Alex Jones’ excellent new documentary, as much as it covers, doesn’t catch it all
By Daniel Taylor
Upon hearing the announcement from Alex Jones that he was embarking on a new filmmaking adventure – and later finding out what the film would cover – I decided to conduct my own research into the various subjects that Endgame would discuss. Rather than get the information for the first time from the film, I wanted to see what I could dig up on my own prior to viewing it. The information I found – which is openly available to anyone willing to look – is incredibly sobering, but not all hope is lost. If we live our lives in fear of what the future may bring, we allow ourselves to be defeated. We still have the power to raise awareness among our fellow man, and despite what the elite may believe, they do not have a monopoly on the future.
You may have heard Alex say that Endgame only covers a small percentage of the information out there. After watching his excellent film, I can tell you from my own investigation that this is absolutely true. I point this out not because I am criticizing the film, but to drive home the true gravity of our situation.
The subject of Eugenics and population control was the main focus of my research. In August I wrote an article on eugenics covering a short history of the pseudo science, and detailed possible future applications of it. The following is a sampling of some of the other information that I’ve been able to find detailing a small part of the elite agenda and possible future scenarios.
China as the world model
“Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.” — David Rockefeller, The New York Times, August 10, 1973
China, as noted in Endgame, has long been supported by the global elite in its population control policies and tyrannical measures of control.
In 2000, the Rockefeller foundation gave $2 million to upgrade a drug factory in China which produces the abortion drug RU-486. As the Washington Post reports, the drug has been widely used in China’s population control efforts,
“RU-486 has been a key ingredient in China’s population control strategy for years. Of the estimated 10 million abortions performed annually in China, about half are carried out with RU-486, said Gao Ersheng, director of the Shanghai Institute of Planned Parenthood Research.”
In 1995 China adopted the law on Maternal and Infant Health Care. The law, shaped around Francis Galton’s model of eugenics, is dedicated to “improving the quality of the newborn population.” The law details methods of “educating” the public on the importance of genetics and good marriage. If a couple is deemed unworthy of childbearing they are either not allowed to marry or are sterilized. Using modern genetic screening, fetuses deemed to be “medically considered inappropriate for reproduction” are terminated.
Population control via one child policies are also enforced in China. The Chinese government has heralded the one child policy as contributing to the reduction of their “carbon footprint”.
Eric G. Swedin, assistant professor at Weber State University, speculates in the May-June 2006 edition of The Futurist that China is likely to be the first to develop “designer babies”, triggering a “eugenics race” between the United States and China. Swedin says,
“Around the world, parents seeking the best opportunities for their children may want to buy biotechnology that gives their children an edge, and we will see the birth of specialized human beings. Moral qualms will be brushed aside, and keeping up with the Chinese will be seen as a patriotic duty.”
Swedin goes on to speculate, like many others in the field of genetics and biotechnology, that a new elite upper class that is able to afford the new technology could arise.
“Before the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, which promoted the essential equality of every human, people believed that noble blood entitled the aristocracy to rule over the peasants… Genetic enhancement could lead to a new feudal order. If a new aristocracy arises, those people whose parents can afford to provide genetic enhancements will not just be stronger, brighter, and less prone to disease, but will actually have “noble” blood in the form of their new and improved genes.”
A technocratic, genetically enhanced elite
The idea of a new class of elite ruling over a lesser, genetically inferior class is not new. H.G. Wells wrote about it in his book The Time Machine, while thousands of years before him Plato’s Republic promoted the idea of elite “Guardians” specifically bred for ruling over the masses. Some warn of its grave dangers, while others promote it as an inevitable, positive development.
Rather than rely on non-technological means of enhancement, advanced technology will be used by the new aristocracy. John Campbell of the University of California writes in his paper The Moral Imperative of Our Future Evolution,
“The costs [of genetic enhancement] will be enormous, far beyond what most people could afford. This has kept our democratic society from appreciating that these possibilities will be used and will be important. However, their feasibility cannot be judged from what the average person will be willing to pay to procreate. What matters are the resources that the most successful generative lines will be able to apply to their goals. A million dollars per conception seems a great underestimate to me for the beings who hold evolution’s frontier.”
“We should not imagine that people will just dabble in their evolution. Another generation will fan autoevolution into the all-consuming endeavor of the intellectuals, scientists and economists. The resources of the world probably will suddenly be shifted to this enterprise. Remaining “humans” will realize that they have been displaced from their former privileged status as the masters of destiny.”
John Glad, former Professor of Russian studies, comments on Campbell in his book Future Human Evolution: Eugenics in the Twenty-First Century,
“Campbell’s projection of rapid, small-group-directed evolution is at once heartening and depressing. Greater, even openended,
intelligence is awesome to contemplate. On the other hand, how sad it is for those “living fossils” who constitute the mass of humanity – humanity, at least, as we know it today.”
“The two societies projected by H.G. Wells in The Time Machine, one producing material goods and the other, childlike, consuming them, is probably going to arrive sooner than we think, and the childlike creatures will be us.”
Lee Silver, Professor at Princeton University and former senior investigator for Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, writing in Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World, sees a future in which,
“The GenRich–who account for 10 percent of the American population–all carry synthetic genes. Genes that were created in the laboratory….The GenRich are a modern-day hereditary class of genetic aristocrats….All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry are controlled by members of the GenRich class.”
Another angle on advanced technology taken by the elite is the deliberate dumbing down and domestication of the majority of humanity. A picture emerges of a technologically advanced elite sitting atop an oppressed mass of humanity that fails to benefit from advanced technological and genetic developments.
William Sims Bainbridge, a top figurehead in the Transhumanist movement writes,
“Techniques such as genetic engineering, psychoactive drugs and electronic control of the brain make possible a transformation of the species into docile, fully-obedient, “safe” organisms.”
The future as seen by the CIA and the U.K. Ministry of Defense
Like the new genetic upper class, the CIA and U.K. Ministry of Defense envision a future in which global integration brings inter-communal conflict as borders are erased, and a large percentage of the population lives in poverty while only a tiny elite benefits from globalization. At the moment, the European Union exists and is expanding, the African Union is nearing completion, and the North American Union project is currently underway. Ultimately, as Zbigniew Brzezinski has stated, these “post-national” forms of organization will be foundations for a world governmental structure. The future scenarios identified by Global Trends 2015 and other similar reports can undoubtedly be identified as possible responses to these developments.
The CIA’s 2001 report called Global Trends 2015 outlines trends in technology, globalization, and governance to name a few. The report, as noted by the May-June 2001 edition of The Futurist, includes contributions from the RAND corporation and the Carnegie Endowment (who’s leaders attend the secretive Bilderberg conferences regularly). Global Trends 2015 states,
“The continuing spread of information technology and biotechnology will stimulate more innovation in advanced countries. New medical breakthroughs will improve the health and longevity of the wealthy.”
“Established governments are likely to lose some control over their borders… Corporations and nonprofit organizations will exert more influence on state affairs. Winners and losers in globalization will emerge…”
An alternative to positive globalization is given,
“Pernicious Globalization: Global elites thrive, but the majority of the world’s population fails to benefit from globalization. Internal conflicts increase, fueled by frustrated expectations, inequities, and communal tensions.”
The scenario presented by the U.K Ministry of Defense mirrors Global Trends 2015, with a few twists. The London Guardian reported on the MoD report in April of this year. “The development of neutron weapons which destroy living organs but not buildings ‘might make a weapon of choice for extreme ethnic cleansing in an increasingly populated world'”, the report says.
“‘The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx,’ says the report. The thesis is based on a growing gap between the middle classes and the super-rich on one hand and an urban under-class threatening social order”“By 2010 more than 50% of the world’s population will be living in urban rather than rural environments, leading to social deprivation and “new instability risks”, and the growth of shanty towns. By 2035, that figure will rise to 60%. Migration will increase. Globalisation may lead to levels of international integration that effectively bring inter-state warfare to an end. But it may lead to “inter-communal conflict” – communities with shared interests transcending national boundaries and resorting to the use of violence.”
Education is the key. Awareness of the global elite is spreading like wildfire. Take an active role in history and do your part in educating others. You don’t have to have the biggest website, be well spoken, or be the best leader. No matter how insignificant your contribution may seem, it makes all the difference in the world.