation goes up and you donít complain because theyíre protecting you from a potential war. Weíre just used, folks, Iím sorry to say. Or financial crisisÖ Oh thereís going to be a financial crisis blah-blah-blah. Or the country is in debt. What do you mean the country is in debt? Why is the country borrowing money in the first place? ...look at all the taxes they bring in.
And this democracy is wonderful. Do you see in any charter of any country that they canít borrow money? Of course itís not there. Who runs them? The banks do, the ones who lend to them, the big international bankers. But people keep voting for the same system, thatís never worked. And every time, twice a century at least they have the two big crashes where they plunder you; the banks never lose a damn thing. They gain a lot, because we always bail them out. And you keep voting for the same system. Iím just tossing ideas out there; Iím not advocating something else. Iím just telling you how it is.
Itís conology. Itís just conology. But Iím trying to get you to think for yourselves at least and question things. Thatís a start. Thatís a start, folks. But youíre run by sciences which most folk havenít got a clue exist. Havenít got a clue. A simple part of conology, as I say, is the weather. Never mind the fact that theyíre spraying you, theyíre manipulating the weather, have been for years, and using HAARP along with it too apart from the spray. Iíve gone through all the talks that Mr Teller did back in the 1950s talking about spraying the skies with metallic particles and then hitting it with magnetic frequency waves and pulse waves, altering weather. Old techniques, so nothingís new. And itís been done.
Iíve been keeping my own records of these cold temperatures here and itís March and last Wednesday night into Thursday morning it was back down to almost 40 below again at night; when it gets 40 below itís almost the same in both Celsius and Fahrenheit. It was about 25 or 30 below last night. But you look into the government stations and theyíve only got it down about 2 to 6 below. They never change it all night long, nor the next day. Why is that? Itís because, you see, very few folk, Iím one of the oddballs that still has outside thermometers; I like to check things myself. Most folk donít have them. Brzezinski said in the 70s in his book Between Two Ages, most folk eventually will be unable to think for themselves, they will expect the media to do their reasoning for them. So you tune into the media, the news channel, whatever, and they tell you something. And it must be true, why would they be lying to you? Itís so simple. It doesnít fit in with global warming, you see. And youíve got all these new carbon taxes flooding in like crazy. It doesnít fit in.
We are conned on every level out there. The TV is just the con box, and an indoctrination box, because thereís not a darn thing out there from a comedy to a drama to a movie that doesnít have, convey with itÖ See, itís the conveying mechanism to download you with something, either hypersexualize you, or to update you with your PC stuff, or to instill guilts into you for things youíve never done, to give special statuses to different kinds of people and so on and so on and so on. Thatís how itís done, folks. Itís the delivery system, itís weaponized. Itís the delivery system. The story in any movie or drama or thriller is the delivery system, the hook to make you follow it through all the sex and all the rest of it, the sex and violence and blah-blah-blah-blah-blah; itís the delivery system. Especially teenage horror movies, tits and bum movies I call them. The little bit of story is simply to keep you watching it, and say okay I should really turn it off but I want to find out how it ends, the story, the thriller part of it. And you watch all the rest of it on the way, and youíre contaminated. Itís very simple. Old techniques, eh. Nothing new under the sun.
Well, from Hamish and myself from Ontario, Canada, itís good night and may your God or your Gods GO with you.