Part 1: Newton, Rosicrucianism and the Imperial Control of Science
Part 2: Tesla’s Eugenics (and other Black Magick)
Part 3: Tesla and his Nazi Friend… The Strangest Friendship
Part 4: Tesla’s Martians and H.G. Wells
Part 5: Tesla: From Extreme Empiricist to Father of A.I. Gods
Part 6: Why Tesla Flattened Space and Attacked Einstein
Part 7: Tesla Evolves a New Species!
Part 8: Bulwer’s Dream and the Coming Race
As outlined in the new film H.G. Wells’ War of the Worlds and the Dawn of a New Age, Thomas Huxley’s nest of Royal Society influencers tended to move in between spiritualist/occult activities attempting to channel spirits, perform alchemy and astral projection across the ‘luminiferous ether’ while simultaneously conducting ‘respectable scientific work’ by day.
Leading members affiliated with Huxley’s elite scientific network in London’s Royal Society often overlapped with Sir Edward Bulwer-Lytton’s occult revival, and Huxley was himself a member of London’s elite Atheneum Club alongside Bulwer-Lytton.
Thomas Huxley was also a leading innovator of a new approach to empire dubbed ‘social imperialism’ by another influential occultist named John Ruskin, who was a founding member of the South London Working Men’s College. This network of imperial socialists centered in the Working Mens’ College formed the nexus of a new movement created to direct the justifiable rage of the mobs of poor and oppressed towards ends that would:
1) Tend to result in toppling nations whether animated by just or unjust leadership under a concept of eternal class struggle and
2) Would undermine the spread of the American system of national economics both in the USA itself and globally during the second half of the 19th century and beyond.
Unlike the British imperial school of “capitalism” which relied on independently operating private central banks, total free trade, speculation, and looting, the American system of national economics which periodically came to prominence in the USA was based on protectionism, national banks under the law of the sovereign nation state instead of private financiers, public works and the continuous increase of the productive powers of labor through industrial progress and new scientific discoveries.
This later component of the American system was itself premised on the concept that not the markets, utility or desires “caused” economic value, but rather that economic value was caused by the increased power of citizens to make discoveries, and apply those discoveries into making life better for themselves and the world. To the degree that this was done, the Malthusian population limits could forever be broken, which the British Darwinists demanded never be permitted to occur, for fear that the system of Empire itself would come undone.
Hence, just as Isaac Newton was created largely to mimic the discoveries of real scientists like Johannes Kepler or Gottfried Leibniz earlier (outlined in part 1 of this series), so too was the newly emerging science of political economy co-opted and hollowed of its essence by a grouping around John Ruskin, Lord Palmerston, David Urqhardt and Giuseppe Mazzini which came to be known as ‘communism’.
[Note: The details of this story were most clearly developed in Richard Poe’s essay How the British Invented Communism and Blamed it on the Jews, and Andrew Laverdiere’s The British Empire Returns To A 168 Year Crime-a Scene. ]
This new ideology, shaped over years within the corridors of the British Museum, would adopt certain elements of the American System as outlined by such figures as Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List, and Henry C. Carey, eliminate the essence of the system and then infuse a myriad of Trojan horse assumptions into the British-made doppelganger. Among those trojan horses were included 1) the belief in forever class struggles, 2) the obsession with eliminating entrepreneurship (aka: the actual cause of the middle class and the assumed cause of inequality), 3) religion (dubbed ‘the opiate of the masses’ and cause of alienation), and 4) the rejection the possibility of any harmony of interests between industrialist, farmer, worker and entrepreneur.
This latter concept of ‘a Harmony of Interests’ was in fact the title of Lincoln advisor Henry C. Carey’s 1852 book which took direct aim at the new thesis promoted by the social imperialists of London.
A Manchester industrialist named Friedrich Engels soon became a regular attendee of Ruskin’s salons which steered the growth of this new utopian doctrine internationally. By 1844, Engels began working with a young revolutionary named Karl Marx and in 1847 (just in time for Young Europe proletariate upheavals across Europe), the duo co-authored the Communist Manifesto creating a cohesive, internally consistent model outlining the scientific management of society.
This new model stood in convenient contrast with the British system of political economy outlined by Adam Smith in 1776 which promoted a set of fallacies wrapped in “scientific” language, namely:
1) that wealth was created by animal desires expressed by free markets
2) that the decisions of all people are bounded only by rational self-interest animated on a pleasure/pain principle of buying low and selling dear, and
3) That sovereign nation states must NEVER play a role in economics by engaging in regulation, protectionism, national banking etc…
The obvious controlled opposition between Smith’s ‘science’ of free trade and the new system of ‘centralized’ scientific management would result in a convenient dualism which the empire would use many times to induce its victims to get enmeshed into a spiders’ web.
Marx expressed his understanding of this formula within his defense of free trade in his ‘The Question of Free Trade’:
“But, generally speaking, the Protective system in these days is conservative, while the Free Trade system works destructively. It breaks up old nationalities and carries the antagonism of proletariat and bourgeoisie to the uttermost point. In a word, the Free Trade system hastens the Social Revolution. In this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, I am in favor of Free Trade”.
John Ruskin and Thomas Huxley’s Peculiar Socialism
Despite promoting a thing called “socialism” in their many lectures and writings, John Ruskin and Thomas Huxley were unabashed misanthropes who despised technological progress as much as they despised the overpopulated poor.
In the mid-19th century, it was well understood that the only viable form of socialism (ie: a society founded upon social values governing the behavior of the economy) was premised on the concept that ‘all men are created equal’, endowed by their Creator with the inalienable rights of each sovereign citizen and the General Welfare mandate as outlined in America’s founding documents.
In contrast to these social principles, John Ruskin had the following to say: “The Americans, as a nation set their trust in liberty and equality, of which I detest the one, and deny the possibility of the other.”
Ruskin, whose teachings went on to directly inspire Cecil Rhodes, Lord Milner, Arnold Toynbee and Thomas Huxley, outlined his peculiar form of socialism saying:
“In the case of the old families, which… however decadent, still truly are, the noblest monumental architecture of the kingdom, living temples of sacred tradition and hero’s religion, so much land ought to be granted to them in perpetuity as may enable them to live thereon with all circumstances of state and outward nobleness. their income must be fixed and paid them by the state, as the king’s is… Their land should be kept in conditions of natural grace [under’] such agriculture as develops the happiest peasant life… agriculture which… must reject the aid of all mechanism except that of instruments guided solely by the human hand, or by the animal”.
Along with Ruskin (and British Prime Minister William Gladstone), Thomas Huxley acted as first principal of the South London Working Men’s College which formed the basis of the International Working Mens’ Association (aka: First International) launched in London in 1864.
In Zachary Bullock’s essay From Labor to Value: Marx, Ruskin, and the Critique of Capitalism in the 19th Century, the author noted that nearly every single concept developed by Marx/Engels were simultaneously developed by John Ruskin.
Historian Paul Glumaz writes of Huxley’s promotion of socialism in ‘The Hideous Revolution’:
“Huxley became the most popular lecturer in what was known as the “workingman’s lectures.” His lectures on science deeply impacted the Socialists, the Communists, the Labor Movement, as well as the Anarchists. The cadre of these movements were all indoctrinated into the “materialist ape origins” of the human species. This included Karl Marx and especially Frederick Engels who totally embraced Huxley and his circle.
At the core of [these] movements… lies the spoor of Thomas Huxley. Their vision of a workingman’s utopia was strongly laced with the arsenic of Huxley’s pessimism about humanity. A utopia which rejects the creative potential of the human species is a hellish place.”
[Note to reader: it must be held in mind that any successes that have resulted in nominally communist movements across Eurasia have more to do with the functional elements lifted from the older anti-imperial and anti-Malthusian National system of political economy expressed by the Colbertist-Cameralist American System, as well as the deeper cultural dynamics of particular civilizations and not on the materialist proclivities or utilitarian Darwinist assumptions of human nature embedded within the Marx/Ruskin/Engels communist system per se. The multitude of variations of communism that emerged after 1848 (represented by the Bakhunin, Trotskyite, Kropotkin, and anti-Marxist Fabians demonstrates a much more rich story that must be held in mind when analyzing this period of history. For more on this see ‘Communism, Capitalism and Feudalism: How Nominalism Makes us Fools.]
Darwin’s Evolution: Nature’s Class Struggle
Darwin’s thesis of natural selection, defined by the constant struggle for existence of stronger against weaker species, had provided new fuel for the imperialist’s world view on the one side, and had fed Marx’s thesis of phases of civilization being led by Darwinian laws into periodic pressure cookers that necessarily must explode into proletarian revolutions as messy stepping stones towards some imagined utopian state of perfect equality under a dictatorship of the proletariate.
After reading On the Origin of Species, Marx sent a personally signed copy of Das Capital to Darwin in 1873 and had a german edition dedicated “In deep appreciation for Charles Darwin”.
Now in perfect fairness, Marx and Engels’ appreciated Darwin’s theory principally for the fact that it’s social application would lead inevitably towards ever greater states of oppression of the masses by ‘the more fit’ and hence to a proletariat revolution. In letter to Socialist Ferdinand Lasalle Karl Marx wrote: “Darwins work is most important and suits my purpose in that it provides a basis in natural science for the historical class struggle… Despite all short comings, it is here that, for the first time, “teleology” in natural science is not only dealt a mortal blow but its rational meaning is empirically explained.”
Despite his profound dislike for the British Empire’s high priest of population control Thomas Malthus, Karl Marx appears to have not recognized the core Malthusian worldview embedded in Charles Darwin’s system, which Darwin himself admitted took direct inspiration from Malthus’ 1799 theories on population. In his Autobiography, Darwin writes:
“In October 1838, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on, from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The result would be the formation of a new species. Here then, I had at last got a theory by which to work”.
Huxley and Ruskin’s “Imperial socialism” would be used to capture and re-direct the energies of revolutionary movements around the world towards ends that would weaponize the masses and induce rival powers into chaos and civil war instead of viable change. By the 1880s, the Theosophists, then led by Annie Besant, would form the Indian Congress Party in order to subvert anti-imperial revolutionary movements across the oppressed colony by creating what Alan Octavian Hume (Theosophist founder of the National Congress Party in 1885) dubbed ‘pressure valves’.
As noted earlier, despite the fact that the networks of Ruskin and Huxley were putting every effort into taking control of world scientific, economic and aesthetical ideas, those very same networks were simultaneously overseeing the rise of the the occult spiritualist revival across the USA and the British Empire.
Huxley’s X Club
On the scientific battle front, Thomas Huxley founded an elite think tank dubbed ‘The X Club’ in 1865 which was driven by the mandate of gaining control over the narrative of “what is science and how does it work”.
Huxley’s group was composed of leading imperial scientists devoted to the cause of world empire and featured such notable names as Sir John Tyndal, Herbert Spencer, William Carpenter, Joseph Dalton Hooker, Francis Galton, George Busk, William Spottiswood, Sir John Lubbock and William Thompson.
Describing the X Club, historian Jules Evans wrote:
“Like a Roman phalanx, the X-Club defended the cause of Darwinism and scientific naturalism (i.e the belief that God and other supernatural entities did not exist or at least did not intervene in the natural world). The members also used their influence to support each other’s work, and win the top jobs for themselves and their allies. It was a new guild, a new priesthood.”
Featuring a similar mandate as taken up earlier by the Royal Society team managing the figure of Sir Isaac Newton (see part 1 of this series), so this 19th century Royal Society team would run another Newton project in the form of Sir Charles Darwin. Like Newton earlier, Darwin never engaged in debates or even lectured publicly to defend his own theories, but always had Huxley or other members of Huxley’s circle carry out public debates in his stead.
Under Darwinism, free will and the transcendent notion of soul and God were deemed irrelevant artifacts of a bygone era, as newly-hypothesized mechanisms of “survival of the fittest” and “random mutations” were made the the new secular Gods of science.
Caption: godfather of Transhumanism Sir Julian Huxley standing in front of a painting of his grandfather Thomas Huxley
Huxley’s Darwinists asserted that since wild predators kill their prey, fight rivals for territory and appear to be animated by sex, so too are human apes shaped by those same fundamental laws. Worse than apes actually, since humans are apes animated by IDEAS of morality, honor, beauty, goodness, freedom… which are simply ephemeral unscientific illusions which deprive the alphas of the species from the natural ability to exert their influence over the majority of slaves, as they deserve to do as “nature’s most hereditarily fit”.
Thomas Huxley described his misanthropic vision of biology which he sought to steer as “Darwin’s Bulldog”:
“I know of no study which is utterly saddening as that of the evolution of humanity. Man emerges with the marks of his lowly origin strong upon him. He is a brute, only more intelligent than the other brutes, a blind prey to impulses, a victim to endless illusions, which makes his mental existence a burden, and fills his life with barren toil and battle.”
The War on Free Will continues
The crux of Huxley’s efforts to support Darwinism and Imperial Socialism had less to do with the love of scientific truth, or a concern for justice than it did with maintaining a system of imperial controls over the majority of depopulated slaves living under a feudal oligarchy.
For this entire formula to work, it was understood by Huxley, as it was by the high priests of mystery cults in ancient times, that the very notion that humans have a soul or free will must be eliminated. Any reasonable defense of the existence of immortal souls, of course implied the necessary existence of a reasonable Creator, and made defending notions of hereditary control systems very difficult to maintain.
Of course, the Darwinian mechanisms promoted by Huxley assisted in obscuring the notion of a soul, god or free will since a ‘scientific’ argument could now be advanced proposing that the poor were poor and the rich were rich not due to any matters of foul play, intentions or designs… but rather due to genetic forces alone.
Additionally, the peculiar brand of socialism promoted by Huxley was also one that diminished the existence of individual human free will in favor of a homogenous war of two class systems defined by ‘the oppressed’ and ‘the oppressors’… that could do nothing but exploit, or be exploited until a deterministic boiling point resulted in an explosion.
It didn’t take many more steps to extend Darwin’s system to humanity as a whole with two members of Huxley’s elite X Club (Herbert Spencer and Sir Francis Galton) generating a false debate centered around the proper application of Darwinism onto the management of humanity.
On one side of this false debate, Herbert Spencer’s Social Darwinism called for an unregulated free market frenzy resulting in the strong naturally destroying the weak and unfit. On the other side, Francis Galton’s Eugenics called for an imperial socialist (see fascist) system of centralized scientific management of humanity and the systematic annihilation of the unfit.
As outlined in previous chapters in this series, the open minded Nikola Tesla embraced both sides of this debate.
Tesla was also extremely influenced by Thomas Huxley himself, and found himself at the center of another lesser-known project which Huxley had unleashed in 1874 which Tesla and many representatives of the Empire hoped would put the final nail into the coffin of free will… the automata project.
Huxley’s Living Automata Project
Another component of the war on free will was launched with Thomas Huxley’s 1874 speech to The British Association for the Advancement of Science titled On the Hypothesis that Animals Are Automata, and Its History where he said:
“It is quite true that, to the best of my judgment, the argumentation which applies to brutes holds equally good of men; and, therefore, that all states of consciousness in us, as in them, are immediately caused by molecular changes of the brain-substance. It seems to me that in men, as in brutes, there is no proof that any state of consciousness is the cause of change in the motion of the matter of the organism.”[1]
Huxley continued in the same famous lecture:
“No evidence can be found for supposing that any state of consciousness is the cause of change in the motion of matter of the organism. . . . The mind stands relegated to the body as the bell of the clock to the works, and consciousness answers to the sound which the bell gives out when it is struck.”
Huxley’s belief that humans were simply machines (which he dubbed “conscious automata”) was not separate from his occult interests in chasing ghosts with fellow séance-goer Bulwer-Lytton and John Tyndall [2].
In fact, although these elite “Darwinians” obsessively promoted Darwin’s theory to the masses, they never appeared to want to apply it to themselves. For the adepts of the British Empire’s aristocracy were alone meant to claim their true god-status as Thelemic creatures of pure will controlling the levers of evolution through the new “sciences” of eugenics and social Darwinism.
But Charles Darwin wasn’t alone as the only Royal Society project being advanced during this period.
The Influence of The X Club on Tesla
In the brilliant essay I, Robot: Nikola Tesla’s Telautomaton[3], historian Kendall Milar-Thompson insightfully recognized the major role which Huxley’s X Club played on all of Nikola Tesla’s thinking, writing: “The group whose work Tesla seemed to emulate and study most closely was the scientific naturalists including [Thomas] Huxley, John Tyndall, William Kingdon Clifford and Herbert Spencer.”
Throughout his adult career, Tesla used man British X Club scientists as authorities, but placed special emphasis on Herbert Spencer (founder of ‘Social Darwinism’) writing in How Cosmic Forces Shape our Destiny:
“Herbert Spencer has interpreted life as a continuous adjustment to the environment, a definition of this inconceivably complex manifestation quite in accord with advanced scientific thought.”[4]
As Milar-Thompson astutely noted, all of Tesla’s writings about the non-existence of free will supposedly “proven” by his Telautomaton (see part 7 of this series) rely on the identical lines of reasoning (and even errors of interpretation of Rene Descartes) as those expressed by T.H. Huxley in 1874 including Huxley’s division of Descartes’ theory of human nature into the same five categories created by Huxley and reproduced by Tesla later.
Milar Thompson writes:
“Tesla’s interpretation of Cartesian automatism was problematic. Although he showed familiarity with much of the argument from Treatise on Man, he misunderstood the fundamental premise. He believed that Descartes argued that humans were entirely automata, an interpretation that was likely based on a misreading of Huxley’s work. Tesla’s reading, and sometimes intentional misreading of the work of the scientific naturalists, served to position the telautomaton as a significant contribution to science and the discussions on human automatism. By positioning the telautomaton and his later wireless inventions in this way, Tesla attempted to legitimize his inventions as scientific discoveries.”
Tesla as Gateway to a scientifically-managed world order
Based on the evidence we’ve seen in the previous segments of this series, and based on Tesla’s own explicit reasons why he ‘evolved’ his Telautomaton in 1898, it appears as though Tesla may have been setting the ‘technological’ foundations for Huxley’s ambitious form of imperial socialism.
The fact that Tesla was additionally an unapologetic social Darwinist and eugenicist, who believed in the ‘scientific management of humanity’, it becomes increasingly probable that Nikola Tesla played a major role in the plan set into motion by Darwin and Marx’s handlers in London during the mid 19th century.
BUT just because Royal Society empiricists, X Club scientific imperialists, and satanic occultists (see part 2 and part 8) influenced the thinking of Nikola Tesla, does not make the inventions of the Serbian wizard illegitimate… but it does raise questions about what exactly Tesla was a part of? Did he in fact originate those technical innovations associated with him? And who were the masters controlling the automaton which he believed himself to be?
To continue to answer this question, it will be useful to review the figure of the man whom Tesla himself asserted to be of the greatest influence on his life, his mentor and lifelong friend: Sir William Crookes (1832-1917), President of the Royal Society, President of the British Society for Psychical Research, and member of the roscrucian Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn.
Footnotes
[1] Huxley continues his speech saying: “If these positions are well based, it follows that our mental conditions are simply the symbols in consciousness of the changes which takes place automatically in the organism; and that, to take an extreme illustration, the feeling we call volition is not the cause of a voluntary act, but the symbol of that state of the brain which is the immediate cause of that act. We are conscious automata, endowed with free will in the only intelligible sense of that much-abused term–inasmuch as in many respects we are able to do as we like–but none the less parts of the great series of causes and effects which, in unbroken continuity, composes that which is, and has been, and shall be–the sum of existence.”
[2] Although T.H Huxley later famously said that he had no interest in paranormal investigations, his enthusiastic participation in seances with Bulwer-Lytton and Tyndall is on the public record.
[3] I, Robot: Nikola Tesla’s Telautomaton, Kendal Milar Thompson, A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy, University of California, Los Angeles, 2015
[4] New York American, February 7th, 1915
Also watch for free our RTF Docu-Series “Escaping Calypso’s Island: A Journey Out of Our Green Delusion” and our CP Docu-Series “The Hidden Hand Behind UFOs”.