The Proto-Indo-European Language & Transhumanism: Does Scientific Racism Exist in Modern Science Today?

Over the past hundred years, mankind has made tremendous strides in technology and other fields of science. These advancements have not only made life more comfortable for modern man, but have also provided him with a better means of living and improved health. Humanity’s investment in science has greatly improved his lot in life. What is science today?

The term science originates from the Latin, scientia, meaning knowledge. Science was originally defined as “what is known, knowledge (of something) acquired by study; information.” While science has definitely been a great aid to mankind, the application of this term and its meaning has changed over the years. In ancient times, what is often classified as “occult” topics, are, and were said to be sciences. Much of what was established by ancient occultists paved the way for modern-day scientists of this era.

While the work of modern science has contributed many beneficial things to human life, there is a growing consensus that it is becoming corrupt, due to a criminal-political influence. Brendan O’Neill, in an online article entitled, Is Science Becoming a New Religion?, stated the following:

“And science suffers because it inevitably becomes polluted, I think. It seems absolutely clear to me that the more politicians call on scientists for evidence and stats, the more science will feel pressured to do the right thing, to provide the kind of info that will allow politicians to do what they want to do. People often complain about corporate-funded science and how that can influence the outcome of science – but what about when Iain Duncan Smith goes looking for evidence for his illiberal family intervention policies or the Home Secretary goes looking for evidence to justify a public smoking ban? Doesn’t that potentially corrupt science, too, especially over the long run?”

Many feel that the corruption in modern science began shortly after Operation Paperclip. Operation Paperclip was the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) program in which over 1,500 German scientists, technicians, and engineers from Nazi Germany and other foreign countries were brought to the United States for employment in the aftermath of World War II. James Regan, in the book, Frameworks: The Price of Delusion, writes:

“However, when World War II was finally over, there were many German scientists that were displaced. The United States did not want any other super power, especially Russia, to get a hold of these scientists. They did not want Russia to use them for their own purposes. It was decided back then that they would bring hundreds of the German scientists and technicians into our country. They were to be given protection under the project code-name Operation Paperclip.”

Many historians make the claim that it was necessary for the United States to import Nazi scientists into our country for fear that Russia would provide a home for them. Historically, the United States has never acted in fear of such things, it just simply kills the enemy and it scientists. For example, during the World War II era, Japan had made quite a few technological advances, even developing the world’s first combat helicopt Take a look at the article Japan’s Secret Weapons of World War II. There was no talk of importing any Japanese scientists into America after the World War II. Why did the United States Governement find the need to import scientists from a defeated Nazi Germany into this country?

The process of importing Nazi scientists into the United States started shortly the Allied victory in Europe. According to a report made by Wikipedia we read:

“Although the JIOA’s recruitment of German scientists began after the Allied victory in Europe on May 8, 1945, U.S. President Harry Truman did not formally order the execution of Operation Paperclip until August 1945. Truman’s order expressly excluded anyone found “to have been a member of the Nazi Party, and more than a nominal participant in its activities, or an active supporter of Nazi militarism”. However, those restrictions would have rendered ineligible most of the leading scientists the JIOA had identified for recruitment, among them rocket scientists Wernher von Braun, Kurt H. Debus and Arthur Rudolph, and the physician Hubertus Strughold, each earlier classified as a “menace to the security of the Allied Forces”.

To circumvent President Truman’s anti-Nazi order and the Allied Potsdam and Yalta agreements, the JIOA worked independently to create false employment and political biographies for the scientists. The JIOA also expunged from the public record the scientists’ Nazi Party memberships and régime affiliations. Once “bleached” of their Nazism, the scientists were granted security clearances by the U.S. government to work in the United States. Paperclip, the project’s operational name, derived from the paperclips used to attach the scientists’ new political personae to their “US Government Scientist” JIOA personnel files.”

So here we have the importation of Nazi scientists into the United States before the desegregation of America. They are given security clearance without psychological counseling and nice salaries. They were also put in charge of many departments in NASA. Nazi Scientists were coming into the United States before some of the troops returned home. How did the United States Government expect these Nazi scientists to be US loyalists, despite the fact that they were given no psychological counseling? How could the US be so certain that these scientists were not going to conspire against this country? Maybe there existed a faction in the United States Government that was already affecting the country’s policies in a subversive manner, while remaining hidden. Michael Dobbs, wrote an article, appearing in the online version of the Washington Post, entitled, Ford and GM Scrutinized for Alleged Nazi Collaboration. The article talks about the possible involvement of The Ford Motor Company and General Motors supplying the German army with war material. The article states the following:

“General Motors was far more important to the Nazi war machine than Switzerland,” said Bradford Snell, who has spent two decades researching a history of the world’s largest automaker. “Switzerland was just a repository of looted funds. GM was an integral part of the German war effort. The Nazis could have invaded Poland and Russia without Switzerland. They could not have done so without GM.”

Both General Motors and Ford insist that they bear little or no responsibility for the operations of their German subsidiaries, which controlled 70 percent of the German car market at the outbreak of war in 1939 and rapidly retooled themselves to become suppliers of war materiel to the German army.

But documents discovered in German and American archives show a much more complicated picture. In certain instances, American managers of both GM and Ford went along with the conversion of their German plants to military production at a time when U.S. government documents show they were still resisting calls by the Roosevelt administration to step up military production in their plants at home.”

It should be noted that Ford Motor Company was founded by Henry Ford, author of a literary work entitled The International Jew. In the preface of the book, Henry Ford writes:

“The International Jew and his satellites, as the conscious enemies of all that Anglo-Saxons mean by civilization, are not spared, nor is that unthinking mass which defends anything that a Jew does, simply because it has been taught to believe that what Jewish leaders do is Jewish. Neither do these articles proceed upon a false emotion of brotherhood and apology, as if this stream of doubtful tendency in the world were only accidentally Jewish. We give the facts as we find them; that of itself is sufficient protection against prejudice or passion.”

In 1922, The New York Times reported that Adolf Hitler‘s office contained a large picture of Ford. Back in 2004, The Guardian published the article, How Bush’s Grandfather Helped Hitler’s Rise to Power, which stated:

“George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.”

So here we have Henry Ford, founder of the biggest American car company in the world, and Prescott Bush, a Bush patriarch, whose family’s political influence surpasses even the Kennedys, profiting from their investments in Nazi Germany. So it is very well possible that the men who profited from Nazi Germany would make provisions for its scientists to enter the United States, even before America entered the war. It is also possible that these same men and other investors would now make plans to continue the work of the Nazi scientists globally after World War II through the guise of modern science. Here is a list of a few ideas promoted by various fields of science today that began in Nazi Germany:

1. The Proto-Indo-European Language that Never Existed! Who would ever believe in the day when a fictional language with no historical proof would fill dictionaries and encyclopedias and is cited in these works as the original language of man. Meet the Proto-Indo-European language! It’s probably the one of the most racist efforts put forth by an academic institution to date.

Remember when the Eurocentrists’ community were trying to promote this idea that Greece was the world’s first civilization? Despite the accomplishments of the Babylonians, Chinese, Egyptians, India, and many other nations which preceded Greek culture, this idea that Greece was the world’s first civilization was put forth in media and reference sources early in the turn of the last century. Eygpt: Origin of Greek Culture, states the following:

“Schools still teach that the Western civilisation is a child of Greece. Until a few decades ago, many schools did not mention the cultural achievements of Egypt or Sumer – and many schools in Europe still pay no attention to the Inca’s, Toltecs, etc. But when it comes to the Greek and Egyptian civilisations, it was made painfully clear that the Egyptian civilisation was “primitive” when compared to the cultural and specifically philosophical achievements of the Greeks. ..This situation is now slowly beginning to change, though the chasm between the Greek and Egyptian culture remains. Though geographically both countries are close to each other, and whereas many Greeks would later travel to Egypt, it is assumed that the Egyptians, a civilisation that predates the Greek civilisation by two millennia, never used that time to sail in the opposite direction. Though the ancient Egyptians had seaworthy boats – e.g. the funerary boat in the boatpit on the Gizeh plateau – the status quo is that they never sailed the Mediterranean Seas to Greece.”

Sir William Jones discovered that the Sanskrit language, being more complex than Greek and Latin, also held some deep similarities to the two later cited languages. The similarities between Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin were observed before Jones’ time. However, Sanskrit was found to be more complex than the other two. Since it was supposed that the world’s first civilizations were coming out of Europe, then the linguists during this time promoted the idea that there must have been a parent language to the three just mentioned. Why weren’t any studies done to see if Sanskrit itself may have been this mother language? It is due to the fact that Sanskrit is not a European language and these scholars needed to find a way to fit themselves into the “superior” side of the picture. The Proto-Indo-European Language has no history among nations of ancient times, but promoting it in reference works as if it really did exist is just an attempt to rewrite history and this is the racist thing about it. Let’s take a look at one example.

We just observed how Egypt influenced Greek culture. I am sure that during this exchange there were words adopted by the Greeks that may have been of Egyptian origin. A while back I did some research into the word “necro,” and came across the following link http://www.myetymology.com/english/necropsy.html, which states:

“derived from the Greek word nekros, νεκρός (corpse; dead (literally or figuratively; also as noun)) …derived from the Proto-Indo-European root “nek..“

As we can all see this resource states that the Greek word nekros derived from the Proto-Indo-European root nek. What I do know is that the Egyptians and Greeks had a history of influencing each other. I also know that since the Egyptians and the Greeks influenced each other, the Greek term nekros probably originated from the name of the Egyptian goddess Nekhbet. See, the Proto-Indo-European Language doesn’t supply a history of how the word “nek” entered the Greek vocabulary, but what it does suggest is that a Proto-Indo-European had to be present in history, where there is no history of him being, no ancient records. And in this lies a hint of racism.

Think about it for a second. The Greek term nekros means dead. We know the Egyptians and Greeks influenced each other so it is not hard to say that the term nekros originated from the name of the Egyptian goddess Nekhbet. Nekhbet is described in Wikipedia as follows:

“In Egyptian mythology, Nekhbet (also spelt Nechbet, and Nekhebit) was an early predynasticlocal goddess who was the patron of the city of Nekheb, her name meaning of Nekheb. Ultimately, she became the patron of Upper Egypt and one of the two patron deities for all ofAncient Egypt when it was unified…She was seen as a goddess who had chosen to adopt the city, and consequently depicted as the Egyptian white vulture, a creature that the Egyptians thought only existed as females (not knowing that, lacking sexual dimorphism, the males are identical). They were presumed to be reproducing via parthenogenesis…Egypt’s oldestoracle was the shrine of Nekhbet at Nekheb, the original necropolis or city of the dead. It was the companion city to Nekhen, the religious and political capital of Upper Egypt at the end of the Predynastic period (c. 3200–3100 BC) and probably, also during the Early Dynastic Period (c. 3100–2686 BC). The original settlement on the Nekhen site dates fromNaqada I or the late Badarian cultures. At its height, from about 3400 BC, Nekhen had at least 5,000 and possibly as many as 10,000 inhabitants…The priestesses of Nekhbet were called muu (mothers) and wore robes of Egyptian vulture feathers.”

Now if we were to assume that the Greek term nekros originates from the Proto-Indo-European word “nek”, if such a thing exists, then the history of how the term entered the Greek language must involve a European. That is rewriting history for every reference source that cites the Proto-Indo-European Language as the origin of a word. Since when do reference dictionaries trace the origin of words to theoretical, or should we say, fictional languages? This means that the academic world is now asking us to believe in them like a congregation puts faith in a certain deity. Only in this case our faith is just a way of allowing time for the academic world to create the proof instead of discovering it. Wikipedia states the following under the topic Proto-Indo-European Language:

“PIE was the first proposed proto-language to be widely accepted by linguists. Far more work has gone into reconstructing it than any other proto-language and it is by far the most well-understood of all proto-languages of its age….There is no written evidence of Proto-Indo-European, so all knowledge of the language is derived by reconstruction from later languages using linguistic techniques such as the comparative method and the method of internal reconstruction.”

Sounds like the work of extremists. Could it be that the Nazi scientists who came to the United States during, and after World War II became a behind-the-scenes force of influence? Just what is a Proto-Indo-European anyway? Bruce Lincoln in the book, Theorizing Myth, makes the following observation on page 94:

“First, the hypothesis for which Sir William Jones is most famous had deep antecedents and was always problematic. Most immediately, Jones was influenced by Jacob Bryant’s bibliocentric attempt to trace all world mythology back to Ham and all right religion to Shem….A  more critical genealogy of the discourse need not minimize his gifts nor impeach his motives while treating Sir William’s genius, stature, and organizational and promotional talents as crucial factors that helped legitimate an enterprise in which various chauvinism (racists, nationalist, anti-Semetic, colonists, and imperialist) were-and remained-implicit. It is not hard to re-employ the story in the genres of tragedy and horror,…by following the discourse’s nineteenth and twentieth-century peregrinations, when Bryant’s Amonians and Jones’ “Hindu Race” acquired the name “Ayrans.” ….Since the atrocities of the Nazis in the Second World War, the term “Aryan” has virtually disappeared from polite conversation…Scholars who wish to pursue the discourse while marking their distance from its savory aspects now use the term “(Proto-) Indo-Europoean,” also a coinage of the nineteenth century.”

Wow, from Lincoln’s observations we can see that Proto-Indo-European is a phrase that actually is used to replace Hitler’s understanding of what the term aryan means. Aside from Hitler’s definition of the term, aryan comes from the Sanskrit arya, which means noble or spiritual. Any association of the term Aryan with an ethnic group or “race” is entirely based on Hitler’s use of the term. All we have to do is replace the term aryan with the word Proto-Indo-European, which is what the academic world did a few decades ago, according to Lincoln’s observation. So now linguistic scholars are saying that the Aryan language in the mother-tongue of the world? Oh yeah, and life started in Africa too We now have bridges to sell with no explanation of how they washed up on shore. Okay, I see what’s going on here. Somebody must have paid Reverend Al Sharpton a lot of money to keep his mouth shut about this one! And that’s like putting a price tag on something that money can’t buy!

2. Transhumanism. Hitler recognized the value of society’s youth and believed that young people were an integral part in the development of Germany’s future. He would later develop Hitler Youth based on this principle. This principle will also arise in our discussion about transhumanism. What is transhumanism? Wikipedia defines it as such:

“Transhumanism (abbreviated as H+ or h+) is an international cultural and intellectual movement with an eventual goal of fundamentally transforming the human condition by developing and making widely available technologies to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities. Transhumanist thinkers study the potential benefits and dangers of emerging technologies that could overcome fundamental human limitations, as well as the ethics of developing and using such technologies. They speculate that human beings may eventually be able to transform themselves into beings with such greatly expanded abilities as to merit the label “posthuman“.”

Wikipedia’s definition of “transhumanism” sounds like a very unique thing, up until the time we start doing background checks. The term transhumanism was coined by biologist and eugenicist Julian Huxley. It is reported that in 1957, Huxley coined the term “transhumanism” for the view that humans should better themselves through science and technology, possibly including eugenics, and more importantly, the improvement of the social environment. Really? Julian Huxley?

For those who may not be aware, in 1924 Julian Huxley, upon returning to England after a tour of the United States, wrote a series of articles for the Spectator. One article in particular was entitled The Negro Problem in America, where the creator of the term “transhumanism,” Julian Huxley states:

“NOT until you have lived in the Southern States, or at least lived somewhere in contact with Western- veneered negroes, can you realize at all adequately what the negro problem means to America. Even when you stop only a few minutes in some little country town where the blacks outnumber the whites, you are apt to experience a queer feeling—of insecurity, of familiar worlds upset. That is an almost instinctive reaction, a reaction to the obvious visible differences between black and white.

On further acquaintance you find that the differences go deeper. The negro mind is as different from the white mind as the negro from the white body. The old characterization ” the minds of children ” is perfectly true…..There is also an attempt to fill the vacuum with .another ” inferior race “—the Mexicans. There is no immigration quota for Mexicans any more than for other peoples of the American continent. But there are strict laws as to the literacy and other qualifications of all immigrants, which would keep out 95 per cent. of Mexican labourers. However, the frontier is immense and human smuggling easy, and, legally or otherwise (usually otherwise), the Mexicans continue to pour in.

All this has only served to alter and perhaps to complicate the problem : but the problem itself is still there. What will happen to the eleven million ” Afro- Americans,” as the coloured intelligentsia like (and with some justice) to call the negroes ? In the first place, let us note with relief that, contrary to much popular belief, they are not increasing faster than the whites. There is further some evidence that they tend to die off more rapidly in the North. • On the other hand, this mortality will assuredly be selective, and – will assuredly bear harder on the coal-black negro than on the mulatto. It will not solve the problem. There are various alternatives. To ship them all back to Africa. Yes, but which part of Africa would accept them, and where are the ships that would carry them ? The idea is more ridiculous than reparations ! Among the negroes themselves, many would prefer Brazil as a land of promise ; but Brazil has immigration laws which keep negroes out, and it is unlikely, to put it mildly, that the United States would invent a super-Monroe doctrine to force her to take them in.”

These are the words of the man who invented the term “transhumanism.” Now you have people walking around calling themselves transhumanists, a term coined by a man who thought it was appropriate to keep Mexicans out of the United States and also implied that it would be a good idea to ship black people to Africa. Young people today are naming themselves after what comes out of this man’s mouth? Don’t worry! I’ve heard all the arguments about “oh that was just the popular thought at the time towards people of color.” No it wasn’t, especially in the fields of human science. You have many Persian alchemists and Asian doctors whose science still amazes the world. They are not recorded in acts of racist criteria. This is a thing of the Western world, but it was still no excuse, as Charles Darwin himself was an abolitonist. Maybe transhumanism wasn’t for everybody?

It is interesting that Julian Huxley’s article is entitled the “Negro Problem” because this phrase was used by the famous eugenicist Margaret Sanger. Two years before Julian Huxley wrote the article entitled “The Negro Problem in America” Margaret Sanger edited and published the following article in the Birth Control Review, written by Knight Dunlap, entitled Psychological Factors in Birth Control:

“Under present conditions, the more intelligent individuals in any group, and the more intelligent races generally, practice contraception, and the very worst eugenic results are obtained…..I am, moreover, seriously inclined to believe that if methods of contraception which are simple, easily accessible and inexpensive were brought within reach of the negro women generally in the United States, our “negro problem” would be solved in one generation.”

In short, the “negro problem” was a termed used to discuss ways of getting rid of the “negro” in private, and much by eugenics. In Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America by Linda Gordon, Margaret Sanger is quoted as saying:

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” Sanger said, “if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

Margaret Sanger, would later organize the Negro Project as a way to expose to Southern black women birth control. Margaret Sanger  organized and developed what is known as Planned Parenthood. Margaret Sanger, in her autobiography, boasts of being invited by over a dozen Klu Klux Klan organizations after delivering a successful speech in Silver Lake, New Jersey. This is the woman who was one of the biggest advocates of using eugenics to solve the “negro problem.” It was this same “negro problem” that Julian Huxley, inventor of the term “transhumanist,” wrote about in the Spectator. Why did Julian Huxley, inventor of the term “transhumanist” find it necessary to involve himself in discussing “the negro problem?”

Another aspect of transhumanism that we must speak about here is eugenics. We had already spoken about Huxley and Sanger, who were both eugenicists, but let us look deeper into the origin of this science. Community Genetics and Genetic Alliances by Aviad E. Raz, wrote:

“A relatively new movement that hinges on a utopian outlook of eugenics is transhumanism, the ‘intellectual and cultural movement …”

According to Wikipedia, the term eugenics is described as follows:

“Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek eu, meaning “good/well”, and -genēs, meaning “born”) is the belief and practice of improving the genetic quality of the human population. It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human genetic traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of people with desired traits (positive eugenics), and reduced reproduction of people with less-desired or undesired traits (negative eugenics).”

The term eugenics was coined by Francis Galton in 1883.  We can see the true purpose of eugenics by just looking at the inventor of the term’s writings. Here are two key statements made by Francis Galton:

“Fourthly, the number among the negroes of those whom we should call half-witted men, is very large. Every book alluding to negro servants in America is full of instances. I was myself much impressed by this fact during my travels in Africa. The mistakes the negroes made in their own matters, were so childish, stupid, and simpleton-like, as frequently to make me ashamed of my own species, I do not think it any exaggeration to say, that their c is as low as our e, which would be a difference of two grades, as before. I have no information as to actual idiocy among the negroes—I mean, of course, of that class of idiocy which is not due to disease. The Australian type is at least one grade below the African negro. (Hereditary Genius)

 “On the other hand, if a higher race be substituted for the low one, all this terrible misery disappears. The most merciful form of what I ventured to call “eugenics” would consist in watching for the indications of superior strains or races, and in so favouring them that their progeny shall outnumber and gradually replace that of the old one.” (Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development.)

I think it’s a good thing if someone seeks to evolve, to improve themselves. However, I cannot help to wonder why everyone involved in the foundation of both these terms, eugenics and transhumanism, were of the same opinion in their racist conclusions.

In Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America by Linda Gordon, Margaret Sanger is quoted as saying:

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” Sanger said, “if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

It was not only black people who were discriminated against by the founders of eugenic ideology, but also the Irish and other ethnic groups, who, by the turn of the twentieth-century were considered by some “eligible” to enter the white race. American eugenicist, Madison Grant, published The Passing of the Great Race, where he writes:

“Along with other ancient and primitive racial remnants, ferocious gorilla like living specimens of the Neanderthal man are found not infrequently on the west coast of Ireland, and are easily recognized by the great upper lip, bridgeless nose, beetling brow and low growing hair, and wild and savage aspect. The proportions of the skull which give rise to this large upper lip, the low forehead, and the super-orbital ridges are clearly Neanderthal characters. The other traits of this Irish type are common to many primitive races. This is the Irishman of caricature, and the type was very frequent in America when the first Irish immigrants came in 1846 and the following years. It seems, however, to have almost disappeared in this country.”

Grant continues:

“Whenever the incentive to imitate the dominant race is removed, the negro, or for that matter, the Indian, reverts shortly to his ancestral grade of culture. In other words, it is the individual and not the race that is affected by religion, education, and example. Negroes have demonstrated throughout recorded time that they are a stationary species, and that they do not possess the potentiality of progress or initiative from within. Progress from self-impulse must not be confounded with mimicry or with progress imposed from without by social pressure, or by the slavers’ lash.”

Fred Pearce, in the book, The Coming Population Crash: And Our Planet’s Surprising Future, talks about  Madison Grant and the public reaction of his literary work:

“Grant, who was for a time also vice president of the U.S. Immigration Restriction League, argued for Nazi-style selective sterilization to eliminate “the criminal, the diseased, and the insane, extending gradually to weaklings and perhaps ultimately worthless race types.” The year before raising his standard for the redwood, Grant had published his own rabble-rousing tome called The Passing of the Great Race, a study of the “racial history” of Europe and the threat posed to “the Nordic race.” He believed hard northern winters had purged defective genes from the virile, blond-haired, blue-eyed, chivalric and warrior Nordic race. Their purity had to be protected. The book sold 1.6 million copies in several languages, including German, which translated “Nordic” as “Aryan.”

Grant has a species of caribou named after him, and helped create Glacier National Park. As secretary of the Bronx Zoo, he put on display in 1906 a Congolese pygmy called Ota Benga. The unfortunate man. Who had been bought from soldiers of King Leopold of Belgium, occupied a cage next to a collection of apes to illustrate the stages of human evolution. When black clergy in New York tried to rescue him, the New York Times said that to do so would be an affront to science. “The reverend colored brother should be told that evolution is now taught in the textbooks of all schools.” After his eventual release, Ota Bengu went into the Vermont woods and shot himself.

One of Grant’s friends was former president and fellow hunter Teddy Roosevelt, who called The Passing “a capital book.” ….Several years before Grant’s death in 1937, an aspiring young politician in Germany wrote to him. “The book is my bible,” said Adolph Hitler.”

The foundation of the transhumanist movement is not multi-cultural, though its present-day followers perceive it as such, as few of them are aware of the danger that lurks around the corners of ethnic fences. Ideologies such as these are traps to mislead the would-be scientists from  investing into ideas that only benefit the elite made with the promises of changing humanity. Instead of using tainted terms, they regentrify them. Present them in the media as the latest sci-fi ideas. But, are we so quick to forget the power of comics and how they were used during war times to promote nationalism? Why should that power be forsaken after the war is over? We can still use this method to create faith among the young people into forms of genocide that are sold to us as something beneficial. Martin Luther King once said: “Never forget that everything that Hitler did was legal.”

If you truly want to advance and evolve pass the human condition, why not look towards paradigms that were not started by people who were racists? Why not invent another word to describe your path instead of following that of those whose intelligence was truly limited. Evolve pass transhumanism and will evolve into something greater than what transhumanism can ever produce! There are many people who have evolved pass the human condition. leaders in the fields of martial arts, shamanism, music, magic, have all gained the ability to perform supernatural feats by use of their subconscious mind. Do not be deceived by the hidden racist and his Nazi appeal. Be yourself and in that you will advance.