The Neo-Eugenics War On Humanity


by Alan Watt


Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt 2009 (Exempting Literary Quotes)


I’m Alan Watt and I’m an author and researcher into geopolitics really, and history.  I follow where the world has been, the techniques that were used to bring us to those stages and I apply them to where we are today, and how the future is planned.


I’ve researched so many books; I’ve got a library of my own.  I like paperback books or at least hardback books because they’re permanent records of the past, and if you can’t understand the past you won’t understand the present or the future.


I’ve also been in the music business, heavily involved for years.  And I saw how culture creation worked from the top, and how generations were swayed into new fashions, new ideas.


I’ve been following the histories of what’s now called “the new world order” for many many years, and I try to go into the books written by the big players; the technocrats themselves – those famous people, like the Kissingers, the Brzezinskis and so on, the Huxleys, the Lord Bertrand Russells, who all worked for the same organizations.  And I came to the conclusion really that there was only one big organization with many sub-categories.  These boys tend to publish the world that they saw coming into view and they wrote it in their own hand basically.  They told us where they were taking the world.


And when you start studying these things about the age of 14-15, or even younger, and reading their books – and you live long enough – you will see that the world has turned out exactly as they planned.  This can’t be coincidence.  And who can really write up a wish list and make it happen, globally, unless there is an organization?  Very very powerful, probably the only organization really on the planet.  An organization that can fund all sides, all oppositions, and using this synthesis of conflicting parties, they can literally make the world come into view as they planned.


They plan in centuries.  And the astonishing thing is when you go into the United Nations, which was loosely based on the Soviet system, they plan certain parts of their agenda in 50 year plans, some in 100 year plans, and some even in 150 year plans for different aspects of it.  The Russells, the Huxleys, Brzezinskis and so on, also use the same terminology with their long-term plans.


And you’ve got to understand too that nothing in culture comes out from the grass roots.  Even Plato talked about that thousands of years ago.  He said that if it was a grass roots movement really coming from the people, then those in charge – the dominant minority – would lose control.  Therefore every change in culture, right down to fashion and music – and this was written 2,300 years ago – had to be authorized from the top, and promoted from the top, if it fitted with the continuance of control over the public.


And these are sciences which were taught down through the ages (they’re still taught today, to the big players) and they’ve used it to the full in the 20th century, now into the 21st century with the use of television, mass communications, radio etc.  Everything has been given to us for the appropriate time and stage in the actual planning.


For those who are coming into this kind of study, it’s best to go into the books written by the big players themselves.  They love to boast.  [Henry] Kissinger’s got lots of books out there, so has [Zbigniew] Brzezinski.  These are probably two of the master players in geopolitics.  Try to stay away from all the conspiracy books that are also put out there on purpose – very fascinating books, but they lead you in circles forever without giving you the overall picture to the fact that every generation has a purpose, up until this present time.


And in a post-industrial era these “big boys” have decided, and their masters too, that we are simply superfluous and they no longer need us.  Hence we have big foundations coming forward and organizations like the Optimum Population Trust, who have decided to come out openly and demand that governments start radically reducing the populations.  We are now the “useless eaters”, as Lord Bertrand Russell called us.


Our ideas, our opinions on everything, our world view, even to do with population – and the fake view that we’re over-populated – is all projected to us by the mainstream media, working in concert for their masters.  And we begin to parrot what we hear through repetition – and that’s so important; it’s repetition with slogans and catchphrases.  And once you hear it happening in your own local group, your milieu, then you know it’s working.


And the camera can make anything appear to be true.  You’ll see that in India for instance, they always use the same streets of Bombay, to make you think that you’re massively overcrowded, and that’s the impression people think of the entire Indian continent.  The Indian continent is huge with thousands and thousands of miles of forest, where no-one lives.  It’s the same in Africa too.


China, being the model state for the world for instance, put into effect the United Nations policy to the extreme, with its population reduction and the movement of people off of the rural areas into cities.  They started that years ago.  Right now they’re in the process of moving two hundred million more people off into the major cities, and that’s in the major newspapers.


The cities appear to be crowded because everyone’s being moved into them.  In the Western world since the 1950s again under the term of “urban sprawl” and stopping urban sprawl, the Western countries also signed agreements to do no more building in the outskirts of the major cities.  All existing buildings have to be used or else knocked down and replaced with even higher ones, but regardless with the immigration and the free flow of people now from third world countries, the Western countries appear to be overcrowded.


And yet the UN’s own statistics show, and so do the national censuses show, that the Europeans for instance, and Canadians and Americans – who have been here for a couple of hundred years – are actually in decline.  So the over-population problem is simply an image projected by the media, as more and more people are crammed into the same cities and they bring more immigrants in to fill them.


I also realized the system of schooling, when I was going to school, was bogus.  The histories were bogus and I was very very lucky to have access to very old libraries, very old town libraries.  Some of them had reference books going back into the 1700s, written at the time.  When you compared the histories I was being taught in school to the histories that were written at the time, they were completely different.  You had a deeper understanding of how geopolitics had been used in the past to even populate the country of Canada.  London couldn’t get immigrants to go off into the new colonies.


What they did for Australia was to create so many laws that you couldn’t help but break them – and poverty.  And therefore stealing a loaf of bread to feed you or your family would get you deported to Australia, with your family.  That’s how they populated Australia; crime.  They created the laws for crime.  With Scotland we had a rebellion, which could have been rigged – and I often think it was – and the whole of Scotland was punished.  And they deported millions of the Scots off to the Americas, to populate the Americas.  This is geopolitics in action.  That’s how it works.  And whole peoples are often moved from their land because the elite masters want them elsewhere to be productive, for them themselves, the masters.


When you look at the strategy for the US and Canada – again long-term strategy, long-term planning – you’ll find that the big corporations of their day, the Hudson’s Bay companies, the Fraser companies, were given charters to own the land before Canada was Canada or the US was the US; they were simply called the Americas.  These were private international corporations that had the power of life and death over everyone who lived within their areas.  The queen or the king had a consulate in every country, lieutenant general or governor general they call them.  They still have one in Canada today, who represents the queen.  They have all the powers over life and death of subjects under that governor.


How they stopped rebellion in the past was to give us an idea of what they called democracy.  They knew from the Chartist movement in Britain for instance, and elsewhere in other countries, people were demanding rights for the first time.  And so once again they gave us champions to speak on our behalf which calmed the people down, thinking for the first time in history the people were involved in their own destiny creation.  And nothing was further from the truth.  Because the planners knew that once you bring people into a country or continent, create real wealth for them and get businesses going, clear the land, drain the swamps and so on, they can take it all away from you through laws 200 years down the road.  And that’s what’s happening now; long-term geopolitics once more.


And if you think I’m kidding about this go into the history books written at the time – they’re still there in some of the libraries.  And you can also go into the art of geopolitics.  There are even videos on youtube of Brzezinski boasting about how he set up the Taliban in Afghanistan.  You’ll see him encourage them to fight the Soviets at that time in the 1970s, and he actually says “yours is a holy war.”  This man, who obviously believes in nothing but himself and his own peer group, is encouraging another people to go and fight a holy war, a jihad – and he uses these terms – against the Soviets, knowing full well once it was set up and it was backed by the CIA, that 10-15 years down the road, they’d be a problem.  And then they’d have to go to war with the very group they’d created to fight the Soviets.  That’s what’s happening today; long-term strategies.  Well that’s how history has always been run.


If you can go into the books where you find the British Home Office is mentioned, study the history of the Diplomatic Corps, because their diplomats were spies.   They would go into territories, set up embassies and collect intelligence data for future invasions.  Their job was also to try and grab the rights of minerals, gold, silver, etc. across the planet, all natural resources, and find ways, long-term strategy, to either bribe it off the present rulers of those countries or else create an ultimate war with them and simply steal it, under the guise of occupation.


We’re living through a stage today where this is all coming to a culmination.  This is the post-industrial era.  We’re post-technical almost in the West; it’s all done in other countries, all the technical stuff.  And Brzezinski himself talks about the technocratic era, where the future will be for an elite with a highly trained bureaucracy underneath them and scientific elite, who will not need the human labour that was needed in the past.


Human labour that is excessive, and is unemployed, and is hungry, is now a threat to that established elite.  So now they’re doing something which they can only do to the human species.  They don’t need to do this with animals; with animals they just go out and hunt them and kill them.  We’re the only species that has to be convinced to allow ourselves, for the good of all, to be sterilized and bring down the population, through abortion on one end, and euthanasia on the other, under the guise to save the planet.  And unfortunately with the massive propaganda campaigns that are all over media, in every country at the same time, with all the big foundations backing them with unlimited financing – remember too, the foundations are owned by the international bankers themselves – then they can pull all of this off.  And unfortunately it really is working.


In kindergarten now, you walk into a kindergarten anywhere in Europe or Americas, and you’ll see the rainbow inside every single one of them.  You’ll see all of the terms about the world – here’s the globe, ‘we’re all global’ – and you’ll see the greening messages everywhere, everywhere, and how sacrifice will have to be made to save the world and the planet and future generations of society.  Sacrifice.


You tie that together with the institutions that were comprised of the Fabian society, which was a member of the Royal Institute of International Affairs – that’s one society.  The Council on Foreign Relation is also the same thing as the Royal Institute of International Affairs.  They are what Thatcher and Professor Carroll Quigley called “the parallel government”.  They have told us what the future is going to be.  Some of their members have even written books about the need to cull off massive amounts of the population by any means possible.  And so we see this final stage being pushed as they convince us that we are the problem.


The Club of Rome also belongs to the same group.  In the 1990s the two founders said that back in the 1970s at the Club of Rome, they were given the task as the premier think-tank for the globe, for this global society, the task to find ways of reducing the population and controlling the people to go along with this, convincing the public how to go along with it.  And they said they’d looked at all possible means of doing so, what had worked before? – Again, geopolitics, strategy.  Under warfare conditions the public will give up freedom.


The public will be directed by governments, bureaucracies and police, military, etc.  Under warfare the public sacrifice, they’ll have less food, they’ll ration stuff; they go along with it to save themselves.  Therefore, they’d have to find a warfare strategy – a reason for war.  And what they came up with was that man was the enemy of the planet.  They said the idea that global warming could be created and blamed upon mankind would fit the bill.  These are the words they used; “that would fit the bill”.  Written in the 1970s and decided at the think-tanks then, and published [in 1991] by the guys involved in a book called The First Global Revolution, well worth reading.


When they hit upon an idea from a premier think-tank, they will never change that agenda.  I’ve said before it wouldn’t matter if we were up to our eyes in snow all year round, they will still stick to global warming – that’s the agenda.  Now of course they’ve changed it slightly to “climate change”, which simply means changes in the weather.  And they’re in the process now of convincing the general public to be afraid of summer, for instance.  It’s all done through the alteration and distortion of perceptions.  Massive psychology is used on all of this, and they certainly understand mass psychology of the general public.


These boys don’t simply announce things or make up a wish list of the future and send it up the chimney to Santa Claus.  When they come up with an idea, they implement it.  I’ve followed the United Nations Department of Statistics as they announce every single year the sperm count of the Western male, which has been falling drastically since the 1950s.  They say that it’s down by about 75-85%.  Now when something like that’s happened across the whole of Europe and the Americas in 50 years and they suddenly started noticing it, sudden onset, and there’s no crisis made about it, there’s no comeback after announcing the statistics, they just tell you the cold hard statistics and go off to the next statistic on some other topic – that means it’s part of the agenda, otherwise it would be a crisis.  If this wasn’t planned and part of the agenda, believe you me it would be a crisis if they didn’t authorize it.


And now they tell us that the average American has less than 20% sperm and only about 15% is motile.  That’s not a coincidence.  What happened in the 1950s to start this ball rolling?  In the 1950s they suddenly put all the known female synthetic estrogens into the food supply.  They put it in baby food.  Procter & Gamble were the first ones to admit after investigation, 40 years later, that they were using a rinse to supposedly sterilize the baby bottles, and it contained Bisphenol A – an odd thing to rinse baby bottles with, when Bisphenol A is the very thing that attacks young male children at that age, and stops the testes from developing properly.


You go back even further into more detail and you find out that the cosmetic industry was using insufflatants.  Insufflation is a technique where certain carriers are put into the creams themselves, and these creams then absorb into the skin carrying other chemicals with them.  They’re almost like the payloads – they carry the payloads into the target in the bloodstream.  We find that the women were highly toxic with the artificial Bisphenol A and other ingredients, and therefore within the first 8-12 weeks of pregnancy with a male child there was a very good chance that male would grow up to be either almost completely sterile or as I say maybe have some motile sperm.


This was all understood 50 years ago.  Bisphenol A for instance, was discovered in the 1890s.  And the properties it had against humans, especially males, was known then too.  Now it’s in all the beer cans – great for targeting males again – they line the cans with it.  There’s been many exposés on it now.  The CBC in Canada, which is a government-owned television station – it’s the BBC basically of Canada – did a documentary series called The Disappearing Male.  And it goes through all of that in that particular talk, with proof.


Also, when you back to the writings of Lord Bertrand Russell, and Julian Huxley and Aldous Huxley – who were also related to the Darwins by the way – you’ll find that they talked about ways to sterilize the populations, in the ’30s, ’40s and ’50s.  And they even said they would use the needle to create a compliant pliable population – we need to dumb down the people and also to bring down the fertility rates.  In the 1950s across Europe and the Americas what came out, under vast promotion, what came out?  The polio vaccine came out.  That was the first one ever to come out through a mass fear campaign, a massive fear campaign.  Polio was very very rare, yet if you go back to the old Pathé black-and-white newsreels that they showed all over the world at the time, they showed you the same one boy in the iron lung, and that terrified the whole world.  How many polio cases were actually there?  Was it really polio?


We do know that from those first shots, those injections, the generation that got them all ended up carrying 100 simian viruses, live simian viruses in the shot.  And Simian 40 only had one function according to the maker – the discoverer of the vaccine – and that was to cause cancer.  And I also have a copy of the discussion with this particular man and his staff admitting that.  They knew that at the time.  What they said was that they thought the benefits outweighed the bad, risks that might come along down the road.  That was their excuse.


Since then we’ve been trained to accept more and more inoculations until babies now get something like 30 inoculations before they’re out the hospital.  When you look into the big manufacturers of inoculations, like Baxter Laboratories which was in the news recently because they sent out a live flu virus along with the bird flu virus mixed together and were caught by another country who had tested it on ferrets and the ferrets all died – they had done the very thing that they say they’re worried about happening in nature, where the common flu is mixed with a killer flu and becomes highly contagious.  They actually did it by mistake, we’re told.


Go back into Baxter Laboratories even further and you’ll find Baxter Laboratories was part of the I.G. Farben group in World War II.  They were responsible for creating chemicals and so on that were used as gas, and they were also used in other medical experiments on prisoners.  That’s in the records of the inquiry that went on into I.G. Farben. A good book to read is The Crimes and Punishment of I.G. Farben.  All of that stuff is documented in there.  All of the companies, the Western corporations that were involved in the setting up of the Hitler regime are mentioned in that book.  And Baxter Laboratories – the one that is coming out with all the shots we have to take, supposedly for the swine flu – is still on the go.


When you go into Connaught Laboratories as an example, Connaught Laboratories was employed during World War II to manufacture bacterium and viruses, fungus that would attack wheat and corn etc. in Germany.  Mr. [Frederick] Banting who discovered insulin – the great hero Banting – during World War II his main occupation was finding ways to annihilate the food supply of an entire country.  And he came up with ideas of creating a form of what we now call mad cow disease – something that rotted the brains of the cattle for herds; dairy herds and beef herds – and it was manufactured in World War II.  And I often wonder, if there really is such a thing as mad cow disease, is that where it came from?


These big laboratories and Connaught Laboratories eventually became responsible for instance for the blood supply for hospitals and haemophiliacs, and by-products of blood supply for Canada.  When Mr. Clinton was in power he signed a deal with some prisons in the US, where the prisoners would get a dollar or two for a pint of blood, and this stuff was all to be sold to Canada.  And almost every haemophiliac in Canada, everyone who got the blood supply came down with Hepatitis and various other diseases.  The government held about a 10 year inquiry, waiting till they were all pretty well dead, maybe one or two survived, before they paid out compensation.  They knew at the very beginning that this blood was contaminated, and there’s Connaught Laboratories – part of the military-industrial complex used in World War II – buying the blood and selling it and distributing it across Canada.  When the CBC did a documentary on Connaught Laboratories and their role in this, the little guy who purchased it was caught on the steps of his office of the building, and he turned round and he said to the camera crew, who had questioned him on all the deaths that were caused in Canada, thousands of them, he said “it’s business.”  That was the only reply given.


I’ve said for many years that the biggest international corporations are real corporations, but they’re also front groups for one system.  During the Cold War for instance, many books were published on the war, how it would be won and so on, and what they all agreed upon was those with the highest technologies would win.  Now, if you were in a free enterprise system you could never allow inventions coming out of nowhere, unauthorized – especially in communications and different means – to be given to the general public.  Therefore the CIA, MI6 and other countries’ agencies created front organizations to lead the charge and control technology.


You could never allow free competition in technology and give it to the people without authorization.  It has to be permitted by those who rule.  That goes across the board with everything, as I say from those who rule.  You create culture, you manipulate culture, you give the public what you deign to give them, you suppress that which you don’t want the public to have.  It must be under control.  You cannot have that with a true free market enterprise and true entrepreneurialism – you can’t have it, therefore you put up the front companies.  They are real companies; they will really manufacture stuff, but it’s what’s been authorized.  And guys at the top, CIA, MI6 fund them and run them.


We’ve seen this with different banks that were set up by the CIA in the past, where they funnel money to all the major wars they were fighting.  The BCCI was one of the first ones that collapsed – Papa Bush was a director at one time, and then he was back to being director of the CIA.  These were front massive banks, massive corporations.


A difficult thing for some people to understand is that what’s happening today is not just an elite making a final move to take over anything.  Every generation for hundreds of years has been brought up with the same elite’s predecessors, designing and running the show for each generation.  The elite in fact, are simply moving their system into a new system, an updated system to suit themselves.  That’s a hard concept for people to grasp.  They’ve been trained to believe things are happening at the moment by happenstance, by crises coming out of nowhere and here’s what we must do, we must solve this problem at the time.  Nothing is further from the truth.


And when people wake up they generally go through the same stages as someone who becomes bereaved, when you find that democracy never existed in the first place.  You go through an anger phase, a depression phase, you’ll blame whoever’s handy.  And then hopefully you emerge from it and become active, and you want to learn what’s going on, and what has been going on.


You’ll also eventually come to the realization that you’re up against something, a system that’s very very very old; it’s the only truly organized system on the whole planet.  It uses sciences that are ancient, in population management.  It gave us the system of money – money is a tool that we must believe in to serve them.  Karl Marx was quite right; he was one of their boys, who was set up to set up the dialectic, and he was quite right when he said that money is a tool of the elite.  It’s essential that the people who stop bartering or working for themselves and start using money as a means of exchange – which then can be taxed back from them – are becoming slaves.  Because under law and legality, for a thousand years, no-one could take anything from you.


Money represents your food, your home, everything.  When it’s taxed back from you, they’re creating a form of slavery.  Therefore it’s essential that the workers believe in money.  The elite have all the money in the world; they own all the resources in the world.  They don’t need money.  But they need us to believe that it’s the only thing that we must use.  Today the power of the purse, as they call it at the top, is being used to the maximum to tax almost everything back from the people that they earn.


You tie that in with Charles Galton Darwin and his book The Next Million Years, where he lays out the next few thousand years up to a million years for the elite, and all the changes that will happen – the grandson of Charles Darwin, who again, was related to the Huxleys and many others.  And he said, in the 1950s in his own book “slavery has always existed in one form or another.”  There’s different ways to have slavery.  You can either get a bunch of henchmen, force a tribe into obeying you and being your slaves – that’s a lot of force, but you have to feed them etc.  Or you can allow them to keep so much of their earnings for themselves, to maintain themselves, and take off all the rest to supply the elite and the structure of the system over them.  But he said “we are now in the process of creating a more sophisticated form of slavery”.


In other words the general public, who would drift into this system – and it would become natural for them – would never twig on that they were actually slaves.  You tie that in with the institutions that the Huxleys and the Darwins belonged to.  The Royal Institute of International Affairs which has branches in every country in the world – they set up the United Nations.  They said in their own writings from the earliest times to the present, the world they’re bringing in is to be a world where everyone who is born (or would be allowed to be born) would be born to serve the state.  That would be their sole function – that’s if they had a job for you to fulfill, or a need for you.  But it’s a more sophisticated form of slavery, and we’re going through it today.


These families have been at this for at least centuries, and I think much much longer.  Why is it that the Rothschilds come onto the scene as a revolutionary family?  Why is it that they suddenly could take over five countries with five sons, create central banks or take the central banks over that already existed?  And why is it that right to the present time they’re in the forefront of world politics?  Why is that?  Why doesn’t a generation of the Rothschilds go off in some other direction or lose interest?  You’re dealing here with a specific religion – a religion and a cause, a purpose.  You will only find this kind of fanatical intergenerational devotion to an agenda when there’s some kind of a religion involved in it.


When did all these families crop up, with the banks?  We find that when the Rosicrucian Court was created at Queen Elizabeth I’s court – and that’s open history today; John Dee, Francis Bacon, Francis Drake, all these boys were members of the Rosicrucians.  It also broke out in France and Germany at the same time, and they even announced their presence by billboards all across Paris.  The members in Britain were open in the time of Queen Elizabeth I.  Their idea was to gain gold and money through plunder.  And they basically lived off of the Spanish galleons for an awful long time, as the Spanish were taking the gold out of South America.


John Dee and Bacon were also advisors to kings and queens, and they wrote about how to control, guide, mislead and always fool the populations, and always too to get them into warfare, thinking they knew what they were fighting for – but the public were never to know the true ambitions that they had.  John Dee coined the term “the British Empire”.  It didn’t exist before he said it and wrote it down.  He went to the queen with the idea and he said a system should be set up where countries are invaded or taken over by Britain to create a world system, which would be based on free trade.  Free Trade.  He said those countries willing to adopt the British system would be given special status, and its most favoured nation trading status.  The very same terms that are now used in all the charters they draw up for free trade across the planet, yet we’re going back 500 years to find it first used by an advisor to Queen Elizabeth I.  So therefore we know there was a world plan under way.


We also know that Kipling for instance – who worked for the British Raj in India, wrote many books and was a very high freemason – was sent over to the US where he spoke to the US Senate, equal to equal, and said “we pass the torch on to you”.  America was then to take over the financial cost of conducting this world war basically, to take over a world and turn it into a global system.




I’m Alan Watt and I’m a long-term researcher into the geopolitics and the psychopolitics of a world society basically; the society that’s bringing in globalism in our lifetime.


In the 1950s a book came out called The Next Million Years, and that was done by Charles Galton Darwin.  The Galtons again were another special bunch that came out to do with eugenics.  They started up the I.Q. tests that are now used across the world for schoolchildren to try and get the average intellect of children, classify them in grades, etc. And they then intermarried with the Darwins.  So Charles Galton Darwin was the grandson of Charles Darwin.  He was a physicist.


Again too, what we’re talking about is what Huxley said – Huxley being the end product of selective breeding to get a scientist, and so was Charles Galton Darwin.  They were bred along the Platonic lines – Plato talked about it too – and they became the scientific class.  Charles Galton Darwin was a top physicist in Britain, worked on atomic energy, weaponry and so on.  He also was attached to other delegations at the United Nations, had a lot of power, was well known, given a lot of exposure on political viewpoints and social viewpoints in the media.  And he came out with the book in the 1950s called The Next Million Years.


The Next Million Years is an astonishing book because it’s an incredible boast of how an elite would literally rule the world for another million years, and how it would be done – not just could be done, but would be done.  And his biggest cry throughout the whole book was that the media and educational systems would have to work so hard on the general public, even from schooling up, to get the public to go along and allow themselves to be somehow sterilized.  He said that the inferiors would outbreed the superiors, and that was his greatest fear.  Now, he spoke on behalf of his own establishment, his own group.


So they were into eugenics.  And you’ll find the United States became a great laboratory for eugenical experiment – people don’t really realize that.  Because when many of the Albigensian descendants, the Cathar descendants, the Bogomil descendants, came into the United States under the guise of Christianity, they set up their own particular eugenical experiments.  The Mormons were one of them, where couples were matched up.


One of the greatest experiments that’s ever happened in history was the Oneida experiment – Oneida, New York – where the man who set it up was given free reign to match up men and women, not to live forever together, but only to copulate for specific offspring.  Charles Darwin was involved in the experiment.  The newsletter that the Oneidas set out went also to the Huxleys.  H.G. Wells came over at the latter end for visits to it as well.  It was one of the greatest eugenical experiments ever carried on, under the protection and the guise, and the rights of protection of Christianity.  That’s how they got away with it.  And the man – [John Humphrey] Noyes – who was in charge of it, was a high mason.  His cousin was [Rutherford B.] Hayes, who became the president of the United States – so big people were backing this experiment in eugenics through the latter part of the 1800s into the 1900s.


What did they hope to gain?  How can we bring this into the Council on Foreign Relations and the Royal Institute of International Affairs, or the writings of say the Huxleys, or the Darwins even?  Well they believe, and they believed by Darwin’s time that all of the people who had “the right stuff” to excel in life, to acquire wealth, good intellect, property, and keep a hold of it through generations, had already been born.  Therefore anything that came after Darwin was just chance perhaps, or luck.  Therefore all the elite families were already established; there would be no more elite families.  Everyone else married in common because they did not have their wives or their husbands picked for them – they were not mated up for eugenical reasons.  They were called ‘commoners’.


We find the same expression coming out today with the new term for eugenics, they call it bioethics.  And the bioethicists are saying that those people, the common people, have “junk genes”.  It’s another slander on the public you see, meaning you have all these weird erroneous genes because none of you down through the generations were specifically married up for specific reasons.  Whereas you go into the lineage of Darwin, and the Darwin family (and many other families of his time) were already only breeding in to one other family for generations.  And the Darwins for about five generations – that we know of by birth records and marriage records – only married into the Wedgwood family, the big pottery conglomerate.  And when Charles Darwin’s first wife died he married his mother’s sister, who was a Wedgwood as well.


The problem with this incredibly close inbreeding, and I should say too the Huxleys were also descended from Darwin too – you’ll find contacts there – and their wives.  How many of these families, these wealthy elite families were actually into inbreeding in this fashion, this close inbreeding, we’ll never really know.  Maybe one day they will publish it.  But I know that Ian Taylor came out with an excellent book on Darwin called In The Minds Of Men – Darwin and the New World Order, where he documented the lineages of at least the Darwin family, to do with the Wedgwoods.  And as I say the unfortunate thing of such close inbreeding is that if there’s a dominant gene there prone to a specific illness or disease, it tends to be passed on.  And I think that with genetic research they hope to overcome the problems they’ve had with such close inbreeding for themselves.  But genetic research will not be used for the benefit of the rest of humanity, even though it’s our tax money that’s going into it, and has been going into the research for so long.  How long have they been working and why have they been working so long on genetics?  What’s the reason for it?




All geneticists are eugenicists because it starts off in your first course to do with eugenics, superior and inferior types.  Therefore at the start of their training at university they become true believers in eugenics to begin with.


We’ve been told the double helix and the genes and so on, wasn’t discovered until Watson came along around the ’70s or so.  And that they’d always suspected that there were things called genes – this was standard in all medical training for many many many years – but they hadn’t found them.  They just suspected they were there, we’re told.  But yet if you go into the writings of the greatest mathematician that the Royal Society could produce called [Ernest] Rutherford – he’s the guy they sent off abroad to do the equations for the pyramids and so on, for the Royal Society – in his own memoirs he said that in the early ’20s he was employed on scientific research as a mathematician to work on genes.  Why would you need mathematicians working on genes for something you haven’t discovered yet?  You can’t see them, unless they could see them.  And I believe that’s how far ahead they truly were back then.  They did know the genes were there.  They were working on them heavily because the agenda since at least Darwin’s time onwards was to create a superior type of human.


They toyed with the idea of creating even a superior type of worker, to serve the superior class; someone who could be very very healthy, bright enough to accomplish all the tasks but not too bright to overthrow the dominant minority.  That’s what their utopia, or their utopic idea, is basically based upon.  Some of them are so arrogant, like Julian Huxley; who was the first CEO of UNESCO, who said that UNESCO’S function by the way – the United Nation’s organization for education worldwide – was to create a standardized system of education across the world so that all children could be manipulated into the same thought patterns, belief patterns and mentality basically – a standardization process; a Plato’s cave that we’d all grow up in, never knowing anything outside of that cave.  He was quite blatant about that.  It was for social engineering purposes, not for educational purposes as such.


Now eugenics goes back into the most ancient times.  All kings and queens were mated up – for their supposedly inherited traits as leaders, and even as gods – by the priesthoods, who kept records of the traits, the physical and mental personality traits of offspring of these unions.  The one thing that was lacking was a monied class, who also use the same techniques.  We find this coming out with the Rothschild family.  So you had monarchies running the world, running an empire such as the British Empire.  All you needed now was the monied system to go along with it.  We find the Rothschilds worked on the same principals as monarchies; they inter-married each other to keep the same intellect, abilities and so on going.  With the Rothschilds we find they only marry their nieces, their immediate nieces, down through the generations.


We find Benjamin Franklin, very interesting man, long before this, again, high freemason – this is in his own records at the Franklin Institute; he joined the English lodge, he joined other lodges, he became eventually the Grand Master of the Nine Sisters lodge in France.  He initiated Voltaire in as a member, and others, but he was also a member of the Hellfire Club in England.  Benjamin Franklin talked about the carriers; he called them ‘dollies’.  These are women who had selective genes.  They were the products themselves of selective special breeding.  And the Hellfire Club, like many high masonic institutions of that time, had what were loosely called – loosely called and wrongly in a sense – brothels attached to them.  But it was also a cover because the special carriers or ‘dollies’ – and dolly is the term that Franklin himself coined, it’s still in use today; a dolly is a carrier like something you carry luggage on or whatever – basically he said that those who are worthy to go on and breed with these particular women (who were of noble birth most of them) would have the pleasure of having the offspring, knowing they had the offspring and the offspring was guaranteed a life of high exposure in science and perhaps leadership in the world.  Madame Bouvier was the one he was talking about initially at the Hellfire Club – it’s in High Wycombe, London.  And Madame Bouvier’s descendants still live; there’s two of them in France today, and the other one was Jackie Kennedy.




If you look at how politics is run, and you go into the writings of people like Lenin for instance, Lenin said that there are a thousand directions and systems in which people could go and live under, but the public mustn’t know that.  He said it’s important that the system that’s created for them is accepted by the people so that they think that it’s the only system that could possibly work.  And it’s true; we’re contained in a system of left and right, supposedly the have-nots against the haves, or those who own the means of production against those who don’t; the workers.  And that’s traditional Labour versus Tory or Conservative versus Democrat – that’s how the system is run.  It keeps the public contained within a system of thinking that it must be one or the other, or a middle road in between, which they push.  It never occurs to the general public that society has lived in the past under many different types of systems.  And as Lenin said, it’s important that the public don’t know that the system they were born into was designed for them and that it could be any different; they must think it’s the only natural one that could have evolved in their lifetime.


Therefore you’re contained within a restriction of parties.  You vote in one party when you’re sick of the last one – not because you want the new one in, it’s because you’re sick of the last one and what they’ve done to you.  And once they’ve been corrupted and gone off in different tangents – in ways which they never explain during the entire elections, and nothing to do with their election promises – you vote them out and get the next party in.  And so we go on forever with this left-right paradigm.  It’s like a tennis match really with the public in the middle; we’re the ball, and we just simply go back and forth between left and right, left and right, left and right.  Meanwhile, we’re being shepherded all along in one direction, because politics is a tool of the elite to manage the public.  That’s all democracy in fact really is; a tool of the elite to contain the public, manage them, and guide them along a pre-determined path that’s outside of any kind of democracy.


If you take Bush, what he was sent in to do was to wait.  And I believe this truly; he was to wait for 9/11 happening in 2001.  2001 happened, every country automatically went on board with the same agenda, at the same time, which shows pre-planning – bureaucracies in different governments do not work that fast.  It takes years to get that kind of cooperation, that kind of synchronicity working together, in synchronization.  Bush’s job was to bring in a totalitarian system – under the guise of protecting the public – where you lose your rights, and set up the machinery, the agencies to do it; the military forces, the paramilitary forces now (that the police have become) to set up the institutions for enforcement of laws.  Obama comes in, takes over the institutions that are now set up, and his job is to guide you through the economic depression and use those forces against the public at the required time.  That’s how it works.  It’s a continuity as far as I’m concerned; it’s not a separate regime whatsoever.  The same boys who put Bush in – the bankers and all the rest of it – put Obama in.  And Obama’s proved his loyalty to them by literally allowing them to rape the public of all their funds and then rewarding them by public funding and tax money to save the same bankers.  He’s one of their own boys.  But he now has the machinery in place that Bush set up to quell the coming riots – that they say are going to come – and to manage the public into a brand new system of what they call not government but governance, international governance.


If you listen to Obama’s speeches before he was elected and analyze what he actually said, he said very little.  He was giving emotive speeches with no substance.  He never said what he wanted to do or how he’s going to do anything.  It was almost like a lead up to a movie that hadn’t been made yet; emotional talk, talk of hope, but not saying how the hope would be transformed into realities.  He used the term that’s been used in academia for the last few decades, in the Ivy League schools and universities, of “the century of change”.  So his slogan became – and they use slogans, written for them – “change is good”.  Any idiot should ask the simple question “wait a minute, what change are you talking about?”  How can you be for change if you don’t know what the change is going to be?  It could be for your detriment.


But they got the people parroting like George Orwell said with the sheep, you know “four legs good, two legs bad”, “change is good” and the people, his followers start to repeat it; “change is good”.  What kind of change are we talking about?  The loss of sovereignty?  The blending into an international institution?  A world government system?  A system where not only is America bankrupt and the most indebted nation on the planet – for loaning money out to other countries and policing the world, being the policeman of the world – now Obama wants to lead the charge on sustainability, carbon taxes, by making America the example for the rest of the world to follow.  He’s asking everybody to sacrifice everything they have.  That’s what he means by “change is good”.


He didn’t dream up this plan.  He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.  Again, that comes from the Milner Group, the Cecil Rhodes society, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, that planned world government using the British Empire as the model – which has now become the American Empire in a sense.  And the change he is talking about is a new world of servitude, where you will serve the world state.  And you will also have to pay off all your debts along the way, which is impossible as far as I’m concerned; you cannot ever pay the kind of debt America has incurred since World War II.  It’s impossible to pay back.


Therefore the change he’s talking about really is a New Deal.  When you hear a new deal mentioned by any president – and we got that from FDR, we got it from Bush, the last Bush that was in, a new deal, we’re getting it from this administration – that’s a legal admission; a legal admission from the leader of your country of a new system.  A new deal is literally a new system.  The first system was the constitution, you got an updated system with FDR as government became incredibly big and centralized, and now you’ve got a new deal under the guise that change is good.


Who planned the change?  It wasn’t the people who planned the change.  Who will benefit?  It will not be the people; it’s the world of sustainability, Mr. [David] Rockefeller, the population reduction plan.  Those who will go into the future will be those who are necessary for the future’s maintenance, and those who are simply obsolete – the ‘useless eaters’ – will have to perish and die off.  It’s as simple as that.


This generation today, the ones who are alive today, we are the generation that’s going through the biggest changes in history – according to even Rockefeller himself – since the industrial revolution.  It’s the end of one part, one phase of a long-term plan.  And out of this comes a new world order, as they’ve said.  Mr. [Gordon] Brown said – the [previous] Prime Minister of Great Britain – said at the G20 meeting recently “it’s a new world order”; a different order from the previous one, where people technically, technically were working for themselves, would choose their own employment and so on.  The new world order is a planned system, a planned economy, a planned population.


So it’s up to us – it’s not up to the next generation – to change this.  We’re the only ones who can possibly do the changing.  And it’s either really the right to go into an uncertain future – which is what life should really be – where we decide for ourselves where we want to go individually and collectively, or allow ourselves to be dumb animals; creatures who are guided by those who have decided they are the masters of our destiny, and allow ourselves gradually to be sterilized, killed off, used for the last part of their agenda and their wars, and then cast off.


Many people will love socialism.  They enjoy being guided and they enjoy their bosses running the world for them.  But it’s up to those who like freedom, personal freedom, which also entails uncertainty of where we’re actually going to go.




Transcribed by Matthew





Alan Watt: The Neo-Eugenics War On Humanity - youtube links


Part 1/4 -

Part 2/4 -

Part 3/4 -

Part 4/4 -



Other useful links


Video: "Zbigniew Brzezinski to Jihadists: Your cause is right!"


May 30, 2007 Alan Watt blurb

Crisis Creation by the Club of Rome - Clubbing Us to Death

mp3 -

transcript -


The Disappearing Male


Nov. 19, 2008

Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" on RBN:

Class Arrogance and Darwinian Agenda

mp3 -

transcript -

(BOOK: "The Next Million Years" by Charles Galton Darwin.)


Nov. 20, 2008

Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" on RBN:

Relationship of Scientific Dictatorship

mp3 -

transcript -


RBN February 3rd, 4th and 6th in 2009, or #248, #249 and #251


(BOOK: "The Next Million Years" by Charles Galton Darwin.)


The Oneida experiment


In The Minds Of Men – Darwin and the New World Order by Ian Taylor