Number 84
- The money behind the smears
- Transhumanism: the opposition
- Three days against techno-sciences
- Hans Driesch: an organic radical inspiration
- Acorninfo
1. The money behind the smears
by Paul Cudenec
Back in 2020 I was on the receiving end of a lot of vitriol from so-called “anarchists” who objected to the fact that I refused to abandon my commitment to truth and freedom in the face of the Covid coup.
That all went quiet after a while and, moving on, I stopped even caring what these confused people thought about me.
So it was a bit of a surprise to find, via my comrades at Nevermore Media, that I had been targeted by a few unpleasant paragraphs on the Montreal Counter Information website, as you can see here.
The main target of the attack was one of their own former associates, the Canadian activist known as Crow Qu’appelle, and one of the ways they tried to blacken his name was through his ideological association with me, so my name therefore had to be tainted with the odour of badness.
In predictable fashion, they condemned my exposures of the agenda behind the Great Reset, including the collaborative role of anarchists and the Left, as “full-throttle conspiracy mongering”.
Moreover, because I have dared to criticise the Rothschilds and challenge the transhumanist/transgender industry, I am apparently guilty of “propagating far-right conspiracy theories about Jewish bankers and trans people”!
When even the likes of George Galloway, Scots left-winger (and jab enthusiast), can be labelled “far-right” for challenging one aspect of the global mafia’s domination, the term has clearly been redefined to the point that it has no actual meaning.
But I do still find it irritating to be seriously misrepresented by an anonymous hack (possibly a spook, as Crow writes) who clearly has no interest in understanding where I am coming from but has merely set out to attack me.
So why the attention now, three years after I was first excommunicated by the High Priests of the Central Global Church of Woke Pseudo-Anarchism?
I think a clue lies in the reference to other like-minded thinkers with whom I have been collaborating both in the English-speaking world, partly via Nevermore, and also in France and Italy.
The article warns of “a transnational echo chamber of conspiracists who have been embracing increasingly reactionary, transphobic, and antisemitic ideas”.
In other words, they are worried that we are coming together and regrouping outside of the controlled woke-left mind-prison to begin to form a coherent long-term international resistance movement!
A similar angle was adopted by an article in the UK’s Freedom News which is referenced by the Montreal hatchet job.
This attack on feminist Jennifer Bilek claims she is a “source of growing anti-semitic conspiracy theories in the gender-critical movement”.
Again, the “antisemitism” here is an invention. It just so happens that many leading players in the transhumanist/transgender industry, as identified by Jennifer’s excellent research, have Jewish backgrounds.
She is obviously not saying that all transhumanists are Jewish, nor, of course, that all or many Jews are transhumanists.
Criticising transhumanism cannot logically be regarded as automatically “antisemitic”, whatever the ethno-cultural identity of those involved!
The spectre of “antisemitism” is merely being used here to close down any analysis of, and challenge to, the multi-billion dollar industry in question.
It seems very strange indeed to me that “anarchists” would use fabricated political smears to cancel criticism of rich and powerful movers and shakers in the medico-pharmaceutic complex and in the global banking system.
I mean, we’re supposed to be against the domination of an ultra-rich ruling class, aren’t we?
Perhaps some might imagine that this is merely a side-effect of the woke ideology, that their fixation with the threat from anything regarded as “far-right” blinds them to the bigger politico-economic picture.
But there is another line in the Freedom News article which is even more alarming.
Pointing to Jennifer’s previous involvement in Deep Green Resistance, it depicts that organisation not only, predictably, as “transphobic” but also as an “eco-terrorism promoting organisation”.
How could anyone identifying as an anarchist glibly roll out a phrase that sounds like it has been issued from the corridors of authoritarian power?
Real environmentalists are “terrorists”? Writing about real environmentalism is “promoting” terrorism? There is something deeply fishy about the Freedom News angle here.
I have previously written about the dubious connections enjoyed by many so-called “radicals”.
In November 2020 I exposed the ultra-rich “impact” capitalists of the WEF-linked Guerrilla Foundation who fund “activists” in the hope of profiting from “systemic change”, even paying them to hobnob with what should be their enemies at “Unlikely Allies” Impact Hubs.
In February 2021 I investigated Edge Fund, (aren’t they clever, with their pun?), a dodgy organisation which has been seeking to fund anarchists since 2013.
Deeply embedded in the global “philanthropy” network, Edge Fund enjoys links to Big Society Capital, set up by “impact capitalist” Sir Ronald Cohen.
In April 2021 I showed how woke “intersectionality” is, like the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, closely aligned with the impact industry.
And in January 2023 I looked into the four so-called “environmentalists” who had been smearing my French and Italian comrades and discovered that each one of them worked for the Macron regime and/or European foundations promoting vaccines and smart cities.
With regard to the strange “eco-terrorism” line in the Freedom News report, it turns out that they in fact lifted the phrase directly from a March 2021 article by the Trans Safety Network.
The network is a member of Consortium, which describes itself as “the national infrastructure and umbrella body for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans+ groups across the UK”.
My personal alarm bells were immediately set ringing by the fact that Consortium’s website includes an “Outcomes & Impact” section in which “we aim to help LGBT+ groups identify the changes their work is making and how to demonstrate this”.
Measuring “outcomes” is a key element of the digital slavery system known as impact investment and is one of the reasons why the global power nexus is trying to force us to lead our lives online, in an all-inclusive “metaverse” in which our digital twins are commodified for exploitation and speculation.
To this end, Consortium boasts of its Outcomes Framework which “sets out a standardised structure of five core areas of impact and associated sub-outcomes, as well as three underlying principles”.
Stressing the importance of “monitoring, evaluation and learning”, it complains of “an evidence gap around the achievements of the LGBT+ sector in the UK”.
Consortium explains that the impact outcome framework was produced with the help of Traverse, which it describes as “an independent social research and evaluation consultancy”.
It is with Traverse that we can see the real agenda behind Consortium’s outcomes obsession, the related activities of its members such as Trans Safety Network and the anti-radical smears parroted by the useful idiots in the not-so-alternative woke media.
One of the businesses with which Traverse proudly announces that it works is Arcadis NV, a Dutch “global design, engineering and management consulting company” involved in the construction of London City Airport, the A2 motorway in the Netherlands, the Millau motorway viaduct in France, the Tietê River Project in Brazil, and the Long Beach International Gateway, in California, USA.
Others are CITB (Construction Industry Training Board) – “It’s our job to help the construction industry attract talent and to support skills development, to build a better Britain” – and Horizon Nuclear Power.
Now why would any of the above want to smear real environmentalists (as opposed to tame corporate puppets) as “eco-terrorists”, I wonder?
Worse is to come. Two further businesses with which Traverse works are Wellcome Trust, the rotten heart of Big Pharma in the UK, and Big Society Capital, the entity with which Ronald Cohen launched his impact capitalism racket.
What was that again, about Traverse being “independent”?
This is all damning enough, but the trail doesn’t even end here: Traverse, it turns out, is itself “a member of Sonder, a group of organisations”.
The Traverse site tells us: “The Sonder Group and its individual members have been appointed to a series of governenment [sic] frameworks which allow Direct award of contracts in the Health Sector and other Public Sector fields”.
Ah, right! So it’s part of the ongoing privatisation of the public sector, including the NHS, by big business parasites – a process of which impact investment is very much a part.
Sonder, on its own site, says its aims are to “create change” and “achieve sustainable impact”.
It seems very close to a business called PPL, with two PPL co-founders and managing partners, Simon Morioka and Claire Kennedy, on the Sonder board.
PPL actually stands for Private Public Ltd, a name which evokes the business-state merger pioneered by Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler in the early 20th century.
Unsurprisingly, it is heavily into the impact capitalism scam.
Its Impact Report for 2020-21 brags how it had been “supporting the London Covid-19 vaccination effort” and announces that “we are working to launch a new charitable foundation which will help to ensure that the social impact funding we generate forms part of a long-term investment in local people and communities”.
And the following year’s impact report (2021-2022) declares that it aims to “maximise the impact of our growing social impact fund” and “spread our impact more widely than we have done previously”.
So we have seen that Trans Safety Network is part of Consortium, whose framework was provided by Traverse, which is a member of Sonder, which is run by business people from the likes of Private Public Ltd.
More light is shed on the nature of Trans Safety Network (originators of Freedom News’ “eco-terrorism” smear) by the fact that a glowing profile of its director Shash Appan features on the ILGA Europe website.
This organisation, the European region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, describes itself as “an independent, international non-governmental umbrella organisation uniting over 700 organisations from 54 countries across Europe and Central Asia”.
ILGA Europe enjoys consultative status at the United Nations Economic and Social Council and participatory status at the Council of Europe and can boast of some heavyweight financial backing, not least from the European Union and the Government of the Netherlands.
Another of its funders is the Oak Foundation, set up by British billionaire businessman Alan Parker who made a “fortune” in “hedge funds and high tech” and is now happily installed, with his money, in Geneva, Switzerland.
Oak Foundation, itself Swiss-based, says it “comprises a group of philanthropic organisations based in various countries around the world”.
It seeks to “achieve high impact” and explains: “We define the impact of our investments in consultation with partners and support their capacity to assess and measure progress”.
This ties in nicely with the LGBT+ impact outcomes framework produced by Traverse for Consortium and thus, by extension, for its member Trans Safety Network.
A further funder of ILGA Europe is the EVZ Foundation (Remembrance Responsibility Future) which says its mission is “to keep the memory of National Socialist persecution alive”.
It explains that it “raises awareness of the intellectual and cultural heritage of German-language Judaism in schools and universities. Particular attention is drawn to the Jewish contribution to Europe’s political, economic and cultural development”.
It talks of its “substantive impact goals” and its involvement with the controversial IHRA definition of “antisemitism”.
For unspecified reasons, EVZ is also keen on “Support for Ukraine“.
It is likewise unclear why EVZ funds LGBT+ campaigning. I have the uncomfortable feeling that there may be some convoluted connection here with the “growing anti-semitic conspiracy theories in the gender-critical movement” of which Freedom News has been warning.
Indeed, this intuition is confirmed by the identity of the final listed funder of ILGA Europe, Wellspring Philanthropic Fund, formerly known as the Matan B’Seter Foundation.
Jewish media source The Algemeiner explains that it is part of a web of trusts and foundations set up by “a trio of philanthropists, who took great pains to conceal their giving” and provided “extensive support for Jewish charities”.
Its article explains that “for more than two decades, the partners at little known hedge fund TGS Management – Andrew Shechtel, David Gelbaum and C. Frederick Taylor – have coordinated their donations through lawyers who have helped them cover their tracks”.
As well as the $13 billion distributed through this secretive network, “an additional $1 billion was donated through public foundations such as the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program, which distributes funds for thousands of donors, making the ultimate destination of their contributions impossible to determine”.
And yes, before you ask, this is indeed part of the same Vanguard empire that seems to own pretty much every major business in the world, along with sister companies like BlackRock and State Street.
Predictably, Vanguard Charitable says it is dedicated to “charitable impact through strategic and thoughtful philanthropy”.
The lesson from all of this is that people, particularly those on the “left”, urgently need to wise up.
They have to understand that the smears against us dissidents are false flag operations.
They appear on “anarchist”, “environmentalist” or other “left” websites and are couched in the appropriate language, passing themselves off as condemnations of the “far-right”, “antisemitism” or “fascist drifts”.
But the source of the propaganda is identical to that of the funding channelled furtively down to these public-facing groups and individuals.
Both money and smears issue from a secretive global network of “philanthropy”, “charity”, “impact”, “umbrella groups”, “consultancies”, “foundations” and “funds” closely tied to national and international institutions.
The likes of Montreal Counter Information and Freedom News like to pretend they are punching “up”, against a threat emanating from some kind of international “far-right” conspiracy, whereas in fact they are punching “down”, against free-thinking rebels, on behalf of the ruthless global criminocracy.
2. Transhumanism: the opposition
Few intellectuals note the opposition to transhumanism better than the transhumanists themselves. Nick Bostrom writes that resistance comes from:
“Ancient notions of taboo; the Greek concept of hubris; the Romanticist view of nature; certain religious interpretations of the concept of human dignity and of a God-given natural order; Karl Marx’s analysis of technology under capitalism; various Continental philosophers’ critique of technology, technocracy, and the rationalistic mindset that accompanies modern technoscience; foes to the military industrial complex and multinational corporation; and objectors to the consumerist rat-race.”
Bostrom’s summary is a panorama of human expression, literature, thousands of years of culture, religion, philosophy and human meaning-making. Modern literature on philosophy, culture and technology, from Jacques Ellul, Jerry Mander, Neil Postman and Wendell Berry to Jürgen Habermas and Martin Heidegger, offer poignant critiques that are relevant to opposing transhumanist visions of the future, and remind us of the value of community, embodied wisdom, and traditions, and the effects of technological systems. The difference in writing styles is noteworthy: while pro-transhumanist writing tends to be utilitarian and have a tone of scientific authority, ‘bioconservatives’ will often use narrative, symbols, and a writing style considered traditionally beautiful in human culture.
What is noticeable is that the opposition to transhumanism is broad, ill-defined and diverse. Bostrom notes that “right-wing conservatives, left wing environmentalists and anti-globalists” are all pushing back against central transhumanist aims. Firstly, there are the well-published intellectual and academic opponents that engage in a forceful scholarly debate with transhumanism over issues such as biotechnology, threats to liberal democracy, and scientific materialism, and the environmental and social costs of transhumanism. Also noteworthy are the bioethicists, George Annas, Lori Andrews and Rosario Isasi, who have advised making “inheritable genetic modification in humans a ‘crime against humanity’”. These scholars fear the posthuman potential for inequality and war, warning that, “the new species, or ‘posthuman’, will likely view the old ‘normal’ humans as inferior, even savages, and fit for slavery or slaughter…it is the predictable potential for genocide”. The common factor amongst these academics is that they believe biological engineering (of humans) would be disruptive to values, rights, and equality, and would threaten liberal democracy itself. These men have been labelled bio-conservatives or, more dismissively, Neo-Luddites, for rejecting the legitimacy of a posthuman future.
The second group that is emerging as anti-transhumanist are the environmentalists, non-conformists, primitivists, and anarchists committed to Wild Nature with forceful anti-industrial sentiments. In North America, this includes elements of the Deep Green Movement, represented by various writers, artists, activists, ecologists, organic farmers, herbalists and healers, forest-dwellers and hunter/gatherers, spiritualists, and various alternative people, off-grid or nomadic, who refuse to live within a mechanised, industrial system, and may intentionally attempt to sabotage it. As an eclectic group, they have significant influence over specific geographical areas, tend to identify with traditional local indigenous values, and deeply resent Western consumerist culture, war, global corporations, pollution, and industrial infrastructure. Notably, some ecofeminists have written that biotechnology is a dangerous “extension of traditional patriarchal exploitation of women” in promoting the reshaping of natural human bodies.
The third group that has rapidly developed increasing opposition to transhumanism is religious groups. Besides the Mennonite and Amish communities, who maintain ‘old world’ lifestyles across significant sections of the United States, there is a rising anti-transhumanist sentiment and increasing religious fervour amongst some Evangelical Christians across North America. The New York Times reported on the increasing politicisation of evangelical congregations, with defiant unifying songs that repeated, “We will not comply” in the chorus. The language these groups use to describe transhumanism is often symbolic, archetypal and apocalyptic, and understood as an epic battle between light and darkness. For example, speaker and writer, Thomas Horn, has been preaching about the dangers of transhumanism to Christian congregations for over a decade. His books have titles such as Pandemonium’s Engine: How the End of the Church Age, the Rise of Transhumanism, and the Coming of the Ubermensch (Overman) Herald Satan’s Imminent and Final Assault on the Creation of God. Suspicions of ‘Satanic technology’, and anti-transhumanist sentiments may have been a part of the reason why Evangelical Christians were the demographic most unlikely to cooperate with Covid vaccination mandates in the United States.
The tragic situation in Ukraine suggests that ideologically-driven wars may increase with the growing animosity between religious and transhumanist world views, or this may be used in war propaganda. The Russian Orthodox Church, with well over one hundred million members, considers the invasion of Ukraine as a battle of light and darkness, with ‘Holy Russia’ fighting against an unholy NATO alliance. The Church Patriarch, Kirill of Moscow, has taken a strong position against biotechnology—including “gene therapy”, “cloning” and “artificial life extension”—and views the Russian Orthodox Church as defending the traditional family against the liberalism of the West. Addressing the leaders of Russia at the recent 24th World Russian People’s Council, the orthodox believer and philosopher Alexander Dugin proclaimed, “this war is not only a war of armies, of men…it is a war of Heaven against Hell…the Archangel Michael against the devil…the enemy came to us…in the face of LGBT, Transhumanism—that openly Satanic, anti-human civilization with which we are at war with today.” It may be that an influential number of religious Russians believe that they are not fighting against Ukraine at all, but rather rescuing it from the Satanic hold of the Transhumanist West.
The fourth major group that is exhibiting overwhelming anti-establishment sentiments towards what is perceived as the ‘elites’ and their ‘transhumanist agenda’ are the politically and economically disenfranchised working classes and displaced farmers. Known in academic circles as ‘populists’, this group has recently displayed significant anger over extended ‘lockdowns’; losing the freedom to travel and to access decent healthcare (in the US); and experiencing unemployment and poverty. Their physically non-compliant behaviour, seen in mass demonstrations, notably across Europe and with the Canadian truckers, has been met with discursive and physical violence from increasingly irritated political leaders and media corporations. These ‘populists’ often reject transhumanism as an elitist ideology that they fear will lead to further loss of bodily autonomy, increased surveillance, political disempowerment, and a reduction of dignified employment to robots and automation. These fears are not altogether unfounded since, according to the WEF, the 4IR is proposed to lead to significant worldwide job losses, perhaps up to 70%. Steven Bannon, the instrumental ‘populist’ of Trump’s 2016 election force, uses religious polemics to rally resistance against what he sees as a rising transhuman globalist agenda. His popular show, the War Room, features broadcasts such as Descent into Hell: Transhumansim and the New Human Race. The outrage this group has towards 4IR transformations and transhumanism cannot be underestimated: within the US many working class families, though not all, also hold values of egalitarian weapons ownership, and their discourse exudes a willingness to engage in violent confrontation over threats to bodily autonomy.
The United States’ most infamous anti-transhumanist/anti-technologist came, not from religious circles, but from within the radical environmental movement and academia. The late Theodore Kaczynski (1942-2023), a mathematical genius and professor at UC Berkeley, conducted an anti-technology terrorist campaign that spanned 17 years, killing three people and injuring 23. He blackmailed the FBI into publishing his 35,000-word thesis titled Industrial Society and its Future in the Washington Post and New York Times, which led to his capture. During 25 years in solitary confinement, he published volumes about how to conduct a revolution against the scientific elite. In one volume, The Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How, he writes,
“The techies themselves insist that machines will soon surpass human intelligence and natural selection will favour systems that eliminate them (humans)—if not abruptly, then in a series of stages so that the risk of rebellion will be eliminated.”
Kaczynski reacted with terrorism to what he considered an existential threat posed by technology to humans and his greatest love, Wild Nature. His fear was a loss of freedom and masculine human nature, as well as the transformation of society into a controlled Brave New World, something he viewed as inevitable without a revolution. In fact, it is arguable that the United States was already too similar to the Brave New World for Kaczynski, since he depicts “fighting industrial society” as “structurally similar to escaping a concentration camp”.
Bill Joy, founder of Sun Technologies, authored an influential essay at the dawn of the 21st century, Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us, advocating for the relinquishment of developing “AI, nanotechnology and genetics because of the risks”. Interestingly, Joy argues for the legitimacy of Kaczynski’s logic about the threats of advanced technologies, despite Kaczynski having “gravely injured” one of his friends, a computer scientist, with a bomb. Parts of Kaczynski’s writing that shifted Joy’s views included the following:
“The human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines’ decisions. As society and problems that face it become more and more complex and machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more of their decisions for them…eventually a stage may be reached in which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage, the machines will effectively be in control. People won’t be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide.”
This scenario is not too hard to imagine since it is quickly becoming our modern predicament. There is an implicit and explicit consensus in much transhumanist and anti-transhumanist thought, by Musk, Kaczynski, Joy and many others, that this phenomenon is leading, and will continue, to this logical end.
The other scenario that Bill Joy quoted in his essay, again from Kaczynski, was: “On the other hand, it is possible that human control over machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own…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. Or 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 elites.”
Interestingly, the scenarios do not seem mutually exclusive, at least for a time.
Scholar Ole Martin Moen has noted similarities between Kaczynski, Nick Bostrom and Julian Savulescu in their projections of a future crisis. Like Kaczynski, Bostrom has argued that transhumanist technologies expose humanity to a significant risk of eradication. Savulescu, also like Kaczynski, argues in Unfit for the Future: The need for moral enhancement, that evolved human nature combined with transhumanist technologies will lead to catastrophic consequences. Kaczynski, who believed these outcomes were logical, reacted with violence because his highest ethic was one of authentic, uncontrolled freedom. His life is a warning that some human natures may be entirely incompatible with a techno-scientific future. In fact, the transhumanist vision of human extinction and a ‘posthuman’ future may actually promote anxiety and violence in some humans.
Martin Heidegger has warned that those who seek to use technology’s influence without realising the immense power that the technology has over them, are trapped into becoming extensions of machines rather than free actors. They are “framed like men with advanced computational devices into seeing all of reality as computational information”. For thousands of years, human existence and meaning-making has accumulated from “birth and death, flood and fire, sleep and waking, the motions of the winds, the cycles of the stars, the budding and falling of the leaves, the ebbing and flowing of the tides” (John Cowper Powys), and it seems fitting to question if our highly evolved human tissues and ‘natures’ are strengthened or undermined by advanced technology. Is it possible that human flourishing is encouraged by the ancient struggle with the limitations of our own animal natures, rather than by conforming to the constructs of complex technology? With transhumanism, who is in control and who benefits?
It may be fair to say that transhumanism is a bio-social engineering project that ultimately concentrates power in machines, and humans who behave with machine-like characteristics. Large sections of the earth’s population, such as various religious groups, the working class, indigenous peoples, and other nature-based humans, may resent undemocratic announcements from forums like the WEF that, with the 4IR, industrialization is accelerating towards genetic engineering, robotic automation and virtual living. Furthermore, we may risk promoting an existential crisis and extreme reactions in those who dislike being told that the future belongs to the posthuman rather than to themselves and their offspring. It is a contested future and one that is entirely unwritten.
Extracted from Danica’s fully-referenced essay Transhumanism and the Philosophy of the Elites.
3. Three days against techno-sciences
Fifth International Meeting
28 – 29 – 30 July 2023
Three Days Against Techno-Sciences
at Altradimora, strada Caranzano 72, Alessandria (AL), Italy
FRIDAY
12.30 p.m. lunch
15.30
Presentation of the meeting by Resistenze al nanomondo – Bergamo
16.00 – 19.00 Speeches followed by debate
Towards the biolaboratory world
The international attention focused for many months on the Wuhan biotechnology laboratory did not serve, as many have thought, to find a scapegoat in the dangerous Chinese research – especially when zoological narratives of Pangolins and Bats were disproved by the very drivers such as Fauci – rather, we were facing a new biotechnological dimension. The numbering of the security level is only to be seen as a detail where the biolaboratory with all its consequences and side effects, understood as new chimeras and biological weapons towards society as a whole, goes. A society to be surrounded first and then penetrated to the depths, where the biological alarm bell sounding will get mixed up with the bell announcing school recreastion, as it did with nuclear power. This time there is no atomic fallout to be averted, because the new biotechnological dimension with the living being at its centre is about to normalise. We are already in confidence, otherwise there would be no call for moratoriums and a techno-science on a human scale, this can never be given, because it does not exist.
Costantino Ragusa, Resistenze al nanomondo
Cellular mRNA redesign platforms, towards a humanity on a scale of gene therapies, digital identity and QR codes
The era of vaccines is opening, which would better be called the era of gene therapies with genetic engineering technologies from recombinant DNA to synthetic mRNA and nanotechnology for a cellular redesign platform. Universal vaccines – actually gene therapies – for influenza, vaccines – actually gene therapies – against cancer, these and others to be taken up also at a preventive level for a restructuring of medicine in a predictive and preventive key on a genetic basis. We will be responsible if we fall ill because we have not followed the new dictates, not an increasingly deadly society.
We will review Europe-wide vaccination campaigns for Sars-Cov 2 and other future decreed pandemics. But that’s not all, after testing it on women in African countries with their subsequent sterilisation, the trial of the contraceptive vaccine starts, opening up a further transformation: a vaccine to produce an immune response against a bodily process – pregnancy. Genetic modifications of DNA, infertility, increasingly early cancers will not only be health consequences, but will represent a profound transformation of future generations: infertile, sick, weak, ready to be hijacked into genetic engineering and artificial reproduction biolaboratories. To close the circle from the Green Pass we are coming in a big hurry to the Digital Identity that will travel with the 5G network, so at the next scanner check the QR will tell who fails to fit their parameters…
Silvia Guerini, Resistenze al nanomondo
19.30 Dinner
21.00 Screening of the documentary Infertility: A Diabolic Agenda
Subtitled in Italian, 30 minutes
Produced by Children’s Health Defense
The story of how a World Health Organisation (WHO) population control experiment, under the guise of a vaccination programme, led to the sterilisation of millions of women in Africa. One of Dr Stephen Karanja’s last warnings: ‘once they are done with Africa, they will come to you’. Coming finally to the Sars-Cov 2 gene serums that could cause infertility in women around the world. This will be followed by a remote talk by Sister Teresa Forcades, an important witness to all this and to the work of the pharmaceutical multinationals in the countries of the South.
“Medicamentalization”
After the medicalisation of natural processes, such as the change of mood in adolescence, the commercial medical model started to market itself with the medicalisation of social problems and the abuse of preventive medicine. This would not be possible without the cooperation of society.
Sister Teresa Forcades, doctor, theologian, Benedictine nun of the Monastery De San Benedet in Montserrat
SATURDAY
8.00 a.m. breakfast
9.00 – 12.30 Speeches followed by debate
Shining light on the climate of manipulation
Our contemporary society is built entirely from artifice and illusion. In this labyrinth of lies, this demonic hall of mirrors, it has become extraordinarily difficult to distinguish fact from fake, reality from spin. The question of climate change, and so-called “climate justice”, is a prime example of this. It has become clear over the last few years that this “political movement”, from Greta Thunberg to Extinction Rebellion, from Fridays for Future to Ultima Generazione, is a manufactured one serving powerful financial interests under a false green flag. The fact that the “trans rights” movement is also a corporate front is not a coincidence, but part of a systematic and wide-ranging plan. This plan is wrapped in lies, in order to dupe people into going along with it. As well as exposing the plan and the power behind it, we need to affirm our own conviction to truth, as one of our core values. It is the light of our authenticity that can reach through through the system’s barriers of deceit and spark the flame of righteous revolt in the hearts of millions.
Paul Cudenec, www.paulcudenec.substack.com, www.winteroak.org.uk
Improving creation – becoming god – aspirations of human folly
According to the engineers of humanity, we will have a better world by genetically modifying human beings to make them more intelligent, courageous and capable. This is the basic idea that we can observe in all areas. Everything must be improved. A common denominator of improvement in all areas of life is the reversal of values. So what needs to be improved and in which direction? Where does the ‘better’, so defined, come from? It comes from the reversal of natural laws and spiritual laws.
Today’s so-called elite is reversing all the premises that characterise life, both in nature and in society. The focus is not on life on earth, on birth, growth and nurture, on care, not on the wonder of this reality, its beauty, its activity and complexity, but on its reversal, its dissolution, its transformation into an artificial, even enhanced reality; a term that expresses this concept exhaustively is that of ‘assisted evolution’, which we encounter everywhere and which represents the attitude of this technocratic man towards creation.
Maria Heibel, editor of the website www.nogeoingegneria.org
Useless, unscientific, toxic and illegal: the new GMOs, like synthetic pesticides, have these four characteristics in common, while four arrogant cartels dominate the world seed market and four investment funds are destroying the ethical heritage of all humanity
Everyone remembers the words of the warmonger Kissinger “If you control oil, you control nations, if you control food, you control people”, but not everyone knows that food is produced by 857 million individuals who are not easy to control, enslave, dominate .
The speed with which today, four investment funds aim to manage the food supply of the entire planet is there for all to see. By polluting and plundering, water, air and land, they have maintained the same predatory mission of the India Companies, with the arrogance of those who hold immense capital and the majority shares in all the biggest multinationals of armaments, information technology, services, transport, financial, oil, pharmaceutical, seed, biotech, metallurgical, etc.
To overthrow the mercenary violence of their weapons, the illicit power of their invasive technologies, and the useless wealth of their counterfeit bills, you need to team up with the world’s 857 million farmers and let your neighbors know that the coming tsunami , it also concerns his noble family.
Mario Apicella – Mountain agronomist specialized in organic farming and agricultural biodiversity
Climatism: the new ideology that opens the door to the engineering of life
The climate emergency machine is compact and its gears are well-oiled to spread the same catastrophic melody: from the IPCC to the WHO, the practitioners of apocalyptic prophecies are the heirs of a diverse world of neo-Malthusians and technocrats, who have always been engaged in shaping the society of the future. Does the infamous 2 degrees that separate us from extinction represent a real danger or more likely a pretext to legitimise atmospheric geoengineering and techniques for manipulating terrestrial life?
Only by looking disenchantedly at reality will it be possible to stop the creation of the Engineered Planet and the abolition of Nature.
Cristiana Pivetti, artist, illustrator of texts against the artificialization of Life and essayist, www.cristianapivetti.org
13.00 Lunch
15.00 – 19.30 Speeches followed by debate
Eugenics, artificial reproduction of the human, dissociation from bodies and reality, from how one should be born to how one should die.
An outline to introduce and unite the following three talks.
By Silvia Guerini – Resistance to the nanoworld
Biotechnology, MAP and eugenics: for a rational critique
Biotechnology is the techno-scientific manipulation of living beings, including humans. Since the 19th century, industrial societies have justified the coexistence of the principle of equality and the reality of inequality by a biological determinism, for which social inequalities are the reflection of natural inequalities. From this ideology stems eugenics, i.e. the will to scientifically control human reproduction, in order to favour the ‘superior’ over the ‘inferior’. This is the real legitimisation of MAP, research on artificial wombs, genetic manipulation, cloning, etc. The consequence is the deepening of the industrial dispossession of individuals, not only of their livelihoods, their desires, their social interactions, but also of their nature. However, the rational critique of this ideology is confronted with various irrationalities: that of technocratic propaganda, that of postmodern cultural determinism and that of religious fundamentalism.
Jacques Luzi, academic, member of the journal Ecologie & politique
Homo Deus, the human whose brain is a computer made of flesh
What lies behind eugenics, the techno-mercification of reproduction and its Brave New World? Is there a matrix of the ‘trans phenomenon’, transhumanism, transsexualism? Why has institutional ecology become the spearhead of these movements? While the degrowth movement was hitherto persona non grata in the mass media, the ‘degrowth studies’ (Timothée Parrique & Co), the nucleocratic degrowth of the French polytechnician Jean-Marc Jancovici or Klaus Schwab’s ‘Great Reset’ version of degrowth, suddenly had access to public discourse. For the ‘pope of degrowth’ Serge Latouche, the reason for degrowth was liberation from the economisation of the world. After recovering ecology, liberal capitalism attacks degrowth: it is a question of turning it upside down to put it at the service of the realm of the quantifiable. Even in the militant world, this degrowth perspective alleviates avoiding questions that annoy and arouse suspicion of reaction. How can we avoid the subversive nature of our commitment?
Vincent Cheynet, editor-in-chief of the French magazine La Décroissance
Naked death or freely dying
To turn death against those who use it to better govern us means in the first instance to bring it back into life, to return to talking about it, to remove it from the isolation to which it has been subjected, and in the second instance to know how to lay down one’s arms in front of it, to prepare oneself to freely consent to it, to accept one’s fragility, to abandon the warlike metaphor that western allopathic medicine continues to propagate like a malignant tumour and to learn to make peace intimately with illness and death.
This does not necessarily mean renouncing treatment, abdicating any possible cure, rejecting any medicine. Rather, the effort to be made as a political and existential commitment is to revolutionise the very concept of illness, which is no longer to be understood as an attack by external agents to be countered by any means and at any cost, but as a manifestation of one’s own being in the world.
Bianca Bonavita
20.00 dinner
SUNDAY
8.00 a.m. breakfast
9.00
What possibilities for continuing the Resistance?
As we do every year at the end of these three days, we will take time to reflect together on the paths of opposition currently in place, whether these can actually be considered such, and where they are lagging behind. We will make these reflections on the basis of the experiences of the participants, but we will also willingly trespass on proposals that try to give substance to the reflections made, which absolutely cannot simply remain mere abstractions. We are in a context in which, paradoxically, it is becoming difficult to build and sustain a grassroots movement: we have ‘events’, ‘logos’, ‘memberships’, ‘chats’, ‘parties of dissent’ and delegate to experts or supposed such who should never replace the work of activists, made up of research, study and even sacrifice. In all this, a deeper and broader meaning not only of the processes underway, but also of the meaning of a path of struggle with a lack of memory of how networks, coordinations, projects used to be built. Let us restore depth, commitment, continuity, by putting ourselves on the line. If we are not willing to do this, how can we think of building a Resistance?
13.00 lunch
The place where the meeting will take place, Altradimora, (https://altradimora.eu/), strada Caranzano 72, Alessandria (AL), is a house with beds and the possibility of putting up tents in the lawn in front of the house. Bring a sheet bag and towels. We will provide breakfasts, lunches and dinners for all days with organic, vegan and locally produced food. Gluten-free option provided. Please let us know of any intolerances or other needs.
The cost to attend the three days – Friday, Saturday and Sunday – is 100 euros, for Friday and Saturday 80 euros, for Saturday and Sunday 60 euros, for Sunday 20 euros. It is necessary to BOOK in advance in order to participate in the days. Places are limited.
4. Hans Driesch: an organic radical inspiration
The latest in our series of profiles from the orgrad website.
“The object is not the mere sum of its attributes: it is their unity – it is all the attributes together”
Hans Driesch (1867-1941) was a biologist who developed a humanistic and internationalist holistic philosophy in defiance of the Nazi regime in his native Germany.
His embryological research at the start of the twentieth century helped challenge the mechanistic model of life that had come to dominate Western thinking under industrial capitalism.
In a crucial experiment, he destroyed one of the blastomeres of a sea-urchin egg at the two-cell stage of development and found that what happened next contradicted the expectations of the machine model.
Instead of a half-animal developing out of the two egg halves, the half developed into a whole larva that was half the normal size.
This research led Driesch towards his influential theory of organisms as “harmonious equipotential systems” which adapted to the needs of a given situation via a purposeful teleological principle he termed entelechy.
He explained in The History and Theory of Vitalism that this was neither an energy nor a material substance: “Entelechy is an agent sui generis, non-material and non-spatial, but acting ‘into’ space, so to speak; an agent, however, that belongs to nature in the purely logical sense in which we use this word”. (1)
Entelechy allowed a possible happening to become real, he said, without itself providing the energy required for this to happen. “Entelechy only allows that to become real which it has itself held in a state of mere possibility”. (2)
His friend and scientific colleague Jakob Johann von Uexküll commented in 1908: “Driesch succeeded in proving that the germ cell does not possess a trace of machine-like structure, but consists throughout of equivalent parts. With that fell the dogma that the organism is only a machine.
“Even if life occurs in the fully organized creature in a machine-like way, the organization of a structureless germ into a complicated structure is a power sui generis, which is found only in living things and stands without analogy”. (3)
However, it was in opposition to Uexküll’s often-similar theories that Driesch established his own distinct world view.
Uexküll had developed a holistic model of animal behaviour that saw the organism and its environment as a single, integrated system, which he termed the Umwelt. This did not fit well with Nazi scientific theories, which focused on inherited traits and regarded all mention of “environment” as suspiciously left-wing and anti-German.
Uexküll shared the radical organic understanding of the way that natural communities had been replaced by artificial states, which prevented the proper functioning of human society. But his thinking did overlap with Nazi ideology in one area, in that he suggested that a healthy state, or a monarchy, acted as the necessary “brain” of a social organism.
Driesch spoke out against his old friend’s theory after Uexküll published his Staatsbiologie (Biology of the State) in 1920, and insisted that a state was not in any way an organism. It totally lacked the autonomous and creative sense of purpose, the entelechy, which animated living entities.
Instead, the only collective human organism that Driesch was prepared to recognize was a concept of humankind that recognized no national or völkisch boundaries. He wrote in 1922: “The fact that mankind can create states qualifies it to be in a certain sense a single ‘organism’; however the empirical individual states are, in their logical essence, much more like rocks than like some special construction in the context of the organic world”. (4)
Driesch maintained that the concept of wholeness, on which his philosophy was based, arose from pure logic: “For the object is not the mere sum of its attributes: it is their unity – it is all the attributes together”. (5)
But he was criticised by Max Wertheimer, and others in the circles around Gestalt Theory, for what they regarded as the unscientific basis of his vitalistic biology. They objected to his idea of a non-spatial life force, entelechy, guiding the development of an organism. Wertheimer commented that Driesch had “gone over to the camp of the spiritualists”. (6)
At the Prague International Congress of Philosophy in 1934, he was attacked by Viennese logical positivists Rudolf Carnap, Hans Reichenbach and Moritz Schlick, who not only took issue with the concept of wholeness itself but also wrongly equated Driesch’s holistic organic vision with the fascism he so deeply opposed.
It is true that Nazi ideologists initially showed an interest in Driesch’s work. Anne Harrington writes: “During the early, most influential years of Nazi holism, Driesch was a consistently useful resource for a range of holistic scientists with Nazi nationalist leanings. Even those who rejected his vitalism could still hail him as a midwife to the new era of ‘ German wholeness’”. (7)
But this interest flew in the face of Driesch’s own emphatic opposition to the Nazi regime and his determination to forge a philosophy of vitalistic wholeness based on internationalism and humanism.
Driesch travelled extensively in Asia after the First World War, with the deliberate aim of widening his cultural horizons. Harrington notes: “He believed that studying foreign cultures could be an important avenue for discerning transcendent principles that united and guided all individual human communities, regardless of their surface differences”. (8)
In 1927 Driesch declared himself opposed to all “cults of statehood” (9) and in the years leading up to the Hitler regime he repeatedly spoke out against the rise of nationalism.
He used a series of newspaper articles to argue that entelechy recognized no national borders, that the only biological whole that we belonged to was the human species and that militarism and war were “the most terrible of all sins” against the vitalistic principles of life, holistic co-operation and higher development.
In the light of this, it is not surprising that Driesch was among the first non-Jewish German professors to be forcibly retired, at the age of 66, when the Nazis came to power in 1933.
After this, he received no more invitations to speak or hold seminars within Germany. He continued to hold occasional lectures abroad until the spring of 1935, but then all public speaking and travel privileges were taken away from him for the rest of his life.
In 1985, historian of psychology Eckhart Scheerer wrote that Driesch had identified “the biological necessity of reason” and added that his entelechy hypothesis had “made it possible for him to fill his theoretical biological-holistic world view with humanistic spirit”. (10)
Video link: The Definition of Vitalism (1 min 25 secs).
1. Hans Driesch, The History and Theory of Vitalism, trad. by C.K. Ogden (London: Macmillan, 1914), p. 204.
2. Driesch, The History and Theory of Vitalism, p. 205.
3. Anne Harrington, Reenchanted Science: Holism in German Culture from Wilhelm II to Hitler (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), p. 51.
4. Hans Driesch, Philosophie des Organischen (Leipzig: Engelmann, 1922), p. 573, cit. Harrington, p. 61.
5. Driesch, The History and Theory of Vitalism, p. 189.
6. Harrington, p. 124.
7. Harrington, pp. 189-90.
8. Harrington, p. 190.
9. Hans Driesch, ‘Zur neueren Vitalismuskritik’, Biologisches Zentralblatt, 47, 1927, cit. Harrington, p. 190.
10. Eckhart Scheere, ‘Organische Weltanschauung und Ganzheitsspsychologie’, Psychologie im Nazionalsozialismus, ed. by Carl F. Graumann (New York: Springer Verlag, 1985), p. 40, cit. Harrington, p. 190.
“The whole thrust of this agenda is really to move human reproduction to the tech sector”, warns Jennifer Bilek in this informative video discussion on the transgender industry, entitled Trans Tyranny: The Battle for Human Nature.
* * *
“Debt is a critical form of financing for the sustainable development goals”, claims the World Bank. In this video, Iain Davis expertly dissects the profiteering financial agenda behind the fake-green pseudo-caring UNSDG bandwagon.
* * *
“You expressed a forbidden opinion and so you can’t eat today. That’s the system that these guys dream about”. John Titus explains why digital money is slavery in a video interview on the Jerm Warfare site.
* * *
An English-subtitled version of La Vie de Tempête, Marc Khanne’s new documentary film about the Gilets Jaunes movement in France, reviewed on the Winter Oak site in May, is now available online. Full Yellow Jacket, which can be watched for free here, is a very moving 58-minute account of this important popular uprising against the plutocracy.
* * *
We are all potential ‘terrorists’ according to British anti-terrorism legislation, warns journalist Vanessa Beeley. She writes: “Britain is a country that illegally incarcerates and tortures journalist Julian Assange and now it is a country that indiscriminately targets its own citizens if they disagree with the state. This is the very Orwellian definition of a totalitarian state”.
* * *
“The thing is, I don’t respond well to bullies. I feel a particular antipathy toward them. I’m not very fond of liars either. And totalitarians … there’s another group of people I don’t like”. Dissident writer C.J. Hopkins restates his admirable determination to stick to his pro-freedom principles, despite ongoing persecution for Thought Crime by the German state.
* * *
“The more control we have over our food supply and the more of it we can grow for ourselves means we become less dependent on a dehumanised, technocratic system for our needs. This would be the start of a genuine revolution…” Wise words, as ever, from our friends at The Stirrer.
* * *
“What interests them is not whether a certain idea is true or false, or in what measure it is so; their only concern is to find out who first propounded the idea, in what terms he formulated it, and at what date and under what accessory circumstances he did so; and this history of philosophy which busies itself exclusively with the scrutiny of texts and biographical details, claims to take the place of philosophy itself, thus bringing about its final divorce from any small intellectually valuable residue that it might have retained in modern times… by clinging to the letter only, it is unable to enter into the spirit” – René Guénon
(For many more like this, see the Winter Oak quotes for the day blog)
If you like this bulletin please tell others about it. Subscribe by clicking the “follow” button.
—–
Back Issues
Follow Winter Oak on Twitter at @WinterOakPress
winter oak 
When you fight with Adam Schiff and the other Rothschilds let me know, I’ve been doing it for years. And they have the audacity to question you? You are the one making sense, they seem to be going woke. I’m sure you know this quote ‘Stand for something, even if you have to stand alone.’ I’ve stood alone many times.
Perhaps this will clear things up a bit. LGBT were okay when they were satisfied with equal rights. NO the gubmint gave them SPECIAL RIGHTS and shoved them down our throats, creating yet a further division. Did I want to fight the trans contingent on their Day of Vengeance? Not really, I’d have been just as happy reading. However they linked up with Boogaloo Bois who just want to fight and made the mistake of coming near me. SEMPER FI Rob
LikeLiked by 1 person