Aldous Huxley 1958 with Mike Wallace

and how much better and smoother they surely have become with it. So how do we combat this?

It is time for us to start concentrating on solutions. Too much has been happening for too long and we all just keep discovering it and shaking our heads. We have to become solution focused.

This is for Fedor, who thinks there is absolutely nothing wrong with Mister Huxley and his family.

Julian Huxley speaks about the necessity of culling back the population, he was a top eugenicist, he believed in the rights of the superior to decide the fates of the inferior. It's not called bioethics. Huxley talks about in his book, how to control the minds of people, now called Neuroscience.

1. Huxley was a prominent member of the British Eugenics Society, and was Vice-President (1937-1944) and President (1959-1962).

2. Julian Huxley was the founder of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), he helped found it, to create a world culture, by indoctrination of the young, world-wide in the same culture, so they'd be pliable to the new system.

3. Talking about genetic engineering in the 1930s and long before.

4. They are all for the dehumanization, the Humanist Society had many goals such as the destruction of religion, that was a must. "We've all accepted Humanism because we've been dehumanised" ~ From his 1926 book

5. He was awarded UNESCO's Kalinga prize, fire director-general for UNESCO, again to create a world standardised population, through indoctrination. The Darwin medal of the Royal Society in 56, the Darwin-Wallace medal of the Linnaean Society in 58. He was knighted in 1958, because Sir Julian Huxley.

6. Albert Lasker Awards Given by Planned Parenthood
1959 - Sir Julian Huxley
1961 - John D. Rockefeller, III

7. Huxley who worked in Tavistock Institute and worked the propagandists for the New World Order promoting mind expansion drugs was put out there to go around encourage teenagers to try the drug. He’d talk at Ivy League universities and he’s talking more honestly there about the real purpose of his mission because at Berkeley the faculties were listening to him and the students were the ones who would be part of the controlling bureaucracies to come. So they were far, far more honest on the real mission and talks like the one he gave at the Berkeley University.

7. Sir Julian Huxleys book, "Man Stands Alone" excerts

At the moment, there are vast possibilities of value running to waste because they are not harnessed or because they are not even realised. The number of subtle and individual minds that find themselves unable to join wholeheartedly in any corporate organisation is increasing; they find themselves over-individualised.

See, individualised people can't be managed and that was their biggest problem, that's why they created, and I went through this before, the team effort, everything is teamed, the team organisation. It says:

The organisations in which the individual can lose himself and taste self-sacrifice

A very important part, remember world service too is all part of this.

self-sacrifice and corporate enhancement, are for the most part blatantly irrational like political parties, or committed to out-of-date or one-sided ideas like most of the churches; or, like public schools,

That's the private schools.

encourage crude and juvenile loyalties; or, as in the teamwork of sport, they satisfy only a limited part of human nature.

Now, think, this was written in 1926. He says:

One real task for Humanism as I see it is to develop organisations which will satisfy the need for corporate action and loyalty--

Now you know darn well, this is why they brought Bernays and all these boys on board, to get all this going and this tore all through business from then on with team spirit, loyalty etc.

the desire we all have to feel of use--and to provide an outlet for self-sacrifice, as well as for intellectual aspirations.

His friend, Mr. H.G Wells once sketched out such an organisation in his New Samurai, worth the read, by the way, they're talking about the ones who'd spearhead this system into the future.

The success they might have is foreshadowed by the success already attending such imperfect adumbrations of the ideas of the Boy Scouts.

They're talking about using youth groups, Boy Scouts and the various youth movements in central Europe, like, I guess the Hitler Youth and the Young Communists League.

I do not think it would be impossible to build up a scheme of the sort in connection with Education,

This is long before the UN was set up, he became the head of the one organization that would give it a youth culture for the whole world, standardized education, which is just indoctrination remember.

though at present most people not already committed to organisations are too much ashamed of showing enthusiasm in unfashionable ways to begin planning along the proper lines and on the proper scale. The fact is that no community has ever yet set itself seriously to the task of Scientific Humanism.

Now, remember, his brother, in his books, was talking about a future to come, where science would run the entire planet, they would be the new gods. He also calls it a Scientific Dictatorship and saw no reason why it should not happen; of course he saw no reason, because he was part of a massive group that was already going to bring it in. Well-organised, well-funded and knew exactly where they were going; so, he wrote Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited; and, here's the brother, Sir Julian, talking to the scientific community, as this book was intended for, who would then bring it into play.

he was the co-founder of the World Wildlife Fund. That's all part of it, because they knew a hundred years ago, they'd eventually bring in a system and train us, over generations, to come to believe that we were no higher than any other animal or insect on the planet. That's all part of the Humanist agenda, and they've been very successful, that's what Maurice Strong's Earth Summit was all about and all the other ones that have come since then; it's all part of the same network that's been on the go for a long time, fully-funded, well-trained and they've had access to all media outlets and they churn out book after book after book.

On page 269, Sir Julian says this, because they knew they were going to set up this organisation, for this period, and this was written in 1926, he said:

Is it possible to plan a body which shall engender enthusiasm and canalize devotion after the fashion of a young religious order, but which shall not fall into the dangers of religious dogmatism and shall not by defects in its organization slip into the conservatism or worldliness which is the usual fate of so many orders?

He's talking about setting up a system; they had many ideas back then, an Earth army was one, that came back out again in the 1990s, the Earth Army, that's the term they used for the greening process of the world, this whole save the planet idea and now it's coupled with the farce of global warming. As I've said, it doesn't matter what the weather does or if it freezes us all to death, they'll still be shouting global warming, because they never change their agenda, never.

Page 270:

Is there a way of tapping this reserve of moral power without letting it loose in the form of irrational prejudice or wild fanaticism, moral, religious or patriotic?

That was all to be done away with, you see; and, he actually mentions in the book, they'd destroy all morality.

On these and hundreds of other similar questions we are blankly ignorant. We build laboratories to test out how we can harness and concentrate electrical and chemical and mechanical forces; but the corresponding problem of harnessing and intensifying the latent powers and activities of human nature

That's you, that's all of you, and your mind and everything else. He says:

we have scarcely even begun to envisage.

That's why they really went to work with Psychology and Behaviourism, the same bunch behind it all. He says:

Scientific Humanism is a protest against supernaturalism: the human spirit, now in its individual, now in its corporate aspects, is the source of all values and the highest reality we know. It is a protest against one-sidedness and fixity; the human spirit has many sides and cannot be ruled by any single rule; nor can it be restrained from making new discoveries in the adventure of its evolution. It insists that the same scientific procedure can be applied to human life as has been applied with such success to lifeless matter and to animals and to plants--

They're lumping us right in with animals and plants. These are the techniques they would use to study mankind, to control mankind and he makes no bones about the object of it. He says:

Scientific survey, study and analysis, followed by increasing practical control,

‘Followed by increasing practical control’: once they study you and all of society, then this scientific dictatorship would get you under their increasing practical control, that was the object of it.

It insists on human values as the norms for our aims, but insists equally that they cannot adjust themselves in the right perspectives and emphasis except as part of the picture of the world provided by science.

Science would be the new religion, whatever they said would be the gospel truth and you'd better believe it. The whole point of studying mankind was so that they could control mankind and we are all controlled today. These are the same big think-tanks that now fund the political parties; they advise political parties.

It realizes that human desires and aspirations are the motive power of life, but insist that no long-range or comprehensive aim of humanity can ever be realized except with the aid of the pedestrian and dispassionate methods, the systematic planning, the experimental testing which can be provided by science alone.

They're knocking all religion out of the way and they will be the only one. That's standard, you see, as a new God arises, they always have to get above the last lot; standard. On page 271, he continues:

In my term Scientific Humanism I have chosen to emphasise science as against all the other human activities for a simple reason: that at the moment, science is in danger of setting itself up as an external code or framework as did revealed religion in the past; and only by putting it in its rightful place in the Humanist scheme shall we avoid this dangerous dualism. But if science must beware of trying to become a dictator,

That's exactly what his brother said isn't it, in the interview he gave at Berkeley. He said he saw no reason why there should not be a scientific dictatorship. This is his brother. He says:

the other human activities must beware of the jealousy which would try to banish the upstart from their affairs.

In other words, they knew there'd be an awful lot of flak coming back from established religions and so on.

The only significance we can see attaching to man's place in nature is that he is willy-nilly engaged in a gigantic evolutionary experiment

That's what they call life: an evolutionary experiment.

by which life may attain to new levels of achievement and experience. Without the impersonal guidance and the efficient control provided by science,

Impersonal remember; and efficient. In other words, it's not humane, it's impersonal and efficient control, provided by science,

civilization will either stagnate

That's anathema to them; the people who still in the world who are self-sufficient, very-very few people in tribes left in the world, are hated by them. They call them 'stagnant' or 'stagnated' or 'collapsed' societies. He says:

and human nature cannot make progress

Again, you have this odd thing about progress. See, the whole belief in evolution is that there is an end still, there's a goal you're moving towards, like all religions, it has its goals. In the old Christianity, it was: you did well in this life, you obeyed all the rules, you prayed to your God and fought and obeyed etc and then you hoped for an after-life, that was the goal. Here, they're planning out centuries actually, centuries in advance, and telling you what the goal is.

Without the impersonal guidance and efficient control provided by science, civilisation will either stagnate or collapse, and human nature cannot make progress towards realising its possible evolutionary destiny.

This is not a guess by these people, they're not guessing at things. On page 276, he goes on to say:

The particular situation that confronts the religion of Western Civilisation is this: the concept of God has reached limits of its usefulness.

One time it was useful to these boys; and, they certainly made use of it. Go into Weishaupt's writings, He says:

It cannot evolve further. Supernatural powers were created by man to carry the burden of religion. From diffuse magic manna to personal spirits, from spirits to gods, from gods to God--so crudely speaking, the evolution has gone. The particular phase of that evolution which concerns us is that of gods. In one period of our Western civilisation the gods were necessary fictions, useful hypotheses by which to live.

Then on page 277, he says:

The advance of natural science, logic and psychology, have brought us to a stage at which God is no longer a useful hypothesis.

In page 278, he continues on this theme; he really has an awful lot to say about God, he says here:

If you grant theism of any sort, the logical outcome is monotheism. But why theism at all? Why a belief in supernatural beings who stand in some relation to human destiny and human aspirations?

Here's a man with an utter fatalistic belief in evolution, with a destiny, because they have a destiny to fulfil; that's their belief you see. He says:

Theistic belief depends on man's projection of his own ideas and feelings into nature: it is a personification of non-personal phenomena. Personification is God's major premise. But it is a mere assumption, and one which, while serviceable enough in earlier times, is now seen not only to be unwarranted, but to raise more difficulties than it solves. Religion, to continue as an element of first-rate importance in the life of the community, must drop the idea of God

CFR, Royal Institute of International Affairs, again, you see the regional group of nations. Then, on page 283, he said:

To achieve some real understanding of control of the forces and processes operating in human societies is the next great task for science;

They study all societies in order to control us all.

and the applications of scientific discovery in this field will have as their goal what we may call the Socialized State.

The socialized state, he's talking about the world state by the way, world state, socialized state; a world run by experts and bureaucrats and scientists.

The religious impulse, itself one of the social forces to be more fully comprehended and controlled,

They would also use the religious impulse to create the green movement by the way. Page 284, he says:

will increasingly find its outlet in the promotion of the ideals of the Socialized State.

You've seen that very thing happen, this whole agenda's happened in your life, it's happening right now.

Accordingly, we can prophesy that in the long run the nationalistic element in socialised religion will be subordinated or adjusted to the internationalist:

The internationalist religion of secular Humanism, that's what he's talking about.

that the persecution of minorities will give place to toleration; that the subtler intellectual and moral virtues will find a place and will gradually oust the cruder from their present pre-eminence in the religiously-conceived social organism. We can also assert with fair assurance that this process of improvement will be a slow one and accompanied by much violence and suffering.

Sources:
A Brave New World
Man Stands Alone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Huxley
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldous_Huxley
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/transcripts/Mass_Mind...
http://www.alanwattsentientsentinel.eu/english/transcripts/A...
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=5&url=ht...

Prophetic. I love Aldous Huxley. Just a few comments:

1) The number of Americans taking psychiatric drugs like Prozac and Ritalin is alarmingly high, and much higher than anywhere else in the world. It only makes sense that Americans would take more soma. I think we are at the forefront of the Brave New World.

2) "The dictators will get the consent of the ruled by drugs, propaganda...bypassing the rational side of man and appealing to his subconscioous and physiology...making man love his slavery." People love Obama, too...WHY??

3) When he talks about foreseeing how our technology can be used in a bad way, I'm reminded of the computer. Our perception of it hasn't quite caught up wit the reality. We think it's harmless but what if the camera in it (in mine, anyway) is always on and transmitting what it sees? Google has an application that would allow them the turn on the mike in your computer and use it as a bug. Then there's the outright surveillance, so the computer is a three-fold spy device.

So why am I still on this computer? Maybe this is me "loving my slavery."

Anyway, thanks for posting this. I've enjoyed reading the comments, too.

(This isn't in response to the original post, but to the comments its author makes throughout the thread)

**Spoiler Alerts**

John the Savage, having been plucked from the reservation and dumped into the Brave New World, discovered a way of life so foreign and repulsive that took his own life rather than living with the knowledge of end mankind had come to!

The island is a novel about a paradise where people, through personal introspection, meditation, and rationality achieve a sort of Eden-- an Eden that is lost due to the machinations of a debauched figurehead monarch, an English oil baron, and a tinny dictator.

Both works are pro-individual and anti-establishment. They both depict humanity being betrayed, and ruined by those in power.

Huxley talked about the use of drugs on the public level to get them through the scientific dictatorship. "What's wrong with drugging the people, What's wrong with it, Why not lower their IQ, they'll never figure anything out then. They won't even respond or react"

That's one of the main reasons why I am against Huxley.

Fortune Favors the Bold

Did I read a different interview then the poster?

read the book before you open your mouth.