March 15th, 2012 (#1044)
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:
Poem Copyright Alan Watt March 15th, 2012:
Taming of the Crew, Led by Wild Few:
"Most Folks Today don't Suspect or Know
Nor Question Why They Go with the Flow,
They're Prompted to Adapt without Lesson
Into Desired Direction without Question,
C.G. Darwin said 80% of Public were Sheep
Which Obey any System because They're Meek,
J. Huxley said Media and Communications
Would Speed the Process of World Integration,
Using the Science of Persuasion and Dialectic,
Guiding the Masses, 'twould do the Trick,
Domesticated Peoples, By Elite Reviled,
Led by Masters, Not Tame, Still Wild"
© Alan Watt March 15th, 2012
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt – March 15th, 2012 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Hi folks, I’m Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through the Matrix on the 15th of March, 2012. For newcomers, I always suggest you make use of the website, cuttingthroughthematrix.com, where hopefully you’ll get enough free audios for download that you’ll start to understand this system you’ve been born into, and to realize that literally your whole reality is given to you from birth basically, first by your parents, who have been indoctrinated, through lifelong education. By education I mean the media, and entertainment too. And then of course, school takes over for you. And that furthers your indoctrination. So much so, that philosophers like Jacques Ellul said that it was essential for good propaganda to take on a person, it was so essential to give them an education first. Without the education, it was more difficult. That’s why guys who skip out of school, and hardly attend it, and end up on the street selling whatever they’re selling, they’re very streetwise. They’re not fooled by things so easily as the ones who are educated.
Help yourself to the audios, and you’ll find out the big system that runs the world and how our thoughts are shaped for us, our topics are shaped, our opinions are given to us, and where they intend to take the whole planet now. It’s not just countries. It’s the whole human species, basically, down the road into the future, because the future is always planned. That’s what really staggers some people, to realize that the future is actually planned, way ahead, a hundred years or more, by big foundations. Foundations outlive the people who work in them, remember. So generations can work on the same goal, one after another, for hundreds of years, if need be. And that’s why they formed the foundations to make these things happen. And the foundations work and are often owned by the big international bankers, and international corporations, so they have quite an easy time of it, really, shaping the future.
So, remember too that you are the audience that bring me to you, so you can help me keep going by buying the books and discs at cuttingthroughthematrix.com. I don’t sell anything else. And I don’t promote any products or anything like that. So, it’s up to you, if you want to hear this kind of information to keep me going. And you can do so by going into cuttingthroughthematrix.com and ordering the books and discs. From the US to Canada, remember, you can use a personal check. You can still use an international postal money order. You’re the only country in the world left that can still do that to Canada. And you can send cash instead, or you can use PayPal to order. Remember, straight donations are really welcome. And across the world, you’ve got Western Union, Money Gram and PayPal, once again.
And what I do is to go into the histories of the organizations that came together, openly, that is. It’s much, much older than that. It’s hundreds of years old actually, the idea of running the world. Go into the writings of Francis Bacon. Go into the writings of John Dee, and he talked about a British Empire and Free Trade, and how they would create this around the world. It really solidified and came into the public view for the first time, as I say, with the groups that were formed in the late 1800s and into the early 1900s, such as the Cecil Rhodes Foundation, and the Milner Group, that became the Royal Institute for International Affairs, and commonly known in America for their branch as the Council on Foreign Relations. They have branches across the whole planet, bringing the world together, under a particular plan. And you’ll see the plan, if you go into the United Nations agenda for the future, Agenda 21, and beyond in fact. They have ones even going beyond that now. And, where we’re supposed to, what change is supposed to happen in this century. This is the Century of Change, where eventually you’ll live in your own little communities. That’s where they hope to break you down into.
Really, they’re also conflicted in some countries about using the overcrowded cities to cram you into for a while, as they take down the rural areas. They’ve said that eventually less than 3% of very, very wealthy people will live out in the country. Too expensive for everyone else.
Back with more, after this break.
HI folks, I’m back, Cutting Through the Matrix. Talking about, well, not just world government but the whole of society, and how our minds are shaped by those who control it, because we are controlled. Every society is basically controlled by those who hold the power, naturally. And power today derives from the accumulation of cash, and having the ability to pay your children through the best or the top universities on the planet, the ones with the real well established names. And that’s how you hold on to power, really, is just breeding the right children, because some of the elite, really, they’re matched up with their wives. And money always marries money too, so the psychopathic types, unfortunately, are the ones who tend to get to the top. Either through royalty, and royalty gets to the top through slaughtering people around them, as a family, until they take over more land, until they run countries, basically. And it’s the same thing with the CEOs of corporations. They’re very good, remember, psychopaths, at flattering people and manipulating others around them to get what they want. And other psychopaths tend to gather around them once they have that power. And in fact, the psychopaths only worship those who have more power than themselves. So, they tend to congregate at the tops of big international corporations, things like that.
And when they get a better education, they generally are good speakers, of course. They end up doing the speaking circuits across the world at conventions to do with CEO conventions or IBM conventions, and the handful of big corporations that really have been deemed the right ones to rule this world. Look at the UN SmartCities idea that came out of IBM. And you’d be surprised how far that’s gone already. SmartCities, literally, and they’ve got SmartCities already built. I think they’re on their third version of them already, within a span of a year. They put up these cities, and get employees to work in them, but these cities are literally to do with the future, and how we’ll all live being spied upon, in your own bedrooms, even. But as long as it’s unobtrusive it won’t bother you. They’ve already done their studies on that. You get used to it. You don’t even think about them. So, as long as they have hidden cameras everywhere, and hidden microphones, you’ll get used to the idea.
Exactly the system that George Orwell talked about in Nineteen Eighty-Four. And he wrote the book, of course, or it was published in 1948, about this totalitarian society. Because, at that time, you see, the bigwigs who owned the world were looking at the big movements, which they’d helped establish, such as Communism, in some countries, and they’d funded it too. They were always looking at ways to control the vast majority of the population. See, power must always be on the lookout for being overthrown by people below them. So, they want to make sure when they bring in a new creed or an understanding or a system of things like Communism, then they hold on to it, because they know there will be guys coming up from the younger ranks who will want to take over. So, they’re always worried about the general population, and they find ways to keep them suppressed or stupid, in fact, as the case may be, but definitely compliant and obedient. And that’s always been the way, really, of governments.
We’re given a Disney version of history. In fact, a lot of people today literally get their history from the History Channel, which is junk. It literally is junk. The incredible, when you compare what they give you to the old books written, even sometimes at the time, or right after events, they’re giving you absolute junk, because history is always rewritten, you see. It’s a kind of Disney version of reality. Because they want you to be very naïve. And they want you to be compliant. And they want you to think that everybody around the world is pretty nice. And it’s not really true. It’s not really true. There are places in the world where psychopaths are still fighting other psychopaths to get up into power just to control an area within a country or a big continent for instance. So, as I say, it doesn’t really change. Nature doesn’t change. So, years ago the big boys decided to find ways to literally fix society in certain ways by getting scientific indoctrination, lifelong indoctrination by using the media.
And I touched on that yesterday, with Julian Huxley’s talks about UNESCO, on its purpose and its philosophy. And I gave the link for that too, so you can read it for yourselves. Some sites out there have them broken down into specific parts of his speech, on its purpose, you see. Because it’s very interesting to understand its purpose and its philosophy. Why did they want a controlled society? Now, remember Huxley himself, Julian Huxley was descended from Sir Thomas Huxley, who was the champion, he was called Darwin’s bulldog. He was best pal of Charles Darwin. And he took over the theory of evolution and pushed it after Darwin had gone. And the Huxley’s themselves are inter-related, if you go down through their family tree, with the Darwin family. And it’s interesting to see how they all come together, all the big names that we’re so used to hearing, and that are still taught at university, of course. But he said that UNESCO, and of course, Julian Huxley was the first CEO of UNESCO:
"UNESCO [UN Educational, Social and Scientific Organization]
(Alan: Social and Scientific Organization. That’s the part you’ve got to understand.)
also can and should promote the growth of international contacts, international organizations,
(A: That’s all your NGOs that the foundations fund.)
and actual international achievements, which will offer increasing resistance to the forces making for division and conflict. In particular, it can both on its own and in close relation with other UN agencies such as the FAO [Food & Agriculture Organization]
(A: And you’ve got to look into these organizations. They’re up there at the United Nations website. And go through their histories. And scour the internet for the old speeches given from these different parts of the United Nations. Because they mention food being used as a weapon. It’s always been used as a weapon. Remember that. And they also said that eventually, at the Food and Agricultural Organization that all food in the world will be under the jurisdiction of the Food and Agricultural Organization, and they will distribute the food of the world to the different regions they will set up across the planet. And part of the reason for that, they said, would be to force the people to bring down their populations. They’ll give you quotas, rations, if you like, and if you don’t bring down your population to the desired level, then you won’t get more food. In fact, they’ll probably bring the quota down the following year to force you to deal with some really nasty stuff, like who are you going to kill?)
WHO [World Health Organization],
(A: Very Orwellian, the terminology they use, you understand. It’s to:)
promote the international application of science to human welfare.
(A: Now, science to human welfare. Part of the human welfare is the fact that they said there’s too many people. Too many people, you see, on the planet. They want to bring it down to a manageable level. Not just too many people, too many of the wrong kind of people, I should say. And they’ve actually said that. And so it says.)
As the benefits of such world-scale collaboration becomes plain (which will speedily be the case in relation to the food and health of mankind) it will become increasingly more difficult for any nation to destroy them by resorting to isolationism or to war."
(A: So, in other words, they want to set up a totalitarian regime, worldwide, supposedly to stop any nation having a conflict with another. It sounds not bad that part. And people go for that. Especially young children. They go for that. That’s okay, you know. Kiss and make up sort of thing. But you’re under a bigger tyranny than ever before, because they mean it when they say to use the science, you know, application of science to human welfare. You got to understand how they define human welfare, what they mean by that. And:)
"Further, since the world today is in process of becoming one,
(A: This was 1947.)
and since a major aim of Unesco must be to help in the speedy and satisfactory realisation of this process, that Unesco must pay special attention to international education
(A: So they created the international education system.)
to education as a function of a world society,
(A: That’s in other words, propaganda indoctrination. They’ve already done it with an EU, the European Parliament. They’ve got a whole educational system for the European Child now, where they’ve eliminated most of the history of the countries of Europe. Just like the Communists did in some countries. They also did it in Cambodia. Remember, everything started when victory was achieved and it was Year One. Same with the EU. It’s no coincidence. You see, all these things are related to the one organization that creates them all. It says:)
in addition to its function in relation to national societies, to regional or religious or intellectual groups or to local communities."
(A: Every part of society is catered to, in other words. And he says.)
Peace must therefore be founded, if it is not to fail, upon the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind.
(A: Remember the solidarity movement you had in Poland. Actually, the word Solidarity, in this particular terminology was created in Scotland at Aberdeen University, that’s been a big part actually of pushing the Communist side of the Cap/Com system. Because you must have two sides. It actually mentions it here in fact. He says.)
"In addition, we now know much about the biological evolution, the existence of several types of selection.
(A: Natural selection.)
the evolutionary conflict between the limitations set by an organism's nature and past history and the requirement of the present, and its solution by means of some new adjustment.
(A: They’re talking about adjusting all of you, folks.)
This last point immediately recalls the thesis, antithesis and synthesis of Hegelian philosophy, and the Marxist 'reconciliation of opposites'
(A: That’s what they called it. To get something going, you’ve got to be controversial. Put something out there that upsets folk, they’ll retaliate by refuting what you’re saying and opposing it. And then, of course, you’re both guided to have meetings, and you come to a synthesis, where you both collude together and give up parts of your principles, to create something new. He says:)
Indeed, dialectical materialism was the first radical attempt at an evolutionary philosophy. Unfortunately, it was based too exclusively upon principles of social as against biological evolution.
(A: And that’s what Huxley was prattling on about. And he says:)
. . . a priori reasoning is inadequate to arrive at truth . . . truth is never complete and explanations never fully or eternally valid.
So, there can be no truth, he says. Back with more, after this break.
HI folks, I’m back. We’re Cutting Through the Matrix. Just going over some of the quotes really from Julian Huxley who was a big player in setting up the system you’re going through today, in fact. And what you’ve already come through in the past with the Cold War and so on. He talks about that, how necessary that was, in fact, for the whole movement towards globalism and world government, it would take place. It would need these factions to be really opposite each other on the way. And that’s what he says. He said they have to use the Hegelian dialectic and the dialectical materialism of Marx, with its radical attempt at an evolutionary philosophy. He says:
This last point immediately recalls the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis of Hegelian philosophy, and the Marxist “reconciliation of opposites” based upon it. Indeed, dialectical materialism was the first radical attempt at an evolutionary philosophy.
(A: For change, you see. And he says too.)
Taking the techniques of persuasion and information and true propaganda that we have learnt to apply nationally in war,
(A: Where it’s all lies, right.)
and deliberately bending them to the international tasks of peace, if necessary utilizing them -- as Lenin envisaged - to 'overcome the resistance of millions' to desirable change.
(A: And again, who decides what desirable change is?)
Using drama to reveal reality and art as the method by which, in Sir Stephen Tallent’s words, “truth becomes impressive and a living principle of action,” and aiming to produce that concerted effort which, to quote Grierson once more, needs a background of faith and a sense of destiny. This must be a mass philosophy, a mass creed, and it can never be achieved without the use of the media of mass communication.
(A: Mass communication.)
Unesco, in the press of its detailed work, must never forget this enormous feat.
(A: And then he goes into:)
There are thus two tasks for the Mass Media division of Unesco, the one general, the other special. The special one is to enlist the press and the radio and the cinema to the fullest extent in the service of formal and adult education,
(A: He’s not talking about two and two is four. He’s talking about through fiction as well. And then your entertainment channels and your history channels even. Or science channels. Because he mentions:)
of science and learning, of art and culture. The general one is to see that these agencies are used both to contribute to mutual comprehension between nations and cultures, and also to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures.
(A: So, its real intention was to give you a common outlook, opinions on everything across the whole planet.)
Not much remains to be said in conclusion, but what remains is important. It is that the task before Unesco is necessary, is opportune, and, in spite of all multiplicity of detail, is single. That task is to help the emergence of a single world culture, with its own philosophy and background of ideas, and with its own broad purpose. This is opportune, since this is the first time in history that the scaffolding and the mechanisms for world unification have become available, and also the first time that man has had the means (in the shape of scientific discovery and its applications) of laying a world-wide foundation for the minimum physical welfare of the entire human species. And it is necessary, for at the moment two opposing philosophies of life
(A: It is necessary for the moment, right? That two opposing philosophies of life, that was Capitalism versus Communism. It’s necessary that they existed.)
confront each other from the West and from the East. . . .
(A: So, it was all, the whole Cold War was fake, except for the Big Boys in the armaments industry. And the governments too, they were allowed to tax you into the ground to protect you. It’s always the same old story. And what they were using your cash for was to go into real high tech missiles and also the means of eventually controlling all of you by cameras and different techniques, and the computer as well. Because they planned on using the computer to bring you all together, fifty-odd years ago, at least. He says:)
You may categorize the two philosophies as two super-nationalisms, or as individualism versus collectivism; or as the American versus the Russian way of life, or as capitalism versus communism, or as Christianity versus Marxism. Can these opposites be reconciled, this antithesis be resolved in a higher synthesis? I believe not only that this can happen, but that, through the inexorable dialectic of evolution, it must happen. . . .
In pursuing this aim we must eschew dogma—whether it be theological dogma or Marxist dogma or philosophical or any other form of dogma : East and West will not agree on a basis for the future if they merely hurl at each other the fixed ideas of the past. For that is what dogmas are—the crystallisations of some dominant system of thought of a particular epoch. A dogma may, of course, crystallise tried and valid experience : but if it be dogma, it does so in a way which is rigid, uncompromising and intolerant. . . . If we are to achieve progress, we must learn to uncrystallise our dogmas.
(A: In other words, be very, very flexible. And it’s interesting too that George Bush called for the US to rejoin UNESCO, when he was in office, because of their philosophies and really how they were brainwashing children, especially. And the nasty stuff they do, what was all Marxist too, that they train the children from a very early age to engage in sexual promiscuity. That way they would never bond with someone, so one of the planks of the Communist regime would be worked out. You would never bond with a partner. You never married. Marriage was to end, you see, under Communism. It’s still to come yet. It’s pretty well here, where we are now. It’s dying out. Anyway, this says:)
"UNESCO is often referred to as a school board for the world and, as such, it reflects the educational philosophy of its founding Director-General, biologist/humanist Julian Huxley. In his book UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy, Huxley spills the beans. 'The task before UNESCO...is to help the emergence of a single world culture, with its own philosophy and background of ideas, and with its own broad purposes.' "
And you think it’s all happening by chance, eh? Because you go on holiday somewhere and shake hands with someone, and you’ve changed the world, eh? Back with more, after this break.
Hi folks, I’m Alan Watt and we’re back Cutting Through the Matrix. Just talking about some of the Big Boys who helped plan the system you’re living through today, because these guys like Aldous Huxley and Julian Huxley and another guy too I’m going to mention, which is Charles Galton Darwin, they’re heroes for the boys who run the world today at the top. They’re heroes, because they believe in altering our genes. They believe in doing all the things. They all agreed that they’d have to alter humanity themselves, physically, by using science. One guy who said that they could use hormones in the water, food, and inoculations, and other means, to alter men, especially. And to be more temperate, put it that way, less manly, ready to fight, was Charles Galton Darwin. And again, he’s the grandson of Charles Darwin. And he wrote in the book The Next Million Years an awful lot of good stuff. You’ve got to read it. You’ve just got to read it. It’s a must-be if you want to understand what’s happening, because these guys literally worked at world meetings and whatever they said became law, basically. All of these guys that I’ve mentioned. It became law. And the United Nations and all the groups that have worked for the United Nations since, follow the writings of these guys.
And on page 112 of The Next Million Years, because they planned to plan the world for a million years; The Next Million Years, he calls it. Now, he wasn’t some vague philosopher, either. Charles Galton Darwin was a physicist who worked at the Manhattan project. He says:
Another feature of creeds
(A: He’s talking about causes that bring people together and you become a creed or a religion.)
Another feature of creeds seems to be rather general. Though the majority of a population, say something like nine-tenths, accept their creed implicitly
(A: Your belief system and everything else around you. Your reality. So:)
nine-tenths, accept their creed implicitly regard it as part of the law of nature,
(A: They never question it.)
there is always a small minority who do not. Most people—call them the sheep—follow the ideas of their leaders unquestioningly, but this minority—the goats—goes by contraries, and disbelieves anything just because those around them believe it.
(A: So the goats are the ones who agitate, because they don’t believe everything that the rest believe.)
The goats are often not very pleasant people, but they are usually above the average of intelligence. It is probably the corroding influence of the goats that gradually saps the vitality of a creed by its cumulative infection, and indeed there may well be a proportionality between the number of goats in a community and the life span of the creed of the sheep in that community.
(A; Now, the goats themselves, if you jump back again to Bertrand Russell, the writings of Bertrand Russell, he said that amongst the general population there are those who understand what’s going on by instinct first of all, and then by reading and study. And he says, we must recruit them. And if we can’t recruit them to be on our side, we have to eliminate them, because, obviously, jumping back to Galton Darwin here, they’d be the goats. They’d agitate and just bring the society to destruction. Anyway, back to The Next Million Years. He says:)
In future history the constancy of human nature makes it certain that man will continue to be dominated by enthusiasm for creeds of one kind or another; he will persecute and be persecuted again and again for the sake of ideas, some of which to later ages will seem of no importance, and even unintelligible.
(A: In the present society today, which is primarily humanistic, they’ve been given a humanistic understanding, through schooling, of the world. They can’t understand what the Hundred Years War was or anything like that. He says:)
But there is one much more valuable aspect of creeds that must be noticed. They serve to give a continuity to policy far greater than can usually be attained by intellectual conviction.
(A: So, in other words, once you’ve created a cause and a purpose and an understanding, even if it’s erroneous, it will last a long time, I guess if you have the right folk at the top and the cash to back it.)
There are many cases in history of enlightened statesmen who have devoted their lives to carrying through some measure for the general good.
(A: Now he’s talking from the side of a eugenicist, you understand. So, when he talks about the general good, he’s talking about something else than you’d understand.)
They may have succeeded, only to find that the next generation neglects all they have done. . . .
(A: Think of the Founding Fathers of the US and the Constitution. So people have:)
. . . devoted their lives to carrying through some measure for the general good. They may have succeeded, only to find that the next generation neglects all they have done, so that it becomes undone again in favour of some other quite different way of benefiting humanity. The intellectual adoption of a policy thus often hardly survives for more than a single generation, and this is too short a period for such a policy to overcome the tremendous effects of pure chance. But if the policy can arouse enough enthusiasm to be incorporated in a creed, then there is at least a prospect that it will continue for something like ten generations, and that is long enough to give a fair probability that it will prevail over the operations of pure chance.
(A: Now, you just bring all your foundations into that, because he was a member of most of these foundations that exist today, and they all have specialized purposes. They fund thousands of nongovernmental organizations across the world. They fund the color revolutions that you see agitating within a country before NATO goes in. And so, they’re creating a creed now, through schooling and university primarily, for agitation towards the world system of government. But this guy goes into what man is. He says:)
Man is a wild animal. In the past two chapters I have examined different aspects of the nature of man. In the first he was regarded just like any other species of wild animal, while in the second some of his social qualities were considered, which might not be regarded as those of a wild animal.
(A: So, he’s talking about civilization, but what he really goes on to say, is that we must, we, talking about his own particular class that he belongs to, must alter humanity themselves, all of humanity, except themselves, because they must remain wild. Those who lead the world must not be domesticated. And he does use the term of domestication of the general population, by removal of genes, or by, as I say, mainly he suggested they should alter the hormonal levels of male and female. Well, what do you have today? They’re bringing the population down by destroying basically the hormonal level of the male. The male can hardly produce any workable sperm in the West. And that’s a fact, folks.
The Horizon series in 1992, you’ve got to see it. Where literally, every test they were doing of men twenty-five years of age, showed about less than a third of sperm to begin with, and out of that third of sperm, most of it was nonviable because it was nonfunctional. It was deformed. That’s in the span from 1950 to the 1970s they took the test on. Twenty years, something happened. Something was introduced into men. And of course, they’ve also found out too that estrogen, you know xenoestrogen or synthetic estrogen was put into lots of products which the mother applied on her skin and actually drank as well, during the gestation period of the male fetus, and in the first trimester, even before that, within the first eight weeks or so, if they did that the men would never be truly fully functional men, as in the 1950s version.
And it’s self-evident today. And this is proven fact. What it does with the women is make them more aggressive. And I’ve read articles here, where in places like Britain, the police are complaining that the most aggressive people that they’re up against now are women. And gangs of them, just like the guys used to be. They’re more manly in many ways than the guys. And other countries too, even in Australia, they’ve found out they’ve got a higher level of testosterone in them, the women, than the men do. So, it’s very important to know the past and read books like this, because only by then do you realize, no, this is not an accident. These guys talked about doing this. And when they talk about things, at that level, they mean it. They’re not whistling in the wind. They’re not putting out a list of stuff that Santa Claus is going to deliver. They want it done. And they go ahead and simply do it. After all, you wouldn’t get volunteers. So, he goes on about domesticating the animal, the human animal. But they themselves, as I say, those who lead the world, must be wild, left wild, undomesticated, because they must lead the world. And if you domesticate a man, they lose their ability for pure survival. You won’t care. You’ll just whistle as you go through a forest full of wild coyotes or something, who are rather hungry. And that’s what would happen to you. You just disappear. So the chapter Man is a Wild Animal is awfully important to understand anything. Especially when they say that he himself and his type would not be altered.
He goes into also the creed or master breed that will rule the world. It’s already here. He says:)
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
(A: He’s talking about all the rest of you, you see.)
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,
(A: That’s the beneficent dictator they’re talking about.)
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. . . .
(A: Now you have specialized scientists, all breeding within each other, exactly as H.G. Wells said in his book The Modern Utopia. And you have bureaucrats interbreeding with each other. That’s pretty common. That’s been common for a long, long time. The United Nations in fact has a school for their own children of the workers there, who end up growing up and becoming that breed that runs the United Nations. And they’re not democratic in any fashion whatsoever. And of course, in the military too, you’ve got women in it as well now. And they talked about that, creating a military breed as well, that would end up. So there would be specialized breeds that would dominate all the rest, you see. And this is no science fiction. This is from a physicist, a very serious guy, and he himself was a product of generations of working on the theories of evolution and how to alter the human species. So, until you understand, as I say, these books, you won’t understand the things that are happening today, or why even the UN is where it is, for instance. Why is the UN building in New York? Why is that? Who demanded that it be built in New York? It was the Soviets. Why? Why did Rockefeller donate the land? And what organizations did Rockefeller belong to? These eugenical organizations I’m talking about here.
And he goes on about the creation of the master breed. And he says, “These would be of great value, but they would not be the master breed,” he’s talking about the servant class, mathematicians and so on would be part of the servant class, but they’d still be higher up than the rest of the general population. And he says, they’d be part 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 rulers—among them of course should be included a good many who exert secret influence without holding any overt office—
(A: Well, that’s the technocrats, the Brzezinskis, Kissingers, and hundreds and hundreds more across the world)
and 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.
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.
(A: And I’ve mentioned, you should read that book too. Mainly the technique that Plato uses in the dialectic to bring his imaginary partner that he’s talking to, around to his way of thinking. That’s the technique you have to understand. But he says, breeds are specialized for particular purposes. Now, that’s exactly what the brother of Julian Huxley, Aldous Huxley had in his Brave New World, which he wrote in 1933. You’d breed segments of society for specific tasks. So::)
Breeds are specialized for particular purposes, but the essence of masters is that they must not be specialized. They have to be able to deal with totally unforeseen conditions, and this is a quality of wild, not of tame, life.
(A: So the master breed must remain wild, you see.)
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. All through history the most formidable difficulty of every ruler has been the selection of his successor, and the best intentions have been nearly always disappointed.
Of all animals man is the most ready to try experiments and there are always candidates—far too many candidates—who regard themselves as fit members for the master breed.
(A: Now, all the ones who are brown-nosers, let’s put it that way, who want to get up there, and who really try, and they’re good yes-men, they should read this paragraph.)
Of all animals man is the most ready to try experiments and there are always candidates—far too many candidates—who 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.
(A: He also goes on in the book to say there’s lots of candidates to be a leader, but they’re not brought into it. And Julian Huxley said the same thing, by the way. And then he goes on about the limitation of population. We’re all dying of cancers now. Just coincidence though, eh. And he goes on about too many folk multiplying. The wrong kind, he really means. Then he goes into procreative instincts and how to waylay them or even destroy them, in fact, if you’re really reading properly. Birth control and also abortion would get promoted across the planet. Well, that’s what UNESCO does. In fact, Julian Huxley got awards from the Margaret Sanger foundation and all the other foundations for sterilization and abortions across the Third World countries, because the Third World is not to be allowed to come to too high up, especially Africa. Africa, all the nations of Africa have been, they’ll just keep it going there forever, I think. And Kissinger mentioned that too, that the biggest threat to the state was overpopulation of these Third World countries.
And he says:)
The argument that the eugenist rates the well-to-do highly is quite true if it is read in these terms, for the well-to-do are rather more likely than others to possess the quality of hereditary ability through having shown it in several generations.
So, to get into the club at the top, you’ve got to have the right breeding, marry the right wives, you see. Not because you get on with them necessarily, but for her particular family tree of conquest and holding on to cash and your family tree of doing the same. And having your offspring inherit these qualities. So, they’re the ones who get up into the ruling creed you might say. Back with more after this break.
Hi folks, I’m back, Cutting Through the Matrix. And just talking about a couple of the big boys, and they have their offspring, of course, and there’s the Galton family, Charles Galton Darwin, and the Huxleys, and it’s interesting to see that all the big organizations of the same period that they were writing in, before World War II and after World War II, are still in existence today. And some have morphed into other areas, but still maintaining their previous areas too. And they’re working all through society and they’re all connected to the United Nations. It’s quite fantastic to see that, to see how it really, really works. And how science is totally incorporated into all their ideas. They all mention too about drugging society, either through Soma, in a fictionalized form, that would keep everybody happy, tranquilized and pleasant, and they also discussed other ways of putting things in the water supply too, and of course, we’ve got fluoride and God knows what else in it now. Here’s an article here to show you something that you’d never dream of really in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s.
Prescribed Heroin More Cost Effective Than Current Addiction Treatment
(A: Than government puts out.)
Medically prescribed heroin is more cost-effective than methadone
(A: See, now we’re running Afghanistan and we have all the dope, you see.)
for treating long-term street heroin users, according to a new study by researchers at Providence Health Care and the University of British Columbia.
The study, published today in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ), attributed most of the economic benefits to the fact that recipients of medically prescribed heroin stayed in treatment longer and spent less time in relapse than those receiving methadone.
(A: So methadone actually is more addictive in a sense, which is a synthetic form that the government makes sure they prescribe to the addicts, because they’re all in bed with Pharma lobbyists you see.)
Both results are associated with reduced criminal activity and lower health care costs.
So, it’s interesting, because every government, I’ve read the ones about Britain and the massive amount of money they’re spending on methadone addicts. And now you have parts of eugenics societies coming over to Britain, I’ve put them up on the sites before, where American women approach other women coming out of clinics, even doctor’s clinics, presuming they’re getting a prescription for methadone and asking if they would mind being sterilized. They’ll give you a couple of hundred pounds to be sterilized. I might try and find those and put them up again tonight. See, it all ties together with this movement we’re on to get rid of all, a good part of the domesticated species as Charles Galton Darwin would say.
And talking about again, what they talked about, foundations would help rule the world, and philanthropists would help rule the world, exactly what Adam Weishaupt talked about too. That’s how they get changes made. And they’re full of fraud, of course.
$28 billion health fund backed by Bill Gates and Bono is investigated for fraud
Microsoft’s founder charity has donated over a $100 million.
You should really try and see the documentary Starsuckers. I’ve put it up before. Two parts. You’ve got to see the second part to see what happens to Bono and his particular. They said they’d raked in billions for their big ploy to get money for Ethiopia or whatever, and you have to really see what happened to the Ethiopians. They were led into an area of the desert following the trail of the food that was getting dumped, and wiped out by their government. Yeah. Just a coincidence though, eh, they don’t all work together. But, as I say, if you can’t understand the past, even the recent past, you won’t understand the present or where it’s going. You’ll just be confused and angry as to what’s happening. But at least this way, as I say, you’ll get a step up the ladder to understanding why things are happening, because these guys never change their plans once they make them, even if it’s fifty or a hundred years ago.
From Hamish and myself, in Ontario, Canada, it’s good night, and may your god or your gods go with you.
show covered in following links:
Julian Huxley--Quotes on UNESCO
Prescribed Heroin Cheaper than Methadone Treatment
Sterilization Evangelists Stop Women in Street and Offer Money on Condition They be Sterilized
Gates Charities Investigated for Fraud