Direct Link to Latest News


"Civilization, a Form of Slavery," said Darwin Grandson

January 2, 2011

darwin.jpg"Think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzsche-ism. To us Jews, at any rate, it should be plain to see what a disintegrating importance these directives have had upon the minds of the goyim."

(Protocols of the Elders of Zion 2-3. "Us Jews" refers to Cabalist i.e. Illuminati Jews) 

by Cornelius B


(Originally Posted as  'Darwin was an Illuminati Shill' in March, 2010)

Darwinism, the theory of the "natural selection and survival of the fittest", is of major importance to the Illuminati.  We know this because, as Richard Milton explains in his article, "Darwinism - The Forbidden Subject",  public debate of Darwinism is forbidden.

"Most educated, rational people will find it almost impossible to believe that the debate of Darwinism through mainstream news papers and the principal TV channels is forbidden. I still find it hard to believe myself," Milton writes.

While there is no evidence that Darwin was a Mason, the males in his family were Freemasons, and so were his close colleagues and friends. 

Before coming to Derby in 1788, Dr. Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802), physician and biologist, grandfather of Charles, became a Mason in the Lodge of Cannongate Kilwinning, No. 2, of Scotland.

Sir Francis Darwin, (1786-1859), physician and traveler, brother of Charles Darwin's father, became a Mason in Tyrian Lodge, No. 253, at Derby, in 1807. The name of Charles Darwin does not appear on the rolls of the Lodge but it is very possible that he also was a Mason.

Charles Darwin was well into eugenics and bloodline breeding. The Darwins and Wedgwoods intermarried for several generations. That's the top Freemason way (the Rothschilds even married their sisters). Thus, Charles Darwin chose to marry his cousin, Emma Wedgwood.


A book, "The Next Million Years" by Darwin's grandson, Charles Galton Darwin (1887-1962) is supposed to be a NWO blueprint. You can download it from scribd ( 

Charles Galton Darwin says that "every civilization has really been a form of slavery for the people."

In his view, this is the "natural order", and of course " the leaders" are trained in the technique of enslaving people since birth.

They're brought up listening to a different version of reality than the rest of the population. They're told that in the realities of life, the predators should be at the top of the "natural order". They're predators, of course, because they're such hypocrites, liars, deceivers, and unscrupulous cheats. As good predators, they can't tell the people how they're really feeding off them, or manipulating them for different ends, "because those with the low IQ's, you know the little people at the bottom of the pile, have to be kept in the dark."  


The arms of the Darwin family are very suggestive of their belonging also, just as their motto - "Cave et aude" (Beware and Dare). How about those Satanic red stars, identical to the Soviet symbol?

Because Marx remained a relatively obscure figure in his own lifetime, and his ideology didn't spread, something was necessary to make the masses more receptive... and this something was Darwinism. Darwin's theory eliminated God and presented life as a struggle for survival of the fittest. It was the necessary ingredient for the acceptance of a slave state, and of a cycle of crime, violence, destruction, anarchy, revolutions and wars.


In his essay, "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory" (2004), Stephen Jay Gould finds a strong kinship between Darwin's "natural selection" and "the invisible hand of the market" of Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations." (1776) According to Smith, each individual is in constant search to satisfy his own interests, to best employ his capital and to better sell his work.

The establishment of the relationship of "genuine competition" of all private interests in a "free market" would result in "the greatest wealth and happiness for all".

Adam Smiths' economic liberalism, just as Darwin's theory, is pure ideology because at that time, nothing similar existed in the real world. Alas, shortly after this publication, under the effect of particularly ferocious laws and policy promoted by the dominant social classes (enclosure, bloody repression of the Luddites in 1812, abolition of the law of assistance to the poor in 1834, etc.) Smith justified a kind of enslavement.

With his vision of the economy, Smith introduced the destruction of the social bonds - of neighborhood, of trade corporations with their ancient solidarity, of inter-help and reciprocity, and this ideology undermined the traditional mutual help and assistance between the members of a same family. All these relations that enriched the social fabric, and the quality of life, were reduced to the notions of cold personal interest, selfishness and to the quest of money.

The poor literally became slaves, and for the slightest mischief, such as the cut of a tree, or poaching, could send a man to gallows, or be sent to the colonies -- America, and later Australia and New Zealand, South Africa, etc. -- to work as a slave (see "They were White and they were Slaves", by Michael Hoffman II -- You also view an interview of M. Hoffman by Ernst Zundel on the same topic --

Smith's free market coompetition corresponds to Darwin's survival of the fittest. The rest of the population becomes disposable, therefore eventually must disappear, or may be disposed of as pleased. This concept opened large the gates to the "demons" of Eugenics, Fascism, Nazism, Communism, Feminism, and lately of Neo-conservatism, all of them of Luciferian or satanic inspiration (see also "Jewish Convert, Rev. Richard Wurmbrand Defined "The Spiritual War"" on as tools for total control of the human society.

Thus, with the concept of the "survival of the fittest", Darwinism became the central pillar for new theories such as "Marxist-Leninist dialectical materialism" theory which introduces class war; Freud which posits sexuality as the central motivation of the "human machine" and all the perversions this entails; Fascism, Nazism and Zionism as forms of absolute totalitarianism and criminal behavior; Feminism as gender war with destruction of the familial entity, depopulation,  and control over the education of children who are educated by brainwashed individuals under the control of governments, in turn infiltrated and controlled by secret societies.

This is in accordance with the agenda of the Illuminati, who pursue the destruction of Christian civilization and the enslavement of humanity. Thus, Darwinism, the central pillar of the "modern theories" which alters minds, attitudes and actions of the people, is still necessary to these Illuminati predators. This is the only plausible explanation for why the public debate of Darwin's scientific findings  is forbidden.

Was Darwin a front man for the Illuminati agenda? What do you think?

Related-  Archeological Finds Debunk Darwin


Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for ""Civilization, a Form of Slavery," said Darwin Grandson"

ACB said (March 16, 2010):

Thanks very much for the article. I have felt for decades that it was just ”too convenient” that Darwinism just happened to come on the scene (with its inherent devaluation of those God tells us (Gen. 1.:27, 9:6) were created in His own image) and provide a superb rationale for the gross inhumanity of Communism from 1917 to the present.

Robyn said (March 15, 2010):

Darwin most likely was a Mason, and was definitely involved in the modernization of Eugenics. However, I believe the political and religious and scientific implications of his research were carried away by others to use as a means to turn the populace into the gelatinous and unconscious blob it is today.

Evolution can be reproduced in a laboratory, we've been doing it to dogs for a very long time. Selective breeding shows how unfavourable traits can be removed from a species. Animals with genes that make it harder to survive well enough to reproduce will have fewer offspring, altering the genetic makeup of future generations.

Killing off a country's bravest and strongest in war is one example of "unnatural selection". Using mutating radiation weapons, medicating food and water supply, and manipulating mating ritual are some more. The various "churches" have done this for centuries via birth control, poverty, and instilling social norms.

The fact that this has become a "God vs. None" argument is ludicrous. "God" and "Jesus" are not the only alternative to the screwiness of power-crazy, god-complexed, closet-case, self-declared Luciferians. Jesus, just like Marx and Darwin, was a genius with well intent, who made great strides of thought, only to have it hijacked as a vehicle to manipulate the people.

To me, evolution is a piece of "God"; the amazingly adapted animals proof that every action has a cause and a reaction. I hope that soon enough the humans that have caused the current state of action by trying to steer the evolution of our species into an H.G. Wells or David Icke sort of direction will be met by reaction by those of us left in the gene pool with courage and the power of deduction before it's to late. I fear it may already be.

I agree with Diane. We have to shed the "daddy in the sky" mentality. Whether it's God, Christ, Lucifer, Annunaki, the Illuminati or Big Brother, we cannot thrive in this mindset.

Sarah said (March 15, 2010):

I just wanted to say that I was really impressed by your article "Darwin Was an Instrument of the Illuminati". Scientific evidence has revealed so much in the past couple of century's, that it is illogical to deny the existence of a creator. However, what is worse than denying His existence, is working directly for the other side. That's what the illuminati figures are doing.. intentionally.

Christianity emphasizes the family unit, and its importance. That's why it must be wiped out of existence before a New World Order can be implemented. Thanks for the article.

Sam said (March 15, 2010):

No thinking person could glance through a cell biology textbook and deny intelligent design. The academic whores are in a world of hurt on this one. Darwin would renounce his own theory immediately were he presented with todays information

Conroy said (March 14, 2010):

Humboldt, the great Prussian, had made a previous tour to south and central America, but did not make any evolutionary statements, and contributed to a great education system.

Darwin (and later Marx, et al), used [Humboldt] to establish evolution, ... a concept of man evolving from monkey.

This fits the elite's attempt to downgrade mankind,who was uplifted from his dark ages feudalism as serfs,by Nicholas of Cusa's renaissance statement of agape, man in the image of god,and given recognition as a citizen with rights and the benefit of a nation state which has the responsibility of the general welfare, which the elite wants to remove with it's global austerity cuts and health cares focus. Then, the feudal ages will return.

Christine said (March 14, 2010):

When I was growing up, I can remember being taught in science class that a theory is a scientific concept that has some evidence of being true. Mainly because it can be reproduced in a laboratory by a scientific researcher.

On that basis, evolution is not a theory because it cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. Nevertheless, while evolution is called a theory, it is rather treated as a fact with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

The fossil record supports special creation, not evolution. Species of animals tend to appear and disappear.

Apart from the absence of scientific data supporting it, evolution does not work as a theory. Creatures that are "evolving" into another creature would not be able to survive in a changing environment.

Indeed, scientists have noted that under normal circumstances, our atmosphere would simply drift off as any other gas and dissipate into nothingness. Someone is keeping it in place and caring for it through various means, the ozone layer, Van Allen radiation belt, etc.

Finally, Bishop O'Gara of China, an Irish-Canadian by birth, survived the Communist takeover of China. He said that the first thing the Reds did was push evolution. For their part, the Chinese had some belief in God and found the false notion of being descended from apes to be offensive.

The Chinese Communists had to bludgeon and brutalize the Chinese into submission by mass murder and indoctrination. When Bishop O'Gara was rescued from China, he came to the USA to warn us about the Reds. To his dismay, he found that many Americans had already been brainwashed to believe in evolution, which is apparently a kind of false religion for many.

Diane said (March 14, 2010):

Was Darwin an Illuminati shill? Probably. But that doesn't mean he wasn't largely correct. I suspect that Zechariah Sitchin is closer to the truth in regard to the origin of homo sapiens sapiens.

Survival of the fittest is a fact of life. Social cooperation can improve the odds for those who can survive or even thrive if given considerable help. The ultimate question is where to draw the line in deciding whether to help the weaker ones among us. As circumstances change, the location of the line must change. We all draw the line somewhere, but most of us do so without really thinking about it. We subconsciously absorb the criteria during our upbringing,and as adults we find it difficult to address the issue squarely.

The current health care debate is to a large degree an argument about where to draw the line. It is unfortunately not possible for everyone to receive the best health care, because the costs of the best care for everyone will always exceed the ability of even everyone all together to pay for it.

Socialism appeals to our subconsciously absorbed criteria. Many of us feel as if we should treat everyone as if they were family, and let the government be the mechanism to deliver the social aid. The fact that socialism doesn't work in the long term should help us to realize that we need to think about, and argue with each other logically about, where to draw the line.

There is a kernel of truth in the Illuminati reasoning. They are predators, and recognize themselves as such, and they feel entitled to treat non-predators as their prey. They get away with it because most of us behave like prey animals, seeking safety in the herd.

I personally do not think the problem can be solved as long as most humans are indoctrinated to believe in a daddy in the sky who will take care of them or at least eventually punish those who mistreat us. It's time for the human herd to grow up and stop behaving as perpetual children. Only then will the mass of psychologically normal people be able to intelligently cooperate to defend ourselves against the small percentage of predators among us.

Bill said (March 14, 2010):

No, he wasn’t. Evolution is grossly misrepresented and twisted to falsely rationalize “might is right” and to be contrary to religion. It isn’t.

Andrew said (March 14, 2010):

Interesting article and for me (as someone who was educated in this kind of thing) not entirely unexpected after all this time. Even though I spent many ears learning about "evolution" and do not doubt that there is at least some truth to it (because organisms do demonstrably adapt to environmental change), "Darwinism" is clearly pernicious and wrong. It has been used to justify diabolical human behaviour.

However, attacking one area of science called "Darwinism" is missing the point. The real point of attack should be the idea of "uniformitarianism", i.e. that processes observed today are exactly the same as they were in the past. The fact is that we do not know this to be true, firstly because we ourselves have such short lives and secondly because there are no sources of information about the past which can be interpreted unambiguously. This is because prior sources of historical records have been systematically destroyed or suppressed, and what is left is "interpreted" subject to "plausible deniability" - I find myself in agreement with William R. Lyne in that regard. See for his take on this and "alternative energy".

From cosmology to microbiology and genetics, there is nothing of which we can be certain because all data are filtered according to how well they fit with current theories. In science, hypotheses should fall if they are falsified, yet everything in science appears to have been falsified long ago, with the lucrative "machine" just grinding on unopposed. The recent "Climategate" demonstrated all of this perfectly - not only is the theory falsified, so was the "evidence" which was supposed to support it! Likewise the idea that since gravity is insufficient to explain the behaviour of the observable universe, there must be some additional, "unobservable" matter binding it all together by gravitational attraction. This is bunk. Go to and read what they say about it there. Can you see why some of us, who were trained in sciences, cannot stomach it any more?

Science is about asking questions and trying to approach a more accurate picture of reality. How can we do that when the very conceptual frameworks under which we toil are demonstrably false?

Mary said (March 14, 2010):

always thought it was very strange that Cornell University went way overboard in backing up Darwin, when in fact his ideas seem ludicrous. There is another truth that is being hidden here, very similar to the fact that there are two entirely different stories of "creation" in Genesis of the OT. One tells of actual creation, and the other tells of manipulation of creation by the later arriving Jehovah (Jew) gods. You can see this if you look at the Hebrew verbs (in Hebrew). Someone does not want us to know that we have been created in the exact image of true Gods. Someone would rather that we believe that we are "descended from apes." What a terrible and limiting insult.

K said (March 14, 2010):

Excellent expose on Darwin!

The first order of Satanist/Luciferians is to tell lies, then endow the lies upon unwitting masses. The more lies the better. Perhaps
the Catholic Church has been the "first" liars of the bunch--the rest have adopted as necessary.

Sad world, yet even more dismal, is that these liars exist as keepers of some "higher" intelligence. Explains the rabid reactions by
Darwinians caught in a devilish belief system--Always manufacturing the next atheist Armageddon.

So many are correct--liberal, elitist, scallywag atheists, are running the show--top to bottom--schools and all.

What a waste of precious opportunity to love and enjoy the goodness in life, the wonder, the good. These luciferian animals are resentful
beasts angry they sold their souls for temporary power on earth to be handed speedily into the abyss. If they only knew what a waste they

Believe NONE of them. All bets are off. Every uttered word by "them" is suspect of lies and deceit.(to their pleasure)

Peter said (March 14, 2010):

Try Lloyd Pye 'everything you know is wrong'.

He wrote a book about this. Darwin was a hoax. No doubt about it in my mind.

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at