A Trap is laid: Elon Musk's New Political Party and MAGA Breakup Over Neo-Con Revivalism
Is this Technocracy Inc 2.0 in the Making?
It has become quite apparent that the phenomenon known as “MAGA” has found itself teetering dangerously on the verge of fragmentation.
On the one hand, conservatives who rallied around the figure of Trump are disturbed by the rise Silicon Valley transhumanists and AI-cultists seeking to take control of the levers of power of all branches of government and military decision-making.
On the other hand, the tendency to support the Greater Israel ambitions which is now threatening a full scale war among nuclear powers has alienated a very large segment of the MAGA base which is largely repulsed by the prospect of imperial warfare.
In this essay, I would like to share some concerns about a trap which may have been laid to carve out MAGA from the republican party, retool it, and absorb it into a new as-yet under-formed entity announced recently by Elon Musk. This formula follows a trend set forth by Musk’s proto-transhumanist grandfather, whom, as we will soon come to see, was a master at organizing technocratic third parties during times of crises and who was directly affiliated with occultists at the highest echelons of global power.
After breaking with Trump last month (which admittedly smells of heavy kabuki theater), Elon announced plans to create a third party (dubbed tentatively ‘The America Party,’) which better represents Americans, and this call was endorsed by non other than Bobby Kennedy Jr.’s former running mate (and WEF-connected billionaire), Nicole Shanahan.
Today, I’m going to take this opportunity to share a few of my reasons for not trusting Elon at all, and why I sense a much larger trap has been set, which is directly connected to Elon’s grandfather’s many schemes to lead technocratic third parties during times of crises (and which were connected to occult activities representing the highest echelons of imperial planning as we will see in the course of the following essay).
During this long article (which makes up a small part of my new book ‘Rosicrucian Golem,’) I hope to persuade you, dear reader, that some extremely toxic ideas that nearly sucked the world into a techno-feudal New World Order ninety years ago, are making a revival around the thing called ‘Elon’.
Elon: Savior or Devil?
There are many things to say about Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Motors, as some people believe him to be a godlike savior of mankind with Billboards across America featuring the image, ‘In Musk we Trust’.
Others have become convinced that Elon Musk is the anti-Christ, brandishing the imagery of the androgynous demon Baphomet in public, extolling the virtues of merging with machines to stay relevant, producing mRNA vaccines with 3D printing [1], and promoting a libertarian variation of 15 minute cities under a new name (‘Bitcoin Freedom Cities’ run by private corporations such as Palantir).
Certainly his mother’s proclivities to Satanic symbology, and his former wife’s open devotion to transhumanist witchcraft didn’t help to convince his detractors that he isn’t the anti-Christ.
Most people, however, simply think of Elon Musk as a self-made Libertarian genius who genuinely invented all 18 patents attributed to his name, and exerted his personal skills and entrepreneurship to build multi-billion dollar businesses such as Tesla, Paypal, SolarCity, Starlink and SpaceX, becoming the second most richest person on Earth by the age of 50.
This popular image tends to explain away Musk’s inability to carry out public debates or even speak cogently about his motives, or methods as simply due to his Aspergers syndrome and nothing more.
His multi-billion dollar contracts with the US military, his role in pushing regime change operations against nationalist leaders of Latin America [2], and his role in advancing Universal Basic Income to manage useless eaters [3], while pushing an everything app that will centralize all banking, biometric data/Digital IDs, social media and more [4] are either ignored by his fans, or brushed off as non-relevant facts unworthy of consideration.
However, I don’t believe these disturbing facts should be brushed off, or explained away superficially.
I also don’t believe that Elon is either the anti-Christ, or a savior.
Nor do I believe that he is a self-made genius, although I do recognize that extremely influential forces have worked very hard to craft this image of Elon for his followers to be awed by.
In this sense, I would tend to identify Elon, as I would most of the Silicon Valley ‘self-made billionaires’ enmeshed in the Pentagon’s global surveillance and military dragnet as a type of a spiritual robot, mimicking human behaviour, convinced he and all human nature is simply a complex algorithm bouncing around in a virtual reality simulation.
Additionally, I believe that Elon is a carefully curated projection not dissimilar to impressive imagery of the Wizard of Oz, with an array of perception managers lurking behind a curtain. While I don’t deny that Elon is equipped with a high proficiency for memorizing certain arrays of facts and lines of logical syllogisms that can be deployed in controlled environments, I don’t believe that there is much going on behind the mask.
It is thus no surprise that Elon Musk appears to be filling the same shoes as those worn by Nikola Tesla nearly a century ago.
Like nearly every other Silicon Valley Transhumanist billionaire operating on either Left or Right side of the political spectrum, we will learn alot about Elon by examining his peculiar family roots and the Technocratic Agenda which has mis-shaped world history and which has shaped his entire life from a very early age.
To begin this exercise, let’s start with Elon’s mother Maye Musk (nee “Haldeman”).
Maye Haldeman had been born into a wealthy Canadian family in Regina, Saskatchewan in 1947. Maye’s father Joshua Haldeman was an aviation enthusiast, chiropractor, and also a devout social reformer who found himself leading the Saskatchewan branch of the newly created Canadian Fabian Society in 1933 as a response to the Great Depression.
The Fabian Society of Canada
When the Fabian Society of Canada (formally named ‘The League of Social Reconstruction’) established a political party called ‘The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation’ in 1933, it was Joshua Haldeman who was assigned to establish the Saskatchewan branch in the Assiniboia Federal Constituency where he would have interfaced with some or all of the five Oxford Rhodes Scholars who founded the organization. [5]
The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation published its Regina Manifesto in Haldeman’s hometown of Regina in 1933 while Joshua ran the Saskatchewan CCF.
The Regina Manifesto called for a technocratic order managed by experts to emerge out of the fires of the Great Depression:
“WE AIM TO REPLACE the present capitalist system, with its inherent injustice and inhumanity, by a social order from which the domination and exploitation of one class by another will be eliminated, in which economic planning will supersede unregulated private enterprise and competition… The [Co-operative Commonwealth calls for the] establishment of a planned, socialized economic order, in order to make possible the most efficient development of the national resources and the most equitable distribution of the national income.
"The task of the Commission will be to plan for the production, distribution and exchange of all goods and services necessary to the efficient functioning of the economy; to co-ordinate the activities of the socialized industries; to provide for a satisfactory balance between the producing and consuming power; and to carry on continuous research into all branches of the national economy in order to acquire the detailed information necessary to efficient planning… It is now certain that in every industrial country some form of planning will replace the disintegrating capitalist system.”
Disappointed that the population of Canada was not embracing ‘scientifically managed governance’ under the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, Haldeman shifted gears in 1936, and joined another organization which he felt had better chances at overthrowing capitalism. The name of this new organization was ‘Technocracy Incorporated’.
An Introduction to Technocracy Inc
Formed in New York in 1932 under the leadership of a figure named Howard Scott (a snake oil salesman who lied about being an engineer for his entire adult life), Technocracy Inc promised to reorganize both human society and human nature itself around a top down ‘Technate of America’ of experts untainted by the filth of democratic institutions, or capitalist ideas of ‘profit motives’.
Under this world government, sub-technates would be organized around a simple formula: Prices, markets, and other practices would be illegalized, as a new world order would be established on “energy credits” assigned equally to all individuals in the world.
On the surface, Technocracy Inc. advocated pacifism and the non-participation in foreign wars. However, this appeal to peace was more than a little disgenuine, since the borders of this promised Technate stretched far beyond the limits of the 50 American states, encapsulating all of Mexico, Canada, Greenland, Central America, and a major portion of South America… and no one assumed that those nations would give up their sovereignty to join the Technate peacefully.
Members of the Technate were given numbers to use in official meetings instead of their birth names and often infused the letter ‘x’ within their sequencing.
For example, Joshua Haldeman’s Technocracy name was known by fellow Technocrats as “10450-1”, and one speaker at a Technocracy rally in California introduced themselves as “1x1809x561”.
One wonders if Elon Musk’s choice to name the first of three children fathered with Claire Boucher (“X Æ A-Xii” in 2018 followed by Exa Dark Sideræl and Techno Mechanicus) were an homage to his grandfather’s Technocracy movement, which may not have died after World War II as some have been led to believe.
Howard Scott and other technocrats believed that automation, computers and robots would soon render most jobs worthless meaning the majority of human kind would not be expected to either work, or (god forbid), participate in government, as those privileges would be reserved for initiated technicians alone.
CBC News described Technocracy Inc during this period: “While other political parties and protest groups were touting plans for putting people back to work, Technocracy’s response was: don’t even bother. The world has changed and the jobs destroyed by machines were not coming back”.
Howard Scott described his view of work: “One of the lowest social diseases is the belief in the morality of work”.
And what was to be the solution to this problem of a new era of mostly useless eaters created by unbounded automation and thinking machines?
Simple.
Launch a ‘universal basic income’… or in Technocracy’s words ‘energy credits’ assigned to all people regardless of their employment or lack thereof.
Under the Energy Survey of North America led by Scott’s organization, an effort was made to measure literally all energy associated with the production of consumable and capital goods on the continent. It was believed that after this survey was made, an accounting procedure would become possible such that the total energy used to sustain production could be divided by the number of citizens over the age of 25.
Under Technocracy Inc, no one would be allowed to accumulate more energy certificates than others, no one would be permitted to invest into the society, start a personal business for profit, or save their credits, as that would lead to inequality… but despite this apparent suffocating determinism, it was assumed that the new humanity would be very content.
And why not?
Technocracy Inc promised their followers that if they were successful, then each person would need only work 16 hours per week and would retire at 45. The obsession with ownership, property rights, entrepreneurialism were relics of a past age which was no longer valid in the technological age of engineers.
Although under-appreciated today, Howard Scott had created Technocracy Inc out of a previous organization which he had joined in 1919 dubbed ‘The Technical Alliance’.
The Technical Alliance: Fabians in America
The Technical Alliance was itself created by a social engineer named Thorstein Veblen as part of his founding of the New School for Social Research in Greenwich Village, New York.
Veblen had created a New School study group which Scott joined after WWI and soon received contracts with the International Workers of the World and Railroad Brotherhood in accumulating voluminous data on America’s agriculture, industry, raw materials and workers (their behavior, psychological profiles, and other relevant data). Despite having no advanced computers, Veblen (and Scott’s) organization became obsessed with the challenge of mass data collection and surveillance of all elements of the economy as well as worker behavior in order to acquire sufficient information to ‘scientifically’ control society like Gods lording over mortals in a 1920s game of Dungeons and Dragons.
Thorsten Veblen was also the creator and leader of something called ‘The Soviet of Engineers’, meaning a new world order founded upon a centralized network of engineers who would monopolize the levers of world power forever. Veblen imagined a world organized around Darwinistic principles of survival of the fittest and a radical determinism that posited that engineers were the highest expression of evolution attained during the ‘machine age’. Meaning it was a scientific necessity for engineers to rule society.
Thus, Veblen proposed that his Soviet (aka: Collective) would be managed by a central directorate which would manage a global array of “sub-centers and local councils”. This was the root of Howard Scott’s Technate developed a few years later.
In Veblen’s equation, this organization of elite technicians would first need to carry out a controlled disintegration in society using their controls of the levers of industry and production. Veblen used the Marxist term of a ‘mass strike’ of technicians to grind global industry to a halt. With this forced reset, the technicians could then “take over the economic affairs of the country…[and] take care of the material welfare of the underlying population.” [6]
While Howard Scott would deny it in later years, historian William E. Akin wrote in ‘Technocracy and the American Dream’:
“Scott absorbed many of Veblen’s fundamental themes. Veblen’s scientific positivism and technological determinism was basic to Scott’s subsequent thought. He adopted the technological tenor of Veblen’s thought, seeing society as a mechanical operation.” [7]
The New School of Social Research: Fabian Society USA
The New School set up in 1919 received funding from the Rockefeller Foundation and became a hub for a vast array of misanthropic academics seeking refuge from Nazi Germany in 1933, who became known as ‘The Frankfurt School’. Among those most influential figures infused into the elite American academic system of New School were Erich Fromm and Max Wertheimer, political philosophers Hannah Arendt and Leo Strauss (to name a few).
Historian Jeffrey Steinberg writes of the Frankfurt School:
“In Germany of the 1920s and 1930s, there were Jews who were Nazis, but who, like Strauss and the Frankfurt School gaggle of left-wing Nietzscheans (Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Leo Lowenthal, Herbert Marcuse, et al.), had no chance for party advancement because of Hitler's anti-Semitism; and so they chose to leave Germany, to pursue more "universal" fascist ideas and policies abroad, particularly in the United States and Great Britain.” [8]
The other founders of New School were John Charles Beard, John Dewey, and James Harvey Robinson, which served as an entry point of Oxford ideologues and London School of Economic Fabians into the USA. Beard, Dewey and Robinson were all radical followers of the theories of John Ruskin and William Morris (British imperialists who ironically advocated Guild Socialism under a world control).
In this sense, the Fabian Society of Canada (aka: The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation) to which Joshua Haldeman was associated, was part of the exact same agency as that which managed Howard Scott in New York beginning in 1919.
Technocracy Rebranded under the Rockefeller Foundation
As 1933 began, the young Technocracy Inc faced its first crisis, as leading members left the organization due to its intensely dictatorial proclivities. Meanwhile, pressure was placed on Columbia University’s president Nicholas Murray Butler to expel Scott’s group, which occured on January 18, 1933.
Carl Teichrib writes in Engineering a New World:
“The month the Committee was expelled, President Butler [of Columbia University] announced the creation of a special task force to examine technological progress in the nation. Named to the commission were Edmund Day of the Rockefeller Foundation, Fabian socialist Walter Lippmann, Alvin Johnson from the New School of Social Research (Veblen’s university), Benjamin Anderson from Chase National Bank, and an assortment of professors from Yale, Harvard, and the University of Chicago.”
Teichrib continues:
Butler explained, “The inquiry will be directed in particular to the technique of production and the technique of exchange… for the service of society.” The topic of choice: The price-based economy and the adequacy of the present system in respect to “social welfare.” In other words, Technocracy.”
A New Technocratic Order out of Chaos
When Howard Scott founded Technocacy Incorporated in 1932, the Great Depression had wrecked many peoples’ faith in free market capitalism and human nature itself. Unemployment was pushing 30% across North America, lives were ruined and starvation across America was rampant.
Just as World War I had convinced millions of young citizens that human nature was the cause of traumatic wars, the same logic extended to the rampant greed and speculation that caused the market collapse of 1929.
Perhaps human nature itself was the problem in need of correcting if peace on earth was to be achieved. Technocracy Incorporated published a 1934 manifesto titled ‘Technocracy Study Course,’ principally authored by Marion King Hubbert (a geologist, founder of ‘Peak Oil Theory’ and godfather father of modern ecology) [10].
The manifesto, which actually served as an immutable bible of all Technocrats for the ensuing decades explicitly banned any considerations of moral ideas when trying to organize human society (thus denying the very foundation of the American revolution itself).
The Study Course read,
“When any large number of individual human beings under the same set of environmental circumstances tend to behave in a certain specific manner, it is safe to say that any other similar cross section of human beings under the same circumstances would respond in a like manner. This basic fact shows the futility of all moralistic approaches to the solution of social problems.”
Following the materialistic theory of human nature extolled by the school of radical Darwinians of Thomas Huxley and the Behaviorist School of B.F. Skinner, the Technocracy Inc bible denied any existence to mind or soul itself:
“It might be remarked that the most minute anatomical dissection had never revealed anything that corresponded to a “mind” or a “conscience” or a “will”... real scientific progress is at all times based upon the correlation of objectively observable phenomena. When we subject such concepts as the human “mind” to this sort of test, they rapidly fade out of existence. When we observe a human being we merely perceive an object which makes a certain variety of motions and noises.” [11]
This denial of ‘mind’, ‘conscience’ or ‘will’ reduced human nature to a simple automaton wired only by urges for sensual pleasure and avoidance of pain, and ironically placed Technocracy into the same worldview as that promoted by the eugenics loving technician Nikola Tesla—then also living in the lap of luxury in New York.
While no evidence survives of Tesla having directly contacted the New School founders, the identical views of governance, human nature and utopian vision for technocratic management of society by ‘experts’ cannot be ignored.
Promoters of Technocracy’s vision have extolled the vision that abundance would be caused by the world abandoning traditional values, spirituality, morality, ideas of God, Soul and nationhood to a world Technate. Yet despite their promises of abundance, the fact is that that the technocratic priesthood was organized around the absolute submission to the law of entropy (aka: The Second Law of Thermodynamics).
This supposed ‘universal law’ posited that all systems in nature from galaxies, to ecosystems, to human economies are 1) closed, 2) tending towards heat death and 3) composed of stochastic/random atomic behavior on the small, which was evidenced in man-made heat engines.
While true for all man-made heat engines (which always consume more energy than they produce), the school of entropic thinkers that emerged out of the British Royal Society in the 19th century attempted to extend these mechanical rules to the entire universe. This irresponsible extrapolation heat death to all reality resulted in the assumption that decay and ultimately heat death were the fundamental laws of the universe.
The Technocracy Inc bible stated,
“The human being is an engine taking potential energy in the form of chemical combinations contained in food, and converting this potential energy into heat, work and body tissue. The thermodynamic processes involved, while more complicated in detail, are in exact accordance with the laws of thermodynamics and are in no essential particular different from the corresponding processes in man-made engines.” [12]
Thus, it can be firmly stated that the promotion of words such as ‘abundance’ in the thousands of speeches of Howard Scott, Joshua Haldeman and other Technocrats was little more than empty words covering up a belief in universal stasis and decay as the law of human society.
The choice of the Yin Yang Monad as the official emblem for Technocracy Inc can thus be read as representative of the belief in a static balance of positive and negative forces in a Manichean dualism.
And of course, we cannot forget the words of Technocracy’s Harold Loeb, who promoted a eugenics vision of ‘scientific breeding’ of the new Technocratic order writing in his Life in a Technocracy:
“Technocracy envisages another form of domestication, a form in which man may become more than man… Technocracy is designed to develop the so-called higher faculties in every man and not to make each man resigned to the lot into which he may be born… Through breeding with specific individuals for specific purposes… A technocracy, then, should in time produce a race of men superior in quality to any now known on earth…” [13]
Here we can clearly see the same dystopic vision as that shared by Nikola Tesla musing over his ideal society of the future:
“Eugenics [is] universally established. In past ages, the law governing the survival of the fittest roughly weeded out the less desirable strains. Then man’s new sense of pity began to interfere with the ruthless workings of nature. As a result, we continue to keep it alive and to breed the unfit. The only method compatible with our notions of civilization and the race is to prevent the breeding of the unfit by sterilization and the deliberate guidance of the mating instinct.
Several European countries and a number of states of the American union sterilize the criminal and the insane. This is not sufficient. The trend of opinion among ecumenists is that we must make marriage more difficult. Certainly no one who is not a desirable parent should be permitted to produce progeny. A century from now it will no more occur to a normal person to mate with a person eugenically unfit than to marry a habitual criminal.” [14]
Who would manage this eugenics driven, decaying closed system?
Experts, of course!
Joshua Haldeman Joins Technocracy Inc
Joshua Haldeman joined Technocracy Inc as its first research director in Saskatchewan in 1936, where he adopted the uniform of grey suits and navy blue ties of all male members, and even painted his car ‘Technocracy Gray’… a special paint hue created by General Motors for Technocracy Inc members, which by this time numbered over a million strong (with over 500,000 registered members in California alone). [15]
When one sees the fleets of Technocracy grey cars on the streets of North America in the 1930s, one can’t help but be reminded of the new Technocratic electric cars of the future rolling around in our modern day.
Again, fascism lurked its head, as William Knight (director of operations of Technocracy Inc) and aeoronautical engineer employed by a German subsidiary selected the Technocracy uniform out of admiration for the paramilitary look of German SS soldiers with whom he frequently associated in his German offices.
The all-grey uniforms accompanied with a Yin-Yang monad symbol made some call this pseudo fascist movement ‘The Grey Shirts’.
Although smelling alot like some mixture of radical communism and fascism, the leaders of Technocracy Inc rejected both systems (in public) as being “too populist” in nature.
In the words of Howard Scott, “As far as Technocracy’s ideas are concerned, we’re so far left that we make communism look bourgeois.”
Although Joshua Haldeman embraced his role as first research director of Canada’s Technocracy Inc with gusto, by 1941, his beloved organization was illegelized due to its potential role as a pro-fascist values threat to the nation, and Joshua was arrested.
While Haldeman denied the charges, the fact is that Technocracy Inc did advocate for world government of an elite class, the overthrow of nation states, and had been fully opposed to Canada’s entry into World War II. Canada’s Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King stated his belief that the goal of Technocracy Inc was “to overthrow the government and the constitution of this country by force”.
When the American headquarters of Technocracy Inc began to support the Soviet Union’s war with the Nazis, Haldeman resigned in protest in 1943.
His next maneuver was to join the Social Credit Party founded by a British philosopher named Major C.H. Douglas.
The Social Credit Party
In 1943, Haldeman became Provincial Co-ordinator of the Saskatchewan Social Credit League, and by May 1945, was the Vice-President and Provincial Secretary of the party. Although he ran in the 1948 elections for federal parliament, he failed to win a seat.
Social Credit was a system created by a mysterious British Engineer named Major C.H. Douglas after World War I in order to provide a solution to the problem of economic inefficiencies across many western industries.
In short, Douglas maintained that too many workers were under-employed, and prices for goods were too overvalued due to the low demand (caused by insufficient wages). Douglas decided that credits should be provided to all workers serving as a form of universal basic income should be provided to all citizens to allow them to afford to purchase the products in whatever company they happened to work for.
The theories of Douglas were a bit obscure, and critics complained that it lacked applicability in any viable sovereign nation. Although the broad ideals Douglas promoted were generally admired (like Howard Scott, he promoted infinite abundance), he entirely rejected all concepts of national involvement in the economy… which would have made this ambition possible.
Instead, Douglas promoted a strange variation of libertarianism which fused state welfare to all citizens, and which devolved all power to trade guilds controlling their local systems of production. In England, Douglas’ Social Credit Party had a paramilitary group dubbed ‘The Green Shirts’ and competed with Sir Oswald Mosley’s Black Shirts (aka: The British Union of Fascists).
Due to the many layers of ambiguity, his political movement failed to gain traction in most nations… except Canada.
In 1935, the Social Credit Party became the ruling government of Alberta (where they promptly applied forced sterilization laws under scientific management onto the unfit), followed by British Columbia, which saw the victory of a Social Credit government 1952. Before Hitler began Germany’s eugenics laws, Rockefeller Foundation lobbying across North America had ensured that 30 US States (starting with Indiana in 1907) and two Canadian Provinces (Alberta and BC) had already applied robust eugenics laws to sterilize the unfit.
The Occult New Age
The name ‘Social Credit’ was not actually coined by Major C.H. Douglas, but rather by Douglas’ mentor, Alfred Richard Orage (1873-1934,) who had been a leading Theosophist, Fabian Society associate, and publisher of the influential New Age Magazine from 1906 to 1922.
Orage was also a personal assistant to the mystic philosopher George Ivanovich Gurdjieff and a leading British occultist, who published one of Major C.H. Douglas’ first works in New Age dubbed"A Mechanical View of Economics" in 1919… which is where Orage coined the name ‘Social Credit’. [16]
It is also useful to point out that Orage’s movement that spawned Social Credit, was itself nothing more than a controlled opposition to the centralized Socialism promoted by Orage’s Fabian Society counterparts with whom he apparently broke his allegiance in 1912. It was this year which saw numerous “splitting off” of various occult organizations into rival agencies, pushing what occultists have referred to as ‘right hand’ vs ‘left hand’ paths to dialectically influence social debate.
This was the year that the Anthroposophists of Rudolf Steiner split off from Annie Besant’s Theosophists, and it was the year that Aleister Crowley’s British branch of the Ordo Templi Orientis split off from other European branches. It was also the year that the world was set up for a violent transformation into a New Age (hence the name of Orage’s Theosophy journal).
In Crowley’s view, this New Age of Horus would be ushered in through a period of purgative violence and mass sacrifice, which, like a phoenix would see a New World Order emerge victorious from the ashes of war. After this period of blood letting, a thousand year reich of peace was promised that would establish a new post-Christian era based upon a revival of ancient mystery religions, depopulation, superstition and magic.
This alchemical transformation of humanity demanded that a prolonged wasting war of each against all was launched, beginning with the British-orchestrated Balkan Wars of 1912, the initiation of World War I in 1914, and the enmeshment of the USA into said war in 1917.
As established in part 2 and part 11 of the Occult Tesla series, the figures of Aleister Crowley and Nikola Tesla played a direct role in this operation.
It should come as no surprise that Crowley was also published regularly in Orage’s New Age Journal, and both men advanced the same pseudo anarcho thesis that a global revolution was needed to overthrow corrupt national governments. This was needed, since governments were illegitimate, run as they were entirely by evil Jewish Bankers as advanced in such locations as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion promoted by literally every fascist of the early 20th century, including Orage and Crowley.
[The evidence for the forgery of the Protocols and broader occult/theosophical conspiracy to direct hate towards “Jew bankers” can be found here]
After the elite ubermenschen expressing their Nietzschean ‘Will to Power’ were successful in overthrowing the established order, which would necessarily involve violence and war, a new age out of man arising out of the ashes built around communalism, local control and neo-medieval socialist guilds would occur.
The fascist movements of Europe that began taking power in the 1920s operated under this strange socialist thesis, which is why the early fascist leaders from Germany, Austria, Italy, Sweden and England marketed themselves as ‘national socialists’.
In the case of Orage, the year 1912 saw him mysteriously break away from his former Fabian Society allies, as he suddenly rejected the sort of top down state planning typical of Fabian Society ideologues.
As if in the blink of an eye, Orage now began extolling the virtues of ‘guild socialism’ which involved a total rejection of all state planning.
Instead of planning, Orage now promoted the view that anarchistic bottom up self-organization would emerge magically across the earth if only everyone in society were left free to do whatever they wanted moderated only by a confederation of medieval trade guilds and free markets.
Following the philosophy of such 19th century guild socialists as John Ruskin and William Morris, Orage demanded a restoration of medieval practices of artisanal, low technological forms of production and a ‘back-to-nature’ ethos of Gaia worship that was later revived in the modern environmental movement. Another name for Orage’s philosophy was dubbed ‘Anarcho Syndicalism’.
To respond to Orage’s break, The London Fabian Society created another magazine dubbed ‘The New Statesman’ in 1913 to promote their “Top Down” Technocratic planning model in direct opposition to Orage’s New Age “Bottom Up” guild socialism. The American version of New Statesman was set up in 1914 by Walter Lippmann and dubbed ‘New Republic,’ which advanced Fabian technocratic ideas in the USA.
Demonstrating that this dispute between ‘top down’ vs ‘bottom up’ systems was entirely manufactured, it is worth pointing out that the other leading exponents working with Orage to advance guild socialism were three leading Fabians named George Douglas Howard Cole, Samuel George Hobson and Arthur Joseph Penty.
All three men collaborated closely with Orage and published regularly in Orage’s New Age Magazine. Cole, Hobson and Penty were not only Fabians, but were both followers of John Ruskin and Willian Morris.
Bertrand Russell Spills the Beans
To properly appreciate how this game of ‘bottom up/right hand’ vs ‘top down/left hand’ manipulation unfolded during this period, it is most useful to read the words of fellow Guild Socialist advocate (and Fabian Society member) Lord Bertrand Russell, who promoted Orage’s system when he wrote in “Proposed Roads to Freedom: Socialism, Anarchism and Syndicalism”:
“My own opinion – which I may as well indicate at the outset – is that pure Anarchism, though it should be the ultimate ideal, to which society should continually approximate, is for the present impossible…On the other hand, both Marxian Socialism and Syndicalism, in spite of many drawbacks, seem to me calculated to give rise to a happier and better world than that in which we live. I do not, however, regard either of them as the best practicable system…The best practicable system, to my mind, is that of Guild Socialism, which concedes what is valid both in the claims of the State Socialists and in the Syndicalist fear of the State by adopting a system of federalism among trades for reasons similar to those which have recommended federalism among nations.
The terrorist campaign in which such men as Ravachol were active practically came to an end in 1894. After that time, under the influence of Pelloutier, the better sort of Anarchists found a less harmful outlet by advocating Revolutionary Syndicalism in the Trade Unions and Bourse de Travail.
In England Marx, has never had many followers. Socialism here has been inspired in the main by the Fabians…What remained was State Socialism and a doctrine of ‘permeation.’ Civil servants were to be permeated with the realization that Socialism would enormously increase their power. Trade Unions were to be permeated with the belief that the day for purely industrial action was pasts, and that they must look to Government (inspired secretly by sympathetic civil servants) to bring about, bit by bit, such parts of the Socialist programme as were not likely to rouse much hostility in the rich. The Independent Labour Party…was largely inspired at first by the ideas of the Fabians…It aimed always at cooperation with the industrial organizations of wage-earners, and chiefly through its efforts, the Labour Party was formed in 1900 out of a combination of the Trade Unions and the political Socialists. To this party, since 1909, all the important Unions have belonged, but in spite of the fact that its strength is derived from Trade Unions, it has stood always for political rather than industrial action.
Anarchism, which avoids the dangers of State Socialism, has dangers and difficulties of its own…Nevertheless, it remains an ideal to which we should wish to approach as nearly as possible, and which, in some distant age, we hope may be reached completely…The system we have advocated is a form of Guild Socialism, leaning more, perhaps, towards Anarchism than the official Guildsman would wholly approve. It is in the matters that politicians usually ignore – science and art, human relations, and the joy of life – that Anarchism is strongest…
Russell’s support for anarchism had nothing to do with a concern for freedom or happiness of the people, but rather with control, as he understood that this ideology would only result in the destruction of sovereign nation states into chaos, justifying a top down response in the form of world government (or what has been termed ‘Oligarchical Collectivism’).
Like brainwashed liberals living in small fifteen minute cities willing to own nothing while being happy, it was presumed that ‘think small’ anarchists would then be content with local controls of their miniature community without being able to influence the broader world system they were merely small parts of.
It is here useful to recall that on June 23, 2019, Musk tweeted out two messages.
The first read, ‘Accelerating Starship development to build the Martian Technocracy,’ which referenced his plans for space colonization, followed by another message a few hours later, saying “Anarcho-Syndicalism FTW!!” (‘FTW’ is an online gaming term meaning ‘For The Win’).
In the same book which Lord Bertrand Russell promotes Anarcho-Syndicalism, we find the hereditary oligarch also, writing,
“If the peace of the world is ever to become secure, I believe there will have to be, along with other changes, a development of the idea which inspires the project of a League of Nations.”
If you are perplexed that an Anarcho Syndicalist promoting oligarch should simultaneously support a World Government under the League of Nations to support world security, don’t be. It was always a joke, and it was on you. It is also the sort of joke that Elon Musk laughed at when he categorized himself as a socialist only one year prior to championing Anarcho-Syndicalism'.
The simultaneous promotion of Libertarianism by Musk’s transhumanist colleague Peter Thiel on the one hand and Thiel’s personal involvement as a member of the Bilderberg Group steering Committee is also not a real contradiction, but two sides of the same joke.
It is also no coincidence that Bertrand Russell was the principal creator of Cybernetics (developed by his student Norbert Wiener in 1943,) which became the new intellectual ‘technology’ developed and used after World War II to create Silicon Valley, and technocratic management of world systems under a world government of self-professed elites.
That story is told more fully in The Revenge of the Malthusians and the Science of Limits by this author.
Social Credit’s Dance with Nazis
Like Bertrand Russell, Major Douglas was a loud opponent of industrial civilization and demanded a return to small scale energy intensive modes of farming and production (ignoring the collapse of population levels that would necessarily ensue,) writing,
“… we are hypnotised by the propaganda of the international chemical combines into the belief that soil analysis, chemical fertilisers, and oil-driven farm machinery are far superior, and more “scientific” than the intimate farming of the older order. Not only is there not a particle of genuine evidence for this, but there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.”
Douglas was also a supporter of the Nazis as the harbingers of a new age of justice on earth, celebrating Hitler’s war on Jewish bankers in May 1939, writing to the fuhrer,
“Herr Fuehrer,
As an introduction to the attached memorandum, I would request permission to bring to the notice of your eminent self the following observations:--
(a) While it is claimed, and is no doubt sincerely believed, that there is some conflict of ideologies between the 'democratic' group of Powers and the Totalitarian group, there is, in fact, no such conflict -- all of them proceed equally from the fundamental assumption which is no doubt believed to be indisputable, that full employment of their populations is the test of success. There differences are of method only.
(b) If this chain rests on a 'moral' basis, then it must be observed that it raises up practical problems which appear to be only soluble by recourse to a war of mutual destruction certain to result in anarchy and final subjugation to a Transatlantic survivor.
(c) If, however, it is claimed that full employment is a practical requirement of an advancing civilisation, it can easily be shown that the contrary is the case. While it is recognized that the present production of armaments in every country has been forced by the general assumption that unemployment is equivalent to economic destruction, it must yet be obvious that the full employment which armaments provide is both temporary and at the same time perhaps the ultimate example of waste and inefficiency.
(d) This employment policy which is here challenged is now recognized to be inseparable from the Jewish Financial System.
(e) A simple change in this system would make full employment unnecessary, eliminate the competition for markets and destroy the power of the international Financier -- a power which war only increases and which if not destroyed will destroy civilization in Europe.
May I earnestly request that the present crisis may, in the key position of the history of the world, which you hold, be used to force an exposure of this false and destructive policy.
It is indisputable that, if this were to be made the major issue of any such conference as has been proposed, not only in Germany but the whole civilized world would be united in support of the action taken by you. Not President Roosevelt, but yourself would be recognised as the representative of all those values which are cherished equally in the so-called democracies and their artificially created antagonists.
Yours truly,
C. H. Douglas [17]”
Much like Fabian Society controller Lord John Maynard Keynes [18] (who cited Douglas in his famous General Theory of Economic Value), Major Douglas believed that Hitler’s fascist regime was well-suited to apply his Social Credit system as the basis for the post-war age.
The destruction of industrial production in favor of ‘local control’ guilds and micro management of the economy around mini communes loosely connected under a compartmentalized federation was believed to be the best pathway to giving the plebs maximum complacency and satisfaction in life, with none of the powers requisite to change the system they were born into.
Although Hitler’s military industrial policy is often featured in historical studies, too little attention has been paid to what Hitler’s vision for a German-led New World Order would have looked like. Considering Hitler (and every leading member of the Nazi SS) was an occultist and radical ecologist who believed in ‘back to nature’ communalist feudal living, it should be no surprise that Douglas felt his ideas would resonate with the Fuhrer.
The Social Credit Party leadership of Canada which Joshua Haldeman joined in 1943, had largely been supportive of German and Italian fascism as modes of government during the 1930s. The Social Credit Party itself took control of the conspiracy narratives of the 1920s-1950s, and under Major Douglas’ lead, directed attention away from the black nobility of royal bloodlines and esoteric mystery cults which have been manipulating humanity for millennia (and which both Major Douglas and Technocracy’s Howard Scott appeared to be closely affiliated) towards a blanket blame on ‘Jew Bankers running the world’.
To this end, The Social Credit Party of Joshua Haldeman was the first, and only Canadian political party to publish and widely distribute the fraudulent pamphlet known as ‘The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion’.
In Quebec, the Social Credit Party leadership published the Protocols in the French language and collaborated for a time with Adrian Arcand, the head of Quebec’s official Nazi party, who led a fascist movement dubbed ‘The Blue Shirts’.
Joshua Haldeman and other Social Credit leaders soon found themselves controlling the worldview of the vast majority of Canadians who were trying to make sense of the reality of oligarchist conspiracies manipulating their world. [See Appendix for evidence of the Protocols hoax as an Okhrana-Theosophy operation to destroy Russia'].
When it was becoming apparent that the Social Credit Party of Saskatchewan was not going to attain power any time soon, Haldeman packed up his family, his luggage and anti-Semitic baggage, and moved to a land which he embraced as the most freedom loving country on earth…. Apartheid South Africa.
Haldeman in South Africa: Land of the Free?
Upon his arrival in 1949, Joshua Haldeman began a new phase of his life as chiropractor in Praetoria, an adventurer flying Across Africa on his private plane searching for the lost city of Kalahari, and a writer promoting Apartheid, Jewish conspiracy theories, writing, “South Africa will become the leader of white civilization in the world”.
When asked about the anti-Black legislation in South Africa applied by the Nationalist Party of Hendrik Verwoerd that came to power in 1948, Haldeman said,
“The natives are very primitive and must not be taken seriously... Some are quite clever in a routine job, but the best of them cannot assume responsibility and will abuse authority. The present government of South Africa knows how to handle the native question.” [19]
What did the South African government do about “the native question” which pleased Haldeman so much?
Beginning in 1948, the Apartheid government directly applied a racial segregation program that codified the humans living in South Africa into four distinct species graded hierarchically from more to least fit.
Those four racial groups were: 1) Whites, 2) Indians, 3) Colored (mixed) and 4) Black.
Blacks were then ‘scientifically’ sub-divided by 10 additional sub-racial groups, while whites were divided into two sub-groups.
In 1949, the Apartheid regime passed a law prohibiting mixed marriages, and in 1950 added to that law by illegalizing acts of inter-racial sexual intercourse. In order to enforce the growing array of racist laws, a new ‘population registration act’ was passed into law in 1950 forcing every citizen to acquire ‘racial identification cards’. This latter act resulted in the splitting up of families due to another law passed that year called ‘The Group Areas Act’ which determined which racial groups were permitted to live in specific districts of South Africa, forcing the removal of thousands of citizens from their homes and families. Under this racial reasoning of the nation, entire homes and towns were demolished by the Apartheid leadership.
When ‘District 6’ in Capetown was determined to be a “whites only” area (despite the fact that whites had made up only 1% of the population when the law was passed), nearly every building was demolished and a new upper class segregated community was built up from scratch.
Under the '1950 Suppression of Communism Act’, all anti-Apartheid resistance was labelled “communist” justifying the disappearance of thousands of activists, and the creation of secret courts which were instituted to punish leaders of the anti-Apartheid resistance, black or white.
This undermining of opposition groups made space for the 1951 ‘Reservation of Separate Amenities Act,’ which ensured total segregation on beaches, benches, parks, schools, hospitals and building entrances.
Finally the 1951 Bantu Authorities Act forced blacks to request permission and special passes to be granted the right to leave their district for any reason.
The years the Haldemans lived in South Africa’s richest neighborhood in Praetoria saw tumultuous events such as a 1960 march of 7000 people protesting district passes, which resulted in a massacre, as police officers fired into the protesters killing 69 and wounding hundreds. In 1976 another protest of 20,000 citizens (mostly school children) called the ‘Soweto Uprising) against school segregation resulted in the mass murder of nearly 700 children.
The fact was that Joshua Haldeman’s beloved South Africa that awarded him with riches, his daughter with national beauty queen status, his son-in-law with an emerald mine, was actually the only nation on earth to unapologetically embrace the full Nazi paradigm in practice after World War 2.
Despite these injustices which the Musk and Haldeman family lived through, not a single member from Joshua Haldeman, Maye Musk to Errol Musk (Elon’s emerald mine-owning father) nor Elon Musk himself, who lived in South Africa until 17 years of age, have had a single critical word to say about the state of the Apartheid regime in any of their writings, or interviews.
In the next segment of this series, we will explore the roots of Silicon Valley as the base of a transhumanist New Age.
Matthew Ehret is the editor-in-chief of The Canadian Patriot Review, Senior Fellow of the American University in Moscow and Director of the Rising Tide Foundation. He has written the four volume Untold History of Canada series, four volume Clash of the Two Americas series and Science Unshackled: Restoring Causality to a World in Chaos. He is also host of Pluralia Dialogos and co-host of Breaking History on Badlands Media where this article was first published.
Footnotes
[1] In 2022, Musk teamed up with the German government (majority shareholder in the CureVac vaccine company) to begin manufacturing mRNA printers for the mass production of mRNA-based drugs. On April 12, 2023 Elon tweeted: “This will make some people upset, but I need to emphasize that accelerating synthetic mRNA technology was another silver lining. It is a revolution in medicine, like going from analog to digital.”
[2] Musk openly promoted the overthrow of Venezuela’s Maduro working in close proximity to the CIA front organization ‘National Endowment for Democracy’ and USAID resulting in President Maduro’s statement: “I denounce that the United States government, together with Elon Musk and the international fascist [Argentine President Javier] Milei, are at the forefront of a destabilization process and a coup d'etat, at this moment, against the Venezuelan people and the Venezuelan democracy."Musk additionally helped break Argentina from the BRICS through the installation of Javier Millei in 2023, and he has used his Starlink and social media networks worked to destabilize Brazil in attempt to restore a pro-libertarian regime resistent to the BRICS. When confronted on Twitter about his involvement in helping the US government manage the overthrow of Bolivia’s Evo Morales in 2019, Musk responded with “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it.”
[3] At a 2017 World Government Summit, Elon echoed the narrative of his liberal doppelganger Yuval Noah Harari when he described the future of automation and AI having rendered most jobs irrelevant. Musk said: “The much harder challenge is, how are people going to have meaning? A lot of people derive their meaning from their employment. So if there's no need for your labor, what's your meaning? Do you feel useless? That's a much harder problem to deal with.” He followed this message up with his support for Universal Basic Income saying: “There is a pretty good chance we end up with a universal basic income, or something like that, due to automation.”
[4] Upon buying Twitter in 2022, Musk stated “buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app.”
[5] Just as Roosevelt was coming to power in America in 1932, the Rhodes Trust networks of Canada centering on Escott Reid, Frank Underhill, Eugene Forsey, F.R. Scott, and David Lewis founded a self-described “Fabian modeled think tank” customized for Canada known as the League for Social Reconstruction (LSR). Reid, Forsey, Scott and Lewis were all Rhodes Scholars while Underhill was an Oxford trained Fabian who was tutored by Harold Laski and G.B. Shaw at Balliol College. The avowed intention of the group was to institute a system of “scientific management of society” under Fabian precepts and expressed itself in the group’s selecting of J.S. Woodsworth, another Oxford-trained Fabian, to head the new Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF). Woodsworth, an avowed eugenicist, vigorously endorsed the passage of Alberta’s 1927 sterilization laws to eliminate the unfit.
[6] Thorsten Veblen, The Engineers and the Price System, p.102.
[7] William E. Akin, Technocracy and the American Dream, p.29.
[8] The ‘Ignoble Liars’ Behind Bush’s ‘No Exit’ War, Executive Intelligence Review vol 30, no. 15, 2003
[10] Although since discredited, Peak Oil Theory became a foundational precept of the post war growth of ecologism. The theory was destroyed by geologist Daniel Yergin who wrote in the Pulitzer prize winning book The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power: “The peak oil theory embodies an ‘end of technology/end of opportunity’ perspective, that there will be no more significant innovation in oil production, nor significant new resources that can be developed.”
[11] Technocracy Inc., 1934, p. 186)
[12] Technocracy Inc., 1934, p. 210
[13] Harold Loeb, Life in a Technocracy, pp.174-178
[14] A Machine to End War (as told to George Sylvester Viereck), 1937
[15] Letter from Technocracy Incorporated headquarters, November 30, 1940. Subject: Symbolization of Technocracy.
[16] The New Age: A Weekly Review of Politics, Literature, and Art, No. 1373 New Series, Vol. XXIV, No. 9, (Thursday, Jan. 2, 1919)
[17] Letter from C.H. Douglas to Adolf Hitler in May 1939 urging Hitler to oppose the "Jewish Financial System", Pravda-EN
[18] By 1937, Keynes’ General Theory of Employment was published in Nazi Germany. If anyone wishes to defend the idea that the economist was somehow an anti-fascist defender of ‘liberal values’, let them read his own words in the preface and then either redefine ‘liberal values’ or their naïve idea of Keynes: “I may perhaps expect to find less resistance among German readers than among English ones, when I put before them a theory of employment and production as a whole… The theory of production as a whole which is the object of this book, can be much better adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state, than the theory of production and distribution of wealth under circumstances of free competition.”
[19] Benton, Joshua (September 21, 2023). "Elon Musk's Anti-Semitic, Apartheid-Loving Grandfather". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on October 7, 2023.
Also, don’t forget that on Sunday June 29 from 3-6pm (MDT),I’ll be delivering a lecture in Calgary Albert titled: An Introduction to Occult Geopolitics
Spaces are EXTREMELY limited for this event, so get your tickets here.
(Food and beverages will be available for purchase at the venue)
Signed books will be available for purchase
Elon is part of the plan, along with none other than Bill Gates, Peter Thiel, Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman, and the rest of the Globalists who want to usher in a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) and Universal Basic Income (UBI). To think that these demons, along with Trumpty Dumpty, aka Mr. Operation Warp Speed, have the best interest of the American People is insanity. They are disgusting, Greedy, power-hungry hogs!! They are the true underbelly of society and humanity!! They are skilled at using deflection, division, deceit, and destruction to achieve their ultimate goal: total control over the people. Let m add, the DemonRats and RepubTurds along with Trumpty Dumpty are all one big happy family!!
How do we take this LOT down. This is the only question that matters; but your research, along with Cynthia's, has certainly been helpful in originating the only definitive answer.
We will be in touch soon.