It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Trans-humanism. What is it and what does it mean for the NWO. A brief intro.

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:02 PM
Transhumanism and the NWO. Where do you stand?

I have been reading allot about the Nazi party and the connection to American politics. I came across the ideologies that the Nazis had that led them to want a perfect race. They were essentially transhumanist/ post-humanist. The idea that they could improve the human race and form a society of super men. They were not concerned with making the average man a superman, but were concerned with eliminating the bad parts of humanity. The goal was the same though, an artificial improvement to what nature had given. Nazi´s were naturalists.

They had a strange mix of biblical, old world, and occult beliefs. The main thing I came across was the focus on the super men of old that were described as Nefilim in the bible. Hybrids of this and that, chimeras of this animal and that or even humans.

The American side had people like ford or Edison. They were naturalists. They were Nazi supporters. They had the belief that some were destined to be more than others. It has been WELL documented that bush had deep Nazi connections. Project paper clip that brought Nazi scientists to the US for work in our own RD projects it is no secret that the science of the third Reich became the science of America.

The fact that Nazi science was used here and that inevitably Nazi visions of its application came along with it cannot be disputed. What was the purpose of Nazi science relating to biology? Something taken right out of Nietzsche. A new world of super men. A place where religion was removed as resistance to change and all that God told us about playing god. The Jewish bible is full of promises of fulfilling the wonders promised to man.

The idea of one group of people separating themselves from the rest of humanity and treating everybody else like "unterermenschen" was not originally a Nazi idea. It started here:

Deuteronomy, chapter 7 -
When HASHEM, your God, will bring you to the Land to which you come to possess it, and many nations will be thrust away from before you - the Hittite, the Girgan#e, the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Perizzite, the Hivvite, and the Jebusite - seven nations greater and mightier than you, and HASHEM, your God, will deliver them before you, and you will smite them - you shall utterly destroy them; you shall not make a treaty with them nor shall you show them mercy.

You shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughter to his son, and you shall not take his daughter for your son, for he will cause your child to turn away from after Me and they will worship the gods of others; then HASHEM's wrath will burn against you, and He will destroy you quickly.

Rather, so shall you do to them: Their altars shall you break apart; their pillars shall you smash; their sacred trees shall you cut down; and their carved images shall you burn in fire.
For you are a holy people to HASHEM, your God; HASHEM, your God, has chosen you to be for Him a treasured people above all the peoples that are on the face of the earth.

It is true that Hitler believed in eugenics. For emphasis I will repeat the second paragraph from the quotation above:

...those elements within the folk-community which show the best racial qualities ought to be encouraged more than the others and especially they should be encouraged to increase and multiply.

That's the connection between National Socialism and Transhumanism. Transhumanism is a kind of do-it-yourself eugenics. Hitler wasn't the only political thinker who said that eugenics is a good thing. In those days it wasn't controversial. In the first half of the 20th century, eugenics was an accepted idea not only in Germany but also in Britain and the U.S.

There were even rabbis who advocated eugenics. Now, of course, this is an embarrassment to most Jews, as it is to everybody else - except Nazis and transhumanists. Nazis and transhumanists agree on the general point that there is something wrong with humanity as it presently exists. Instead of accepting our present condition, we should aspire to something better

if National Socialism had survived intact - if it had not become diluted after three generations - then genetic engineering would have the full support of the government. Nazis have no patience with the idea that there is something "unethical" about modifying God-given life forms. If Hitler had thought his ideas through and developed them into a complete philosophy, and if his successors had continued to develop that philosophy in the second half of the 20th century, then Transhumanism would have been part of it. The idea was there, if only in embryonic form.

This are all things I pulled from a transhumanist site. The next it so true. The need for a single state is no longer sought after. The fact is that a global climate conducive to this particular science and philosophy is better for their goals.

In any case, we don't need a transhumanist state. We only need a situation in which scientists and inventors can pursue their research without interference from the state, and that's exactly the situation we are in, as long as we don't wave a red flag in the government's face. Democracy and transcendence may be mutually exclusive concepts, but that is significant only on a theoretical level, not on a practical level.

The technology of the 1980's and 90's emerged too suddenly to be controlled, and that will be even more true in the future.Our present system of semi-anarchic international capitalism is an almost ideal environment for science. That's not to say I'm enthusiastic about it. Sometimes I despise it as much as anyone. However, for my purposes, it works. In any case, like it or not, we are stuck with it.

An essential part of National Socialism was the attempt to establish Germany as an autarkic economy, independent of international capitalism. This attempt failed, and probably had to fail. The international financial system doesn't permit anyone to secede from it. As the spirit said to Johann Suter (see Ministry of Illusion for the context),

Why do you keep trying to fight the gold?
You can't stop the wheels of the world.

The Transhuman metamorphosis is not going to occur in an "organized folk community," or any kind of idealistic community. It's too late for that. The Third Reich was humanity's last chance for a first-world future. The metamorphosis will happen in the same society we live in now, a society in which the wheels of the world grind inexorably toward a dystopian future too bleak to contemplate.

So we have that but there is more.

H+: Are there Germans in history that are admired as transhumanists?
MJS: Actually, not admired. Some — among them many non-transhumanists — relate Nietzsche, who was a German, to Transhumanism because he introduced the term “Übermensch” or “overman.” However Nietzsche’s concept of the “Übermensch” is prone to misinterpretation and has also been related to — and misused by — Nazi Germany, which in turn also led to certain negative interpretations of Transhumanism that do not reflect actual transhumanist philosophy as it is understood by the vast majority of transhumanists.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:03 PM
The battle to expunge Transhumanism form its Nazi roots and its contemporary followers has been an uphill battle. There has been much progress and so much so that the real truth is, we are all transhumanist for the most part and don't even know it. We support advancing our race and becoming better humans. While the history of it can be overlooked and reworked in today's age we see the challenge Transhumanists face. It is elitist and favors totalitarian rule. Transhumanism can be sold as a means of greater survivability. Whatever the guise we must note that the history of it does come into play in its application since its planners have used what sources they had available.

“(The speaker pointed out that) Transhumanism can remind a lot of Nazism, and we should be very aware about this. ‘We must not be tempted by the dark side.’ We should be ready and have a mental defense ready if fascist(s) were ever to try and adapt Transhumanism, so we can keep them out. I totally agree in this. We want to be post-humans not übermensch.” (Rasmussen, 1999)

“the Third Reich is the only model we have of a Transhumanist state…It's high time for transhumanists to face up to the fact that what we are trying to do cannot be done in our present political system.
Democracy and transcendence are mutually exclusive concepts. I am searching for a radical alternative, and that search led me to consider Nazi Germany, which, for all its imperfections, at least had some concept of human evolution and transcendence.” (Burkhead, 1999)

The site called for a modern racialist eugenic project using genetic engineering and selective breeding, quoted Adolph Hitler and George Lincoln Rockwell, the founder of the American Nazi Party, and linked to neo-Nazi groups, anti-Semitic sites and sites on the racial superiority of whites. The other websites maintained by’s founder, “Marcus Eugenicus,” likewise condemned democracy, egalitarianism, socialism and “political correctness,” especially in regards the silencing of “racialist science.”

The Nazi challenge became a practical matter in 2000 when it was revealed that a website,, that had joined a Transhuman webring was filled with neo-Nazi propaganda, white nationalist essays and links, and racialist eugenics. The site described itself as transhumanist and included extensive art illustrating heroic transcendence and space travel. The site called for a modern racialist eugenic project using genetic engineering and selective breeding, quoted Adolph Hitler and George Lincoln Rockwell, the founder of the American Nazi Party, and linked to neo-Nazi groups, anti-Semitic sites and sites on the racial superiority of whites.

The other websites maintained by’s founder, “Marcus Eugenicus,” likewise condemned democracy, egalitarianism, socialism and “political correctness,” especially in regards the silencing of “racialist science.”

In one of those other sites, Eugenicus promotes “Prometheism” [] which calls for using state coercion to promote eugenic goals:

Here is the meat of the ideology. I think we can agree that it seems a little, well, militant. It should be noted that these are more in line with the Nazi vision.

Principles and Goals
I. We are both a nation and a religion…a homeland must be sought for by any means available.

II. Our aim is to create a genetically enhanced race that will eventually become a new, superior species. In the short-term, this will be achieved via eugenics and genetic engineering.

III. (We pursue eugenics because) the world is caught in a dysgenic trend from which we want to be freed. (Also) this is a way of maximizing our viability -- the survival and probability of survival of our genes. A more intelligent species will be more fit to adapt to new environments and to face new threats and obstacles.

IV. We must not concern ourselves with others that are caught in the dysgenic cycle. We must only be concerned with the success of other competing eugenics' programs that will pose a threat to our own new species, for speciation will not travel along a single vector when humans compete using the new technologies.

V. Any eugenics program has equal validity to use the state's coercive power to improve human genetic capital…

The Politics of Transhumanism

Transhumanism is an emergent philosophical movement which says that humans can and should become more than human through technological enhancements. Contemporary Transhumanism has grown out of white, male, affluent, American Internet culture, and its political perspective has generally been a militant version of the libertarianism typical of that culture. Nonetheless transhumanists are becoming more diverse, with some building a broad liberal democratic philosophic foundation in the World Transhumanist Association. A variety of left futurist trends and projects are discussed as a proto-“democ
edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:04 PM
then we have Extropy. I think it is more of a PR effort to bridge the gap between people hesitant to embrace Transhumanism due to its history. It would also set a platform for religious people to find a common ground with its seemingly democratic and multicultural core beliefs. The core beliefs were later modified to seem less elitist.
" In a more extensive commentary on his 3.0 principles More explicitly departs from the elitist, Randian position of enlightened selfishness, and argues for both a consistent rule of law and for civic responsibility."

Libertarian Transhumanism: Max More and the Extropy Institute

This is really what is unique about the Extropian movement: the fusion of radical technological optimism with libertarian political philosophy… one might call it libertarian Transhumanism. (Goertzel, 2000)

In the 1980s, a young British graduate student, Max O’Connor, became interested in futurist ideas and life extension technologies while studying philosophy and political economy at Oxford. In the mid-1980s he became one of the pioneers of cryonics in England. After finishing at Oxford in 1988, having been impressed with the United States’ dynamism and openness to future-oriented ideas, O’Connor began his doctoral studies in philosophy at the University of Southern California. At USC he began mixing with the local futurist subculture, and soon teamed up with another graduate student, T.O. Morrow, to found the technoutopian journal Extropy.

O’Connor and Morrow adopted the term “Extropy,” the opposite of “entropy,” as the core symbol of their philosophy and goals: life extension, the expansion of human powers and control over nature, expansion into space, and the emergence of intelligent, organic, spontaneous order. O’Connor also adopted the new name Max More as a sign of his commitment to “what my goal is: always to improve, never to be static.

I was going to get better at everything, become smarter, fitter, and healthier. It would be a constant reminder to keep moving forward" (Regis, 1994).In early issues of Extropy magazine More began to publish successive versions and expositions of his “Extropian Principles.” In the early 1990s the Principles resolved down to five:

1. 1. BOUNDLESS EXPANSION: Seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, an unlimited lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, biological, and psychological limits to self-actualization and self-realization. Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities. Expanding into the universe and advancing without end.

2. 2. SELF-TRANSFORMATION: Affirming continual psychological, intellectual, and physical self-improvement, through reason and critical thinking, personal responsibility, and experimentation. Seeking biological and neurological augmentation.

3. 3. DYNAMIC OPTIMISM: Positive expectations fueling dynamic action. Adopting a rational, action-based optimism, shunning both blind faith and stagnant pessimism.

4. 4. INTELLIGENT TECHNOLOGY: Applying science and technology creatively to transcend "natural" limits imposed by our biological heritage, culture, and environment.

5. 5. SPONTANEOUS ORDER: Supporting decentralized, voluntaristic social coordination processes. Fostering tolerance, diversity, foresight, personal responsibility and individual liberty.

In 1991 the Extropians founded an email list, taking advantage of the dramatic expansion of Internet culture. The Extropian email list, and its associated regional and topical email lists, have attracted thousands of subscribers and have carried an extremely high volume of posts for the last decade. Most people who consider themselves Extropians have never met other Extropians, and participate only in this virtual community. There are however small groups of Extropians who meet together socially in California, Washington D.C. and Boston.

In the first issue of Extropy in 1988 More and Morrow included libertarian politics as one of the topics the magazine would promote. In 1991 Extropy focused on the principle of emergent order, publishing an essay by T.O. Morrow on David Friedman’s anarcho-capitalist concept of ["Privately Produced Law", and an article from Max More on "Order Without Orderers".

In these essays Morrow and More made clear the journal’s commitment to radical libertarianism, an ideological orientation shared by most of the young, well-educated, American men attracted to the Extropian list^. The Extropian milieu saw the state, and any form of egalitarianism, as a potential threat to their personal self-transformation. More’s fifth principle “Spontaneous Order” distilled their Hayek and Ayn Rand-derived belief that an anarchistic market creates free and dynamic order, while the state and its life-stealing authoritarianism is entropic.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:05 PM

In 1992 More and Morrow founded the Extropy Institute, which held its first conference in 1994. At Extro 1 in Sunnyvale California, the keynote speaker was the controversial computer scientist Hans Moravec, speaking on the how humans would be inevitably superseded by robots. Eric Drexler, a cryonics promoter and the founder of the field of nanotechnology, also addressed the conference.

Also in attendance was journalist Ed Regis (1994) whose subsequent article on the Extropians in Wired magazine greatly increasing the group’s visibility. The second Extro conference was held in 1995, Extro 3 was held in 1997, Extro 4 in 1999, and Extro 5 in 2001. Each conference has attracted more prominent scientists, science fiction authors and futurist luminaries.

In the wake of all this attention, the Extropians also began to attract withering criticism from progressive culture critics. In 1996 Wired contributor Paulina Borsook debated More in an on-line forum in the Wired website, taking him to task for selfishness, elitism and escapism. She subsequently published the book Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High Tech (2001).

Mark Dery excoriated the Extropians and a dozen related techno-culture trends in his 1997 Escape Velocity, coining the dismissive phrase “body-loathing” for those, like the Extropians, who want to escape from their “meat puppet” (body).

The Extropian list often was filled with vituperative attacks on divergent points of view, and those who had been alienated by the Extropians but were nonetheless sympathetic with transhumanist views began to amount a sizable group. Although More’s wife, Natasha Vita-More, is given prominent acknowledgement of her transhumanist arts and culture projects, there are few women involved in the Extropian subculture, and there have been women who left the list citing the dominant adolescent, hyper-masculine style of argumentation.

In a February/March 2002 poll more than 80% of Extropians were male, and more than 50% were under 30 years old (ExiCommunity Polls, 2002). In 1999 and 2000 the European fellow-travelers of the Extropians began to organize and meet, and the World Transhumanist Association was organized with founding documents distinctly less libertarian than the Extropian Principles. In the latter 1990s, as Transhumanism broadened its social base, a growing number of non-libertarian voices began to make themselves heard on the extro email lists.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:05 PM

Responding to these various trends and presumably his own philosophical maturation, More revamped his principles in 2000 from Version 2.6 to Version 3.0, and from five principles into seven: 1. Perpetual Progress, 2. Self-Transformation, 3. Practical Optimism, 4. Intelligent Technology, 5. Open Society, 6. Self-Direction, and 7. Rational Thinking. In Version 3.0, More adapts the previous, anarcho-capitalist “Spontaneous Order” into the much more moderately libertarian:

5. Open Society Supporting social orders that foster freedom of speech, freedom of action, and experimentation. Opposing authoritarian social control and favoring the rule of law and decentralization of power. Preferring bargaining over battling, and exchange over compulsion. Openness to improvement rather than a static utopia.

6. Self-Direction — Seeking independent thinking, individual freedom, personal responsibility, self-direction, self-esteem, and respect for others

In a more extensive commentary on his 3.0 principles More explicitly departs from the elitist, Randian position of enlightened selfishness, and argues for both a consistent rule of law and for civic responsibility.

“..for individuals and societies to flourish, liberty must come with personal responsibility. The demand for freedom without responsibility is an adolescent’s demand for license.” (More, 2000).

He also argues that extropianism is not “libertarian” and can be compatible with a number of different types of liberal “open societies,” although not in theocracies or authoritarian or totalitarian systems. (More, 2000).

However, as a casual review of the traffic on the Extropian lists confirms, the majority of Extropians remain staunch libertarians. In a survey of Extropian list participants conducted in February and March
of 2002, 56% of the respondents identified as "libertarian" or "anarchist/self-governance," with another 15% committed to (generally minarchist) alternative political visions (ExiCommunity Polls, 2002). [1][1] In the recommended “economics and society”reading list that More attaches to the 3.0 version of the principles, the political economy readings still strongly suggest an anarcho-capitalist orientation:

Ronald H. Coase The Firm, the Market, and the Law
David Friedman The Machinery of Freedom (2nd Ed.)
Kevin Kelly Out of Control
Friedrich Hayek The Constitution of Liberty
Karl Popper The Open Society and Its Enemies
Julian Simon The Ultimate Resource (2nd ed.)
Julian Simon & Herman Kahn (eds) The Resourceful Earth
(More, 2000)

so we have an ideological system of advancing humanity that can conform to all belief systems and many cultures. Even Neo-Nazis that endorse Eugenics. There is some form of Transhumanism in every level of society. We have been conditioned IMO to conform to this general idea: Nothing is so sacred that it cannot be improved.
so what is it really? Do we understand yet? Here is another excerpt to help us see its global reach and understand why it is so appealing.

Transhumanism, abbreviated as H+ or h+, is an international intellectual and cultural movement that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally transforming the human condition by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities.

Transhumanist thinkers study the potential benefits and dangers of emerging technologies that could overcome fundamental human limitations, as well as study the ethical matters involved in developing and using such technologies. They predict that human beings may eventually be able to transform themselves into beings with such greatly expanded abilities as to merit the label "post-human".[1]

This is what I find most appealing myself. The hive mind. I believe in it already and would have no problem accepting this. I wonder if it is conditioning or my natural state. I believed in this even before learning about Transhumanism or reading Nietzsche. I know it sounds awful, and it is really. But for some reason in my family we have always thought this way. I am working on it. It is very elitist but has a empowering aspect to it. A sort of "inherit order" to it I like, or liked.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:06 PM

One of the primary concepts of the Transhumanist agenda is "The Hive Mind".
One of the early Transhumanist elites, along with Julian Huxley, was Sir Charles Galton Darwin, the grandson of Charles Darwin, who founded the theory of evolution. Here is one of Charles Galton Darwin's quotes relating to the Hive Mind:

"There might be a drug, which, without other harmful effects, removed the urgency of sexual desire, and so, reproduced in humanity the status of workers in a beehive."

The founders of Transhumanism have elitist views about what humanity should be. This Human Beehive concept has been envisioned by the ruling elite class throughout history as the ideal society. The ultimate slave race, scientifically designed to conform, obey and serve the needs of the elite – worker bees who do not question or rebel.

Transhumanists envision this Hive Mind as being possible when all people across the world can link their minds together using technology, creating a symbiotic existence through the new super intelligence of this collective Hive Mind. Forget about the needs of the individual – it's all about the Hive. They refer to this collective, super intelligence as the Singularity.

My main problem is that I truly value democracy. I don't know if it is because I was indoctrinated in American society and learned about what horrors happened in Europe, or if I have a natural inclination to altruistic mind sets. Whatever the case democracy is not conducive to Transhumanism since it leaves the decisions to the people. The people have traditionally left things alone that were not broken. Improvement in their mind is more comfort and less work.

A transhumanist looks to better himself regardless of his level of comfort now. He would not be concerned with making work easier since he does not really do it. He would not care for more comfort in society since he has it. He wants to change his body and his consciousness.

The average man is not concerned with these things since he wants to satisfy his more primal needs first. Housing, food, security. His spiritual state, level of understanding of the world around him, his human condition are almost irrelevant. Some so and more so now a days, but traditionally Transhumanism was an elitist ideology.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:06 PM

In the broad sense, democracy means "rule of the people, by the people, for the people".
In a second sense, democracy is used to mean an (almost) universal right to vote on issues and/or representatives. Sometimes direct democracy is seen as "more democratic" than representative democracy.

In a third, very common sense, democracy is taken to refer to some combination of the voting procedures (as in the second sense) and the particular political and legal procedures of the speaker’s country. In the case of the USA, those procedures are mainly constitutional protections of individual freedoms embodied in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. In the case of Great Britain, arguably such a constitutionally-limited republic exists in a largely unwritten form (the Magna Carta being the main written document).

How well do any of these meanings relate to the philosophies of Transhumanism? The first and broadest sense of "democracy" is intended to eliminate in principle the rule of "the people" by an oligarch. In practice, many of the actual people do not get to vote (prisoners, tax-paying permanent residents who are not citizens). Those that do may not possess sufficient knowledge or motivation to vote.

Those who do vote may not enjoy any choices of candidate, position, or package of policies that represents their preferences. The complicated working of real democracies – and the vast involvement of government in commercial activities – means that a small percentage of the people actually wields most of the influence.

Can’t We Do Better?

Transhumanists of all stripes agree in their commitment to continual and fundamental improvements in the human condition. Those who identity Transhumanism with democracy do a disservice by tying us down to a historically transient arrangement. Winston Churchill famously commented that "democracy is the worst form of government except for all the other forms that have been tried".

Churchill’s words expressed a healthy critical rationalism – an attitude crucial to extropic Transhumanism – in that they emphasize that democratic arrangements have no intrinsic value; they have value only to the extent that they enable us to achieve shared goals while protecting our freedom. Surely, as we strive to transcend the biological limitations of human nature, we can also improve upon monkey politics?

Transhumanism was traditionally not democratic in nature in so far as it never really sought out to establish itself within a system of government that was democratic. Early forms of trans humanism were exclusive to monarchal systems of governance. That is why I believe the US is in a transitional state to a more totalitarian form of rule. Indeed the rest of the world is behind this change with such countries like Italy for example that are at the forefront of Transhumanism. It cannot be ignored the level of growth of racist groups and formally fascist groups within this country and the rest of Europe.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:08 PM

Selling fascist Transhumanism
The Vigiliant Citizen website keeps tabs on the mega dangerous fascist transhumanist movement which is receiving treatment in the media recently by way of the "Singularity" question.

Vigilant sees the recent article at MailOnline 'Hitler would have loved The Singularity: Mind-blowing benefits of merging human brains and computers' as a typical treatment of the story by the old dinosaur MSM. It has the characteristic “overwhelmingly-positive-but-with-a-hint-of-obligatory-criticism-to-appear-objective” tone to it.

The big pitchman for the transhumanists is Ray Kurzweil.

Vigilant contextualizes what is going on.

He writes:
We’ve seen in previous articles (notably in The Transhumanist and Police State Agenda in Pop Music) that the concept of Transhumanism, which can be defined as the merging of humans and robots, is being abundantly promoted in music videos, movies and video games.

On top of this “indirect” kind of promotion, Transhumanism is being sold through more direct channels such as documentaries, television features and news reports. The main face of the movement is the American inventor Ray Kurzweil who has recently been on a massive PR campaign to promote what he calls “Singularity” (a term that is probably less threatening than “Transhumanism”).

Kurzweil is however not a lone nut with a crazy futuristic dream. He works in collaboration with the world’s most powerful people in business and politics. For example, in February 2009, Kurzweil collaborated with Google and the NASA Ames Research Center, to create the Singularity University training center for corporate executives and government officials.

The University’s self-described mission is to “assemble, educate and inspire a cadre of leaders who strive to understand and facilitate the development of exponentially advancing technologies and apply, focus and guide these tools to address humanity’s grand challenges”.

It is safe to say that Transhumanism is not only the goal of one man but of the entire global elite. For this reason, the merging of humans and robots is not only promoted as something “cool” and positive in mass media, it is announced, despite its potential pitfalls, as an inevitability.

The Vigilant Citizen post, Mass Media Promoting Transhumanism: the “Mind-Blowing Benefits of Merging Human Brains and Computers”, is here.

Transhumanism is gaining strength but really it is here to stay. Scholars are starting to pick sides and they like the rest of us see some benefit as well as potential dangers. There is a little hypocrisy here though. Many support the idea of enhancements, but do not want to give them to everyone. In essence they want to create classes based on who gets what enhancement. Worker classes get some while ruling classes get others. This is the double sided sword we are faced with.

Transhumanism is being taken seriously by an increasing number of scholars. The fact that Stanford’s respected legal bioethics program hosted the 150 or so attendees from Europe, Asia, New Zealand and North America to discuss issues raised by human enhancement is testimony to how far Transhumanism has come in from the fringe.

Even the government has taken a position — against — in the second report out of President Bush’s bioethics council. Titled “Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness,” the 2003 report suggested the need for regulations to prevent the use of biotech to give people powers they did not have naturally.

There are the military applications that bring to mind the many animals of mythology that plagued mankind for countless ages. Are these the things the bible and other books warned us of? What do our leader really think. Do they want us to be better or better workers and soldiers? Do they want the best enhancements for themselves?

“Dangerous, profoundly wrong and has no place in our society…” are the words President Obama used to describe human cloning

“One of the first things that President Obama did at the executive level as soon as he became president,” he says in “Trans-Humanism,” “(is) he overturned restrictions that had been put in place by President (George W.) Bush which would have prohibited federal dollars, American taxpayer money, flowing in to pay for experiments to be done on human-animal chimeras (combinations) and other forms of science such as stem-cell sciences – which is also important to the transhumanist movement.

“But what most of the public doesn’t realize is when we’re talking about stem-cell sciences, we’re almost always talking about the creation of a human-animal chimera from which those stem cells are being derived. But now, tax dollars in the United States from the federal level are flowing into thousands of laboratories.”

“DARPA has an interest in figuring out how to get around the decaying process of cellular life, and they use the term creating an immortal organism,” he explains. “But it’s more than just an organism. They consider it to be potentially a lethal force that can be used in military application.

“Wired Magazine actually referred to it as a living, breathing creature. And DARPA admits that the force of this living creature, this immortal organism, could be so potent that it ought to also have what they call a ‘kill switch’ introduced into its organism so that in case it gets out of hand, we could throw the switch and stop it, or if it became available to our enemies, we could throw the switch and stop it.”

why are our elites so concerned with biblical prophecy as some say they are. Zionism for one is the fulfillment of prophecy. Transhumanism is another part IMO.

Among them is author and researcher Tom Horn, who stars in “Trans-Humanism: Destroying the Barriers,” an hour-long DVD exploring the radical transformation of humanity.

He suggests people, as we now know them, are in the process of a man-made redesign in order to make them super beings or even non-human entities.

“In terms of what transhumanists are aspiring to do through the use of these new sciences – biotechnology, nanotechnology, neuropharmacology,” Horn says, “what they may do is lead us literally into the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.”

Here are some things to consider as well as where they may nest in powerful people's minds.

If not the present movement per se, then at least some of its core concepts and ambitions helped provide a framework for the genocides of the twentieth century.

For example, Nazi and Communist aspirations of the Übermensch and the Novus Homo, respectively, were clearly motivated not just by an ideology of extreme rationalization and instrumentalization, as Richard L. Rubinstein points out, nor just by a modern reiteration of brutal, archaic tribal instincts, which is the popular wisdom of today, but by a quest to usher in the next phase of human evolution. Consider these well-known remarks:

“All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment…” — Friedrich Nietzsche

“The human species, the coagulated homo sapiens, will once more enter into a state of radical transformation, and, in his own hands, will become an object of the most complicated methods of artificial selection and psycho-physical training.” — Leon Trotsky

“Will the new socio-economic system reproduce itself in the structure of the people’s character? If so, how? Will his traits be inherited by his children? Will he be a free, self-regulating personality? Will the elements of freedom incorporated into the structure of the personality make any authoritarian forms of government unnecessary.” — Wilhem Reich

(I offer the quote by Nietzsche in full knowledge of the debate surrounding it, strictly to highlight how it could be construed transhumanistically.) And this is just to highlight the most egregious cases. Transhumanism has supplied a justificatory framework for many less grand-scale atrocities throughout the world, and arguably it is lurking somewhere in the conceptual background of the present Islamist vision of the Mujahid, too, particularly its Shahid aspect, in which human beings are purported to achieve perfection by permanent revolution and self-weaponization.

What did the Bush really do for Transhumanism? why was 9/11 so alarming for its similarities with the Reichstag fire? What was this push for setting a playing field for totalitarian rule so important to the NWO? Regardless if 9/11 was planned or not. It was used as an opportunity to install totalitarian rule. The sort of rule in which this science can flourish and overcome restrictions of religious or public opinion.

Let's look at the politics behind it.

Understandably, after WWII, there was a widespread revulsion on the Left against bio-utopian ideas. The Left was then pushed further towards a Romantic technophobia by environmentalism, the anti-corporate and anti-military New Left, the spiritual and pastoral counterculture, and intellectual attacks on the Enlightenment from postmodernists.

There were still strains of transhumanist meliorism, however, in ideas such as psychedelic liberation, alternative technology and post-scarcity anarchism. The Iranian-American F.M. Esfandiary, “FM2030,” the promoter of the term “Trans-human,” synthesized left-libertarian politics with advocacy for life extension, biotechnologies and cognitive enhancement. But overall the Left became far more critical of technology than Marxists, social democrats and Progressives had been.

As a consequence of Left techno skepticism, neoliberals and market anarchists were prominent as advocates for techno utopianism in the 1970s and 1980s, from the corporate futurists to the anarcho-capitalists dreaming of independent states in space and on abandoned oil rigs.

As Silicon Valley developed into a hub for entrepreneurial neoliberalism this strain of Transhumanism found a natural home. As email and the Web began to connect technophiles worldwide the neoliberal Extropy Institute, founded by philosopher Max More, emerged in the 1990s as the first organized advocates for Transhumanism.

Partly in reaction to the free market views of the Extropians, European transhumanists organized the broader World Transhumanist Association (WTA) in the late 1990s. The WTA included both social democrats and neoliberals around a liberal democratic definition of Transhumanism, codified in the Transhumanist Declaration.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:09 PM

The years 2002 to 2004 saw the first debates about the transhumanist project in elite policy circles. Francis Fukuyama published the bioconservative best-seller Our Posthuman Future, and was he then appointed to the Bush administration’s President’s Council on Bioethics (PBC) by fellow bioconservative Leon Kass.

Under the leadership of Kass and Fukuyama the PBC published Beyond Therapy, which suggested the need for strong regulation of cognitive enhancement, life extension and other biotechnologies. At the same time, the American Christian Right and the Vatican were evolving beyond opposition to abortion to a broader critique of reproductive technologies and human enhancement.

Left-wing and environmentalist critics of biotechnology such as Jeremy Rifkin, Bill McKibben, the Center for Genetics and Society and radical disability rights groups also began to oppose nanomedicine, genetic engineering and human enhancement in the early 2000s. Gradually, a network of Left and Right-wing bioconservatives has grown linking these groups on both sides of the Atlantic.

Ever wonder why Bush pushed for a religious side, though we all know it was just a sham? ever ask why? Hitler had a similar image, he would often misquote biblical prophecy and misquote biblical excerpts. The image is one of legitimacy, moral and ethical founding as well as an occult hidden meaning for the fulfillment of prophecy. But to what end?

The Bush administration, the religious Right and the emergence of this Left-Right bioconservative axis had a polarizing effect on biopolitical intellectuals, driving many to associate with the growing transhumanist movement and to clearly advocate for the right to human enhancement. Bioethicists John Harris and Julian Savulescu in the UK joined with American bioethicists Arthur Caplan, Henry Greely, and Gregory Pence in defense of reproductive cloning, germinal choice and cognitive enhancement. Although these intellectuals explicitly reject the label of transhumanist, they represent the natural working out of Enlightenment ethics in biopolicy of which Transhumanism is a product.

A major socio-political concern regarding breakdown of a clean transition into an enhanced and more enlightened civilization is firstly of course religious fundamentalism and zealotry. Adherents of pseudo-cult/tradition based religious organizations inculcated with beliefs of apocalyptic redemption and last days scenarios only usher in social stresses and self fulfilling prophesies of destruction, as though the collective consciousness of civilization is unable and ill-equipped to effectively adapt to what is properly deemed an evolutionary point of departure—the social neuroses resists change and in effort to sublimate death and ultimate decay has sublimated the process into a deity-based ideal.

For whatever reasons religion has perpetuated itself ; ultimately for purposes of social and psychological palliatives buffering the burdens and stress of living, the entire faith based system has its own sort of sociological and historical genome which resists change and is hostile to any interference or ideas, however rational which oppose its world-view and system of proliferation and mind-numbing order.

I don’t know the exact figure, but I believe it is something like 95% of the U.S. if not the world have systems of belief correlating at least near to this systematized form of religious indoctrination. Secondly, the leaders of social institutions and governments, for the most part are not scientifically inclined and share more in common with the religious sects and proliferation and maintenance of power structures and are not inclined to make any radical alterations (HDTV?) to facilitate the radical advancements science might provide to ameliorate the human condition.

Promoting the science and possibilities not to mention intentions of future technologies is without a doubt going to produce or exacerbate social tensions and stresses which in a worst-case scenario may spell doom on a large global scale?! Given a growing awareness of the threat of science radically altering the sacrosanct ideal of what it means to be human, live and transport to a blissful afterlife, the warmongering of countries, terrorist groups and otherwise—to what extent do these technologies pose a threat to social stability and harmony?

The science will be there long before ideologies are based on solid reason and initiating this technology I believe would spark controversy at least as intense as abortion. Anyway, what’s the PR on this going to be like? also, given the ethical questions inevitably arising, won’t we have to remodel the capitalist and government systems eventually to accommodate a new breed of being. Timing is everything, just saying, ruffle too many feathers too quickly and the ostrich might attack.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:19 PM
Good info.

This is only tip of the iceberg, and it runs deep.

The "elite" rich want a multi-class society strictly controlled. And they will get it if people don't come out of their media-induced trance and see what is going on.

Beware Kurzweil's Singularity:

edit on 29-4-2012 by pianopraze because: ...

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:47 PM
reply to post by pianopraze

yeah the "singularity" will catch many by surprise. The term has its place in leadership development.
but you are right. This runs very deep. It is hard to even grasp the scope.

On top of this “indirect” kind of promotion, Transhumanism is being sold through more direct channels such as documentaries, television features and news reports. The main face of the movement is the American inventor Ray Kurzweil who has recently been on a massive PR campaign to promote what he calls “Singularity” (a term that is probably less threatening than “Transhumanism”).

Kurzweil is however not a lone nut with a crazy futuristic dream. He works in collaboration with the world’s most powerful people in business and politics. For example, in February 2009, Kurzweil collaborated with Google and the NASA Ames Research Center, to create the Singularity University training center for corporate executives and government officials.

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:54 PM
reply to post by BIHOTZ

It is being subtly programmed into our youth as a good thing through music videos and games:

H3 or H+ is not a good thing no matter how sexy it is portrayed.

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:56 PM
Here is one more video I left for last. It requires a little background study but I feel it is appropriate for ATS:

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:59 PM
reply to post by pianopraze

yeah, it didn't make much sense to me why the symbology used in videos was relevant. It hit me one day when watching kids play video games. It is everywhere. I have to admit. I am slightly programmed to receive this all with open arms. I am still coming to terms with what I truly like about it if anything. It is scary how well entrenched this is in our psyche.

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 07:22 PM
one thing that the last video brings up is the raid in Iraq´s museum. What gets me is that they left so much other really valuable stuff laying around. Even if it was an inside job for the purposes of monetary gain. Why would they leave all that stuff thrown around? What did they set out to find? What was so specific to their purpose there that they left so much equally valuable stuff? They say they dropped the keys and couldn't find them again....right. Because they wouldn't bring flashlights. They knew everything else, but forgot that the lighting was insufficient.....ok....sure.

On 2 May, Bogdanos and companion crept down a dark hidden stairwell towards the basement storage area. They saw its great metal door was wide open with no sign of a forced entry. Someone in the know had got there first. "The chaos," wrote Bogdanos, "was shocking: 103 fishing tackle-sized plastic boxes, originally containing thousands of cylinder seals, beads, amulets and jewellery were randomly thrown in all directions Amid the devastation, hundreds of surrounding larger, but empty, boxes had been untouched.

It was immediately clear that these thieves knew what they were looking for and where to look." But they discovered that 30 cabinets containing part of the world's finest collection of cylinder seals and tens of thousands of gold and silver coins were untouched.

What Bogdanos later surmised was that the thieves had the relevant keys, but had dropped them and, in the unlit basement and lacking torches, had been unable to find them again. What, however, had been taken was 4,795 cylinder seals, 5,542 coins, glass bottles, beads, amulets, and jewellery. As Bogdanos wrote: "It is simply inconceivable that this area had been found, breached and entered by anyone who did not have an intimate insider's knowledge of the museum."

edit on 29-4-2012 by BIHOTZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 07:50 PM
To be fair, I thought I would put these excerpts from a site that sets a difference between the different ideologies of Transhumanism.

Transhumanists vs fake Singularitarians
The ideology of transhumanism and the concept of a singularity have been highjacked by people like Ray Kurzweil. Don't get me wrong, Ray is a really smart guy, a true modern day Thomas Edison, but he has brought about a huge influx of immortality fanboys.

One might even call it a cult following, people who just mindlessly preach that we will all be immortal at 7am on the 1st of july in 2045. It is a fact that since Kurzweil's popularization of his views on mankind's future, many fake singularitarians have joined the transhuman movement. Fake because they join for the wrong reasons. They have no idea what transhumanism is about and are often not even aware that this philosophy exists while it is the underlying root of "real" singularitarianism.

While singularitarians mostly count on computers to achieve digital immortality and promise us that this will have achieved this by 2045, transhumanists are not so sure. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that one could put forward to back up such a claim. We can't even predict the weather 2 weeks from now so how could you put so much faith in what one man, Kurzweil, believes?

I very much agree that mankind will one day become immortal, it's just a matter of time but there is no one that can forecast the date at which this event will come to pass. If a jellyfish can do it, and other living things can live up to 1000s of years, then it is obviously possible which means there is no reason that we can't do it. Nature and its law won't stop us. Some people look at death as a natural part of life and maybe it is (entropy), but why not live longer?

While the essence of transhumanism is about creating a better world, it is such a vast ideology with so many different currents (singularitarianism, extropianism, abolitionism, postgenderism,...) that it can't be abstracted very easily. It is not necessarily about technologies, although those will be required for realizing the dream. Transhumanism is about wanting to set yourself free from biological and cultural limitations. Creating a society with more choice, more diversification and where being different is encouraged instead of frowned upon. It's about not wanting to hold on to an ideal form of being human/sentient. Helping to create a better world for everybody with less pain and suffering

Many confuse Singularitarians with some sort of religious cult, but that is a step too far. There are no gods at play here. Even the fake singularitarians mostly believe that actual religions are outdated. There are, remarkably enough, a small number of god worshiping transhumanists, but the majority believe that the time has come to stop confusing people with such ancient dogmatic concepts. Instead of the supernatural miracles of the past, we should spread the word of real wonders. Wonders that can be found in every nook and cranny of nature. We have to cast aside ancient views and start believing in the beauty of reality that is hiding in plain sight.

The "real" singularitarians are trying to make sure that we don't destroy the world in the next 30 years while at the same time they want to bring about a "positive singularity".

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 08:27 PM
I would like to link another thread I was working on since I think it is related. I was going to include this information in that thread but in the end I thought it merited its own space. I think that Transhumanism was the MO for the Nazi rise to power, much like it is the MO for the totalitarian shift in politics we see in the US today.
Transhumanists in the US gave the Nazis safe passage through operation paperclip in exchange for exotic technologies.

I feel that the ideology of Nazi Germany has found its way into the US and this thread explains the how, by using 9/11 to solidify power and justify its change. The history of the Nazi ideology in the US and its current establishment in our minds slowly through conditioning and the urgency of threats and their appropriate security responses.

9/11 was our Reichstag Fire which brought the patriot act like the Reichstag Fire decree

posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 07:41 AM
In the words of Falun gong Master Li Hongzhi :

What’s more, whenever virtues, kindness, sins, or other things beyond science are mentioned, they are considered superstitions. In essence, isn't it waving the stick of modern science to strike at the most fundamental nature of our mankind -- the human morality? Isn't it so? Because it does not recognize, nor is it able to verify the existence of De (virtue), it will claim that it is superstitious. If human moral values are indeed wiped out, man will lose the constraints from the Fa of mind and the moral codes. People may dare to do anything and dare to commit any wrong doing, which will make the human moral values decline constantly. This is the role played by the weakest side of science.

Morality, virtue, emotions - what is the role of science in these things? It has no such role nor does it aspire to. Science serves the needs of those who fund it - which is basically 2 interests: the Department of Defense and the Transhumanist elites. The military serves the elites and creates the means of destruction and the methods of control. The elites themselves seek ways to enhance themselves and make themselves eternal. They seek to cheat life and death by technological means. If that includes merging their consciousness with a computer or by combining them into a hive mind this is what they intend to do.

In the end, the elites feel cheated by life and by God. Their money and power are not enough, they seek to be "supermen" themselves to boost their egos. They believe they can even escape physical death and avoid the judgement of God that awaits them. This is why they feel no remorse for any evil they commit - they have risen above human standards and see themselves as Gods in the making and anything bad that happens to others in their search for immortality as necessary collateral damage.

We'll see how close they get before the whole scheme goes down in flames.
The singularity will not be televised because it's not going to happen!

Great information you've put together here!
edit on 30-4-2012 by Asktheanimals because: added comment

posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 08:44 AM
I was debating starting another thread about Monsato but since it is part of the transhumanist movement, I will just include what I have been able to put together in here. It is not a separate venture. This genetically engineered food industry is intimately entwined with government. The purpose is to control the food supply by creating seeds that are only viable for one year. This makes farmers dependant on Monsato since if they do not buy the next years seeds, they can't grow anything.

You might assume that they could just buy natural seeds like they have always done. Well, it gets complicated. Monsato has intellectual rights to their particular breed of frankinseeds. These if accidentally "fall" into a farmers land and grow, are a huge liability since Monsato has an army of lawyers that target organic farmers and take them to ruin. Monsato has been accused of intentionally letting their seeds cross pollinate with farmers crops so that they can come in, test the crops, and say "hey, guess what, you can't grow this, it's ours" Poor house for you.

Monsato has been actively in the practice of giving freebies to third world countries. You guessed it, they then become dependent on them. If they resist, they are taken to court since these genetic freaks cross-pollinate with everything. I am guessing that they are designed to increase their pollination levels so as to contaminate all the crops of the surrounding area. It is not bad enough that they die from year to year and must be PRODUCED like a ford model T. If Monsato gains control of the food supply like they want, they can choose how much food there is in the ground, how much ends up on our shelves, and worse yet, if we starve or not.

to quote the maniac of the century, Kissinger

This is the ultimate power.
“Who controls the food supply controls the people.”
~ Henry Kissinger

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in