"Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku Klux Klan or the Fascists?" Bertrand Russell (London, 1927) As quoted in Werlemen's book, setting the tone for his opening diatribe on the book of Genesis.
Does this mean, if Werlemen were God, he would have created robots?
How can you miss the point, that life is about forgiveness, reconciliation, and a future.
Life is a test, to see how we handle free will.
To see if we will walk after your own lusts, eat, drink, for tomorrow we die. (2Pe 3:3; Luk 12:19)
Or if we will lay down our life, moment by moment, day by day, that others might live. (Jhn 15:13; Jhn 10:11)
If you read enough quotes from the elite, several disturbing trends start to emerge.
Here are a couple more quotes from Russell.
“I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing... War... has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full... The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people's... There are three ways of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third that of general misery except for a powerful minority...”
- Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society
"Except for a powerful minority..."? Here is what that that powerful minority, the elite, have in store for you and I ...
"Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. . . . The Nazis were more scientific than the present rulers of Russia. . . . If they had survived, they would probably have soon taken to scientific breeding. Any nation which adopts this practice will, within a generation, secure great military advantages. The system, one may surmise, will be something like this: except possibly in the governing aristocracy, all but 5 per cent of males and 30 per cent of females will be sterilized. The 30 per cent of females will be expected to spend the years from eighteen to forty in reproduction, in order to secure adequate cannon fodder. As a rule, artificial insemination will be preferred to the natural method. . . . Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton."
- Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society
You see, once you put the State in charge (ruled by a powerful minority), and you've removed God (from which all our rights derive), that powerful minority can dictate to us what rights we are entitled to. (Democracy, the classic divide and conquer tool, as is oft said, is “like two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.” In the U.S., we were given a Republic, not a Democracy, big difference. The rule of law versus the rule of the majority.) And of course the elite know how to divide and conquer us, the masses.
That powerful elite didn't just include the Russells.
(If you haven’t heard or read Alan Watt, you haven’t got a clue about history. Remember, “history is bunk”, said Orwell.
"back to Charles Galton Darwin, he said, "we the elite will not alter ourselves. He said because we must retain our abilities for self-preservation but the masses will not need it anymore because the state will be making all their decisions for them."
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.net/transcripts/Stan_Monteith_Interview_with_Alan_Watt.html
How can we reconcile such a remark, by the grandson of Charles Darwin, and what Darwin himself said about slavery? How odd that Darwin is purported to be the source for the abolition of slavery of mankind (as some contend). And yet his grandson, makes it clear, the State (ruled a powerful minority) is to dictate to us what our rights are. Are we not still enslaved?
“Just to get back to Galton Darwin for a minute, talking about slavery, when he said that "the world has always had slavery in one form or another." He said, "we are simply in the process" (this is in the 1950's) "we are simply in the process of creating a more sophisticated form of slavery." What he meant by that is a system where you'll be truly, truly in belief that you are free. In fact, you'll think you've never been so free; and look at it today, when 60 percent of people's incomes through various taxations, direct and indirect, is taken right back out of their pocket again. Taxation is a form of slavery when your labor is taxed. That's the law. That's the law you see. It's always been the law. It was always common law too, long before they put it in books, and yet the people do it as though it's all quite natural because their parents did it too.
[...]
Here's [another] statement before I finish with Charles Galton Darwin. Again, a guy who belonged to the Futurist Society, the Royal Institute of International Affairs and all the big boys who run the world and run the real government. On page 189, he's talking about slavery existing down through society and down through time:
"One of the triumphs of our own golden age has been that slavery has been abolished over a great part of the earth. It is difficult to see how this condition can be maintained in the hard world of the future with its starving margins, and it is too be feared that all too often a fraction of humanity will have to live in a state which, whatever it may be called, will be indistinguishable from slavery."
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/transcripts/Alan_Watt_CTTM_LIVEonRBN_86_Dabbling_Darwin_and_the_Old_Boys_New_World_Order_Mar102008.html
What exactly did Galton Darwin mean when he said, "we the elite will not alter ourselves.” Alter how? What form?
"Eugenics is the study of the agencies under social control that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations either physically or mentally." - Francis Galton, first cousin and associate of Charles Darwin, circa 1883
"What nature does blindly, slowly and ruthlessly, man may do providently, quickly, and kindly. As it lies within his power, so it becomes his duty to work in that direction." - Sir Francis Galton (1905)
And so, it is not hard to believe, the Darwins took “advantage” of their “superior” knowledge.
In Darwin Family, Evidence of Inbreeding’s Ill Effects By Nicholas Wade (Published: May 3, 2010)
Charles Darwin, the author of the theory of evolution, may have been right to worry that his children’s health had been affected by the inbreeding in his own family, especially that of his wife, Emma Wedgwood, who was his first cousin.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/04/science/04darwin.html
It is amazing to realize, number one, there is an elite class to this day. This elite class gave us a theory on our origin that lays the framework for taking away of our natural, inherent, rights, which are endowed by our Creator. It is a irrefutable fact that there is an elite class. History is replete with examples of the elite dominating and exploiting the masses. And number two, to what extent is our world currently impacted by the elite?
"When you go back to the writings of Charles Galton Darwin, quite a big character up there with eugenics, he was also a physicist in the 1940's and '50's and he wrote "The Next Million Years." In that book it's almost a question-answer type of scenario, almost on the style of Plato where he had these dialogues with real or imaginary people, but it's a way to get their information out to their own friends. Charles Galton Darwin, the grandson of Charles Darwin, you'll find it's interesting because their purpose is hereditary. It's so closely inbred that the bankers will turn out bankers who will stay bankers and the guys into eugenics and so on will stay in the same field for generations. They're almost like clones of their parents they're so inbred and it's the closest thing there are to clones when you have three, four, five, six, generations of inbreeding between two families.
[...]
but Galton Darwin himself understands this. He knows his history and he has access or had access to archives, as all the big ones do. Archives that are kept closed to the public where the real histories and complete histories are kept.
Some professors admit to this, that they – maybe one in 60 or one in 80 – are eventually given access to certain archives and even then they have to be very careful what they're allowed to tell the public. People should read Charles Galton Darwin's "The Next Million Years," a fantastic read because everything he talked about then wasn't coming from his own mind. He'd been at many, many global meetings in his day with the elite, his own class, where all of this was discussed.
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/transcripts/Alan_Watt_CTTM_LIVEonRBN_86_Dabbling_Darwin_and_the_Old_Boys_New_World_Order_Mar102008.html
Again I ask, what exactly did Galton Darwin mean when he said, "we the elite will not alter ourselves.” Fast forward, or back to the future, you might say, and look what the futurists are discussing?
Why the future doesn’t need us by Bill Joy, cofounder and Chief Scientist of Sun Microsystems, notes, “our most powerful 21st-century technologies - robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotech - are threatening to make humans an endangered species. […]
Ray [Kurweil] gave me a partial preprint of his then-forthcoming book The Age of Spiritual Machines, which outlined a utopia he foresaw - one in which humans gained near immortality by becoming one with robotic technology. On reading it, my sense of unease only intensified; I felt sure he had to be understating the dangers, understating the probability of a bad outcome along this path.
I found myself most troubled by a passage detailing a dystopian scenario: [...]
On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car or his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite - just as it is today, but with two differences. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consists of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race.
[continued …]
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html
And this isn’t fringe science.
Financial Times: Google and NASA back new school for futurists [Singularity U – Ray Kurzweil]:
Google and NASA are throwing their weight behind a new school for futurists in Silicon Valley to prepare scientists for an era when machines become cleverer than people.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8b162dfc-f168-11dd-8790-0000779fd2ac.html
Truth is so much stranger than fiction.
Again, I ask CJ, what would he have created? Robots?
