Eight Ideal Conditions for the Flowering of Autocracy -1977


Eight Ideal Conditions for the Flowering of Autocracy

The three fictional works I have described [Solaris, 1984 + Brave New World], when combined with those rare political writers who approach autocratic form from the point of view of technology (Jacques Ellul, Ivan Illich, Guy Debord, Herbert Marcuse), begin to yield a system of preconditions from which we can expect monolithic systems of control to emerge. These may be institutional autocracies or dictatorships. For the moment, it will be simpler to use the dictatorship model.

Imagine that like some kind of science fiction dictator you intended to rule the world. You would probably have pinned over your desk a list something like this:

1) Eliminate personal knowledge. Make it hard for people to know about themselves, how they function, what a human being is, or how a human fits into wider, natural systems. This will make it impossible for the human to separate natural from artificial, real from unreal. You provide the answers to all questions.

2) Eliminate points of comparison. Comparisons can be found in earlier societies, older language forms, and cultural artifacts, including print media. Eliminate or museumize indigenous cultures, wilderness, and nonhuman life forms. Re-create internal human experience—instincts, thoughts, and spontaneous, varied feelings—so that it will not evoke the past.

3) Separate people from each other. Reduce interpersonal communication through life-styles that emphasize separateness. When people gather together, be sure it is for a prearranged experience that occupies all their attention at once. Spectator sports are excellent, so are circuses, elections, and any spectacles in which focus is outward and interpersonal exchange is subordinated to mass experience.

4) Unify experience, especially encouraging mental experience at the expense of sensory experience. Separate people’s minds from their bodies, as in sense-deprivation experiments, thus clearing the mental channel for implantation. Idealize the mind. Sensory experience cannot be eliminated totally, so it should be driven into narrow areas. An emphasis on sex as opposed to sense may be useful because it is powerful enough to pass for the whole thing and it has a placebo effect.

5) Occupy the mind. Once people are isolated in their minds, fill the brain with prearranged experience and thought. Content is less important than the fact of the mind being filled. Free-roaming thought is to be discouraged at all costs, because it is difficult to control.

6) Encourage drug use. Recognize that total repression is impossible and so expressions of revolt must be contained on the personal level. Drugs will fill in the cracks of dissatisfaction, making people unresponsive to organized expressions of resistance.

7) Centralize knowledge and information. Having isolated people from each other and minds from bodies, eliminated points of comparison, discouraged sensory experience, and invented technologies to unify and control experience, speak. At this point whatever comes from outside will enter directly into all brains at the same time with great power and believability.

8) Redefine happiness and the meaning of life in terms of new and increasingly unrooted philosophy. Once you’ve established the prior seven conditions, this one is easy. Anything makes sense in a void. All channels are open, receptive and unquestioning. Formal mind structuring is simple. Most important, avoid naturalistic philosophies; they lead to uncontrollable awareness. The least resistible philosophies are the most arbitrary ones, those that make sense only in terms of themselves.

The Blatant Conspiracy behind Senator Robert F. Kennedy’s Assassination

Edward Curtin
27 May 2018

Early in 1968, Clyde Tolson, F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover’s deputy and bosom buddy, a key player in the assassination of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., expressed both the hope and intent of those making sure that there would never be another president by the name Kennedy, when he said about RFK that “I hope someone shoots and kills the son of a bitch.” Earlier, as reported by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in his new book, American Values: Lessons I Learned from My Family, the influential conservative Westbrook Pegler expressed this hope even more depravingly when he wished “that some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter [Robert Kennedy’s] spoonful of brains in public premises before the snow flies.”

These sick men were not alone. Senator Robert Kennedy was a marked man. And he knew it. That he was nevertheless willing to stand up to the forces of hate and violence that were killing innocents at home and abroad is a testimony to his incredible courage and love of country. To honor such a man requires that we discover and speak the truth about those who killed him. The propaganda that he was killed by a crazed young Arab needs exposure.

Continue Reading

Nazism, COVID-19 and the destruction of modern medicine: An interview with Vera Sharav, Part One

Nazism, COVID-19 and the destruction of modern medicine:
An interview with Vera Sharav, Part One
Stand for Health Freedom
12 October 2020

Complete Transcript: https://ratical.org/PandemicParallaxView/VeraSharav-101220-Pt1.html

Vera Sharav:

“When medicine veers away from the Hippocratic Oath that promises to respect the individual right to do no harm to the individual then you’re going to harm the community as well because the community is a bunch of individuals.”

“There are crossroads in life where you have to make choices and if you don’t someone who will make the choice for you is not going to make it for your best interest.”

“The idea of just following authority without considering, What if they’re wrong? What if it’s not in my best interest? I wouldn’t want to live in under such a regime. I know what it’s like. I know what that is and I don’t want, I would not do it again.”


At: 32:44:

Vera Sharav:
But it’s been—things have not gotten better. They’ve actually gotten worse. Because now, mother isn’t asked even when she gives birth, if they should give her baby a tetanus vaccine. And why are babies given tetanus vaccines? It makes absolutely no sense in a medical way. But if you have contracts and business to worry about then I guess it makes sense.

But these babies are being used.

Leah Wilson:      
And that’s an example of the deviation from the Hippocratic Oath. That it’s no longer looking at the patient as, First Do No Harm. But there’s contracts in place that muddle up.

Yes, exactly. And especially it begins in the Public Health arena. Public Health is government. And that was what happened in Nazi Germany. All of medicine wound up being Public Health. Once you have medicine in partnership with government there is no individual care. The Hippocratic Oath goes out the window. And since you have government behind you, the doctor is not responsible for their actions. They’re working together with the state. That’s when medicine becomes weaponized. And what I’ve described is weaponized medicine. If you dictate what medicine is given to your child and you don’t have a say, that invites all kinds of really serious violations of your child and your role. Children are sometimes taken away from their parents if the parent refuses, for example with psychiatric drugs, ADHD. If you don’t agree to give your child, they’ve taken children away. That’s called child protective services. Who are they protecting? Certainly not the children.

There are many areas now where there’s been a complete incursion into private families. Who is to say where is the evidence that government knows best for what’s for your child? There is no such thing. It’s only if you give in and you obey, then you become, then you’re not meeting your responsibility to the child. Really, parents have to be willing to go to battle to protect their children.

And that’s what we’re seeing today: these legislative trends that are infantilizing adult men and women and saying the state knows best for you and for your child. And so we’re expected as parents to willingly give up our parental rights and our health care rights and give them to the state and into state mandates. I’ll ask you a hard question, admittedly because we’re all journeying this together: How do parents go to bat?

They have to organize. They have to organize. It doesn’t take the entire population to rise up. It’s enough if a certain number does. Now there is more awareness. There is more combativeness in Europe. In fact in Germany, Germany has had some very very large rallies. I mean I’m talking 50,000 rallies against mandatory vaccination.

You don’t read about it in the media. Because the media is very much part of the business empire that’s ruling that. Vaccines are an empire and now they really want to do a vaccine globally. Do you know what kind of a market that is? More than 7 billion people for a vaccine. Can you even count the kind of profits no matter what they charge for it? That’s what their goal is. That’s the whole allure of this covid-19 vaccine. It’s that market.

And we’ve seen estimates recently, that the vaccine industry is currently worth an estimated 60 billion dollars annually and then we’ve also seen estimates with the covid vaccine that it could be worth over 300 billion annually because it’s global.

Bill gates said on camera recently, since he invested in seven factories for a vaccine that’s not yet developed. He was asked well, isn’t that a lot of waste of money? And he said, What’s a few billion dollars when we’re talking trillions? Yes, That’s what it’s about. It’s trillions.

My Earth Journey - A message for International Day for Biological Diversity, 22 May 2020

18 May 2020

“Biodiversity and small farmers are the foundation of food security,
not corporations like Monsanto which are destroying biodiversity
and pushing farmers to suicide.”

We are Earth.
We are Biodiversity.
We are Jiva.
We are Conscious.
We are Alive.
We are Free.

We are members of one interconnected Earth Family : of sovereign, autonomous, self organised, interdependent, intelligent beings.

We are Biodiversity : interconnected to other beings through food and water, through breath and air, through life, and intelligence.

Like our fellow beings, human beings are sovereign, living, intelligent, self organised, autonomous beings; mutually interdependent and sustaining.

In the living world of Biodiversity, all life is sacred, and life strives to nourish and support life. Life is the nature of the living.

The Patenting and Piracy of life — of Biodiversity, of natural processes, and nature itself (including the Minds and Bodies of Human beings) — is a violation of Spiritual Law, Ecological Law, Biodiversity Laws and Human Rights Laws. But one does not need to look at ‘theft’ through these lenses to see ‘theft’ as ‘theft’. Patenting of life is the theft of life — claiming that which is not yours to claim. Patents on life, quite simply, are the enslavement of life itself, stealing (or pirating) the nature of life.

The Mechanical Mind separates, mines and extracts

The Mechanical Mind, connected to the Money Machine of extraction, created the illusion of humans as separate from nature, and nature as dead, inert raw material to be exploited.

The ‘death of nature’ assumption is at the core of the logic of extractivism and the metaphor of mining – of land from indigenous peoples, of fertility from the soil, of water from rivers and underground aquifers, of genes from biodiversity, and knowledge from indigenous communities. Biopiracy is the mining of knowledge and biodiversity for patents and Intellectual Property Rights.

A new Biopiracy is under way — through patents on data of our bodies and minds, and mining of such data as “Human Body Activity “. We are being turned into the next raw material. Our minds and bodies are the latest colony for mining and extraction. They did say “data is the new oil”, and just as the oil industry extracted oil to fuel its war on the planet, data is already being used against the minds and bodies of people.

This is a higher level of Biopiracy, because it is an attempt at creating new tools of manipulation and control. It is an attempt to make human beings disappear in a world being engineered through the narrow blinkered mechanical mind which cannot see anything beyond its extractive machine for money making. The Mechanical Mind sees only its objective : Profit.

We stand at a precipice of extinction. Will we allow our humanity as living, conscious, intelligent autonomous beings be extinguished, by the greed machine, that does not know limits and is unable to put a break on its colonisation and destruction? Or, will we stop the machine and defend our humanity, freedom and autonomy? So many species have been driven to extinction, no longer able to survive, because the conditions necessary fir their survival were no longer available. We have a choice: do we continue protecting the conditions for our survival, or do we extract all life for ‘profit’ — leaving a dead planet in our wake, on our way to our own funeral.

For five decades I have worked on the reality of non separability, including my PhD on Non Locality and Non Separability in Quantum Theory. My passionate commitment to dedicate my life to understanding the ecological interconnectedness of biodiversity, and protection of biodiversity, started with the Chipko movement. For me, protection of biodiversity is protecting both for the integrity of life as well as the rights and needs of local communities who have been conservers and custodians of biodiversity.

I witnessed how the Mechanical Mind — of powerful men, who run the money machine — reduced forests, which were sources of water, food, fuel for local communities, to timber mines for extraction. They reduced rivers, including the sacred Ma Ganga into Cusecs of water, to be extracted for privatisation, or kilowatts of energy, to to be extracted through dams and hydroelectric power plants.

Life is not an invention. Seeds are not machines.

In 1987, when I was attending a conference on the “Laws of Life”, on the new biotechnologies, I first heard the Poison Cartel (the group of chemical companies including the erstwhile I G Farben) attempting to define living organisms, and seeds, as machines that they had invented and wanted to patent. I was aware that the seed is not a machine assembled by chemical corporations. It is the embodiment of biodiversity and nature’s urge to reproduce, renew and multiply. Genetically modified seeds are seeds pirated from farmers, and modified with genes of naturally occurring bacteria. The only “invention” is shooting genes in a lab with a gene gun or infecting a cell with Agrobacterium, a plant cancer. Corporations pirate seed and mine genes to make GMOS. Patenting Seed was ecologically, ethically, ontologically wrong. It is a wrong that must be corrected. 33 years ago, I began my journey to protect the Biodiversity the integrity and diversity of Seed, and prevent Biopiracy and patents on seeds.

Navdanya grew from this commitment to Biodiversity. The movement has reclaimed seed as a commons, and created 150 community Seed Banks. Across the world, we have inspired the Seed Freedom movement. A new consciousness has grown about Seed Sovereignty.

We have also passed laws and treaties to protect Biodiversity. The Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 witnessed the emergence of a new legal framework for the Convention on Biodiversity.

India passed her National Biodiversity Act in 2002:

“An Act to provide for conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the use of biological resources, knowledge and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto”.

India has passed laws that recognise that seed is not an invention and hence not patentable.

Art 3 of the Patent Act clearly defines what are not inventions, hence excluded from patentability.

Art 3j of the Indian Patent Act excludes from patentability:

“plants and animals in whole or in any part thereof other than microorganisms; but including seeds, varieties, and species, and essentially biological processes for production or propagation of plants and animals”.

This was the article used by the Indian patent office to strike down a Monsanto patent on climate resilient seeds, as well as Monsanto’s patent claims on Bt Cotton Seed.
(Origin: The Corporate Plunder of Nature and Culture. Natraj, 2018)

India’s law titled Plant Variety Protection and Farmers Rights Act 2001 has a clause on Farmers Rights.

“a farmer shall be deemed to be entitled to save, use, sow, re-sow, exchange, share or sell his farm produce including seed of a variety protected under this Act in the same manner as he was entitled before the coming into force of this Act”

Not only did we put into law the integrity of life and Biodiversity by clearly stating that plants, animals and seeds are not an invention, we also fought and won cases to challenge patents based on Biopiracy — such USDA and WR Grace Neem (Patent No 436257), Ricetec’s Basmati (Patent No 56,63,484 ) and Monsanto’s Wheat Patent (Patent No 962578).

I have written in my book Biopiracy that Patents on Life and Patents on Seeds are the second coming of Columbus.

In 1942, Columbus was given a letters patent by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabel of Castile in Spain, to “discover and subdue some Islands and Continents in the ocean”. The continent that Columbus was looking for was India, and that is why all indigenous peoples of North America are referred to as Indians. Having returned from the “Discovery of America”, he wrote to the King and Queen about the gold, its mining, its processing, and its transport to Castile. There was not a word about the original people, not a second thought about the theft.

Theft and Piracy were central to colonisation, and still are.

In 1493, Pope Alexandar issued a Papal Bull “Inter Caetera,” to naturalise the take over of the land, territories and wealth of indigenous people, and define Colonialism as the Civilising Mission of the Church, through European Monarchs and their pirates and merchant-adventurers.

In our times, Columbus, the monarchs, the Pope, and God have all collapsed into one – the billionaires who play God through their tools and technologies, who define and shape the new “civilising missions” based on those tools and technologies of extraction and control. New religions which must be forcibly imposed on the entire world.

At the peak of the Corona Pandemic and in the midst of the Lock Down, on 26th March, Microsoft was granted a World Patent no WO 2020/060606 by WIPO — the World Intellectual Property Organisation.


Just as our Biodiversity and Indigenous knowledge were “mined” — for patenting and Biopiracy, and there was an attempt to reduce us to consumers of GMO Patented Seed, manipulated and engineered by pirating our seeds without permission and consent — there is now an attempt to mine and pirate the data from our bodies and minds, without our permission and consent. Our humanity and autonomy are being stolen. We are being reduced to “users” of the “machines” which are extracting our humanity and our information to build the next stage of the mechanical, money machine.

Patent 060606 reads

“Human Body Activity associated with a task provided to a user may be used in a mining process of a crypocurrency system. A server may provide a task to a device of a user which is communicatively coupled to the server. A sensor communicatively coupled to or comprised in the device of the user may sense body activity of the user. Body activity data may be generated based on the sensed body activity of the user. The cryptocurrency system communicatively coupled to the device of the user may verify if the body activity data satisfies one or more condition set by the cryptocurrency system and award cryptocurrency to the user whose body activity is verified“

The patent is dramatically changing the meaning of being human.

Firstly, it is redefining us as “mines’ for data — robbing us of our autonomy, our sovereignty, and control over our bodies and minds. The patent is an Intellectual Property claim over our body, and our minds. And just being connected through their “server” is giving consent.

Just as through colonialism, the colonisers assigned themselves the right to take the land, the resources, the earth of the indigenous people, extinguishing their cultures and soveregnties, and in extreme cases exterminating them, patent WO 060606 is a unilateral declaration by Microsoft of our bodies and minds as their new colonies. We are being reduced to mines of “raw material” — the data extracted from us.

The “body activity” that Microsoft wants to mine without our permission, without our consent, includes, but is not limited to :

“radiation emitted from the human body, brain activities, body fluid flow (eg blood flow)organ activity or movement, body movement, and any other activities that can be sensed and represented by images, waves, signals, texts, numbers, degrees, or any other form of information or data. Example of body radiation emitted from human body may include radiant heat of body, pulse rate, or brain wave. Brain waves may comprise, for example, but not limited to i) gamma waves, involved in learning or memory tasks ii) beta wave,s involved in logical thinking and /or conscious thought iii) alpha waves, which may be related to subconscious thoughts iv) theta waves, which may be related to thoughts involving deep and raw emotions v) delta waves, which may be involved in sleep or deep relaxation or vi) electoencephalogram (EEG) which may be measurement used to evaluate the electrical activity in the brain, such as deep concentration. Examples of the body movement include eye movement, facial movement, or any other muscular movement .”

Secondly, it is erasing our humanity — as sovereign, living beings, spiritual, conscious, intelligent beings, making our decisions and choices with wisdom and ethical values about the impacts of our actions on the natural and social world of which we are a part; and to which we are inextricably related. We are being reduced to being “users” of tasks assigned to us by the extractive digital mega machine. A “user” is a consumer without choice in the digital empire. Human creativity and consciousness disappear in the world imagined in #patent060606.

Thirdly, the patent is redefining human values, and the value of being human. Human values include ethical, ecological, spiritual values. For us, right livelihood is Dharma, the Right Action in the web of life of which we are part. Sustaining and nourishing our ecological relationships as Earth Family and our social relationships as one Humanity in our diversities, is what makes us spiritual, self organised and compassionate beings. The value of being human is measured through love and compassion, through sharing and giving. The measure and currency of life is life and love. Value is derived from “valere” -to be strong. Strength comes from our self organised autonomy and interrelationships, our spiritual, emotional, ecological resilience, which grows from deep within our being.

Patent 060606 is aimed at robbing us of our deep humanity. We are being transformed from self organised, conscious, creative, autopoetic beings, into external input “users” whose value will be assigned in cryptocurrency through algorithms, by the very machine that gave us the task in the first place.

Having extracted our “body data”, including our brain function, algorithms will assign a “target rage of valid body function.” A machine will determine the type of machine we are allowed to be.

“For example the user device may generate raw data of the sensed body activity, transmit it to a cryptocurrency system, and then the cryptocurrency system may codify the raw data… The cryptocurrency system verifies if the body activity data of user satisfies one or more conditions set by an algorithm of the cryptocurrency system… The condition may be set by simulating human body activity across all of body activities… Machine learning algorithms may be used to simulate body activities and set the conditions for valid body activities… When the body activity data transmitted from user device satisfies one or more conditions set by cryptocurrency system, cryptocurrency system awards cryptocurrency to user”

Our value as human beings will be allocated by a machine, the cryptocurrency system.

The root of “currency” is the “condition of flowing”. Life flows between living systems, between the Biodiversity that makes the Earth Family. The currency of life is life. The currency of life is food. The currency of life is water. The currency of life is breath and air. The currency of life is living knowledge. The currency of life is intelligence. The currency of life is freedom.

And since life is based on mutuality and giving, the currency of life is not a one way extraction, but a two way flow, a nourishing and giving back in love, friendship, gratitude, oneness. It is the currency of life that weaves the relationships in the Earth Family and sustains the flow of life.

The money machine reduced the meaning of “currency” to be only money. Then the money machine declared a war on cash and made cash illegal. Currency was forcibly reduced to Digital currency to reduce user control. Patent 060606 is the next step of reductionism and total control by reducing us from vibrant living beings to mines for extraction of “data” as the new oil, the new raw material, with our worth and value assigned by the extractor in “cryptocurrency”.

Our value in the Microsoft world is not as sovereign beings but as cryptocurrency assigned my the Machine. We are being reduced to their digital currency. Our reality is being destroyed to engineer us into virtual dots in the digital machine, beyond the control of humans, democracies and even national sovereign governments.

As the patent states:

“A virtual currency (also known as digital currency) is a medium of exchange implemented through the Internet generally, not tied to a specific government “flat” (printed) currency such as the US dollar or the Euro, and typically designed to allow instantaneous transactions and borderless transfer of ownership. One example of virtual currency is cryptocurrency.”

The Patent is in fact a patent to end humanity and human beings as embodying freedom and autonomy based on interconnectedness and oneness with other beings. As mines for “body data”, as “users” of structures of control, with our value assigned by algorithms in cryptocurrencies, we are extinguished as living, breathing, thinking, compassionate, sovereign beings. We are being reduced to being turned into digital cogs in the digital money machine and digital dictatorship of Microsoft.

We are not a genetic mine, nor a mine for “Data” of our “body activity”, data mined without our permission and consent. Biopiracy is a crime, no matter what the instrument of extraction and piracy, no matter which biological being is pirated and patented.

This is colonialism and piracy taken to the ultimate invasive level, with our body’s data as the new colony. This is the ultimate separatism and reductionismof the Mechanical reductionist mind.

This is not just Biopiracy of our autonomous living Body, it is engineering the disappearance of human beings, human values, human significance, human meaning. It is engineering the disappearance of living beings and their living intelligences. It is engineering an end to democracy of economies run by real beings for the real needs of living beings. It is engineering an end to sovereignties at every level and in every form. In Indian philosophy, all beings including human beings are multilayered through multiple sheaths of energy. All beings relate to other beings through these multiple energies and flows. The outer most sheath is the annakosh, the food sheath. Next is Pranakosh, the energy sheath. Then comes Manomayakosh, the mind sheath. The Vijanamayakosh, or discernment sheath. The innermost is the Anandamayakosh, the sheath of bliss.

Patent 060606 is an embodiment of the philosophy of Adharma, of an anti life, anti human imagination. And as in all ages, Dharma has to awaken when Adharma tries to rule and dominate. Our Vijanana, our knowledge, our intelligence, our discernment needs to guide us to not be trapped by the real but invisible prisons being created through “virtual” constructs.

The future of being human cannot be left to Microsoft and Patent Offices, just as we did not leave the future of Biodiversity in the hands of Monsanto and the Poison Cartel.

33 years ago, when I heard the Poison Cartel lay bare their criminal imagination, of wanting to own seeds, I took a pledge to dedicate my life to protection of our biodiversity and Seed Freedom.

On this Biodiversity Day, I pledge to dedicate the rest of my life to the protection of all life, the freedom of all beings, and Human Freedom.


TRANSCEND Member Prof. Vandana Shiva is a physicist, ecofeminist, philosopher, activist, and author of more than 20 books and 500 papers. She is the founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, and has campaigned for biodiversity, conservation and farmers’ rights, winning the Right Livelihood Award [Alternative Nobel Prize] in 1993. She is executive director of the Navdanya Trust.




Go to Original – navdanya.org

The Zyprexa Papers: Big Pharma Meets Big Diagnosis, Big Courts, and Big Psychiatric Hospitals

This book chronicles the battles on behalf of Bill Bigley, the psychiatric patient whose ordeal by Eli Lilly's product made possible the exposure of the Zyprexa Papers. Written by James B. Gottstein, Esq. and published in 2020, The Zyprexa Papers are crucial documents in the fight to hold Eli Lilly accountable for hiding harm caused by Zyprexa and their illegal marketing of it.

It was just a normal day before Dr. David Egilman called me out of the blue on November 28, 2006. The days are short that time of year in Anchorage, Alaska, and it was getting dark by mid-afternoon. Dr. Egilman told me he had been hired as an expert witness by one of the law firms representing patients who had taken Zyprexa and contracted diabetes or other metabolic problems. He wanted to know about documents relating to Zyprexa I might have. In truth, he was feeling me out to see whether I might be willing to subpoena him, so he could legally send me secret documents. These documents revealed the pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly (Lilly) had from the beginning suppressed information showing Zyprexa caused these life-threatening conditions. In addition, they showed Lilly had illegally marketed this powerful and dangerous drug for use in children and the elderly. He wanted me to then send them to Alex Berenson, a reporter for The New York Times with whom he was already working on a Zyprexa exposé.

On December 17, 2006, The New York Times began a series of front-page stories about documents obtained from Alaska lawyer Jim Gottstein, showing Eli Lilly had concealed that its top-selling drug caused diabetes and other life-shortening metabolic problems. The "Zyprexa Papers," as they came to be known, also showed Eli Lilly was illegally promoting the use of Zyprexa on children and the elderly, with particularly lethal effects. Although Mr. Gottstein believes he obtained the Zyprexa Papers legally, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn decided he had conspired to steal the documents, and Eli Lilly threatened Mr. Gottstein with criminal contempt charges. In The Zyprexa Papers, Mr. Gottstein gives a riveting first-hand account of what really happened, including new details about how a small group of psychiatric survivors spread the Zyprexa Papers on the Internet untraceably. All of this within a gripping, plain-language explanation of complex legal maneuvering and his battles on behalf of Bill Bigley, the psychiatric patient whose ordeal made possible the exposure of the Zyprexa Papers.

Bill Bigley (25 Apr 2012)


Psych Rights - Getting To The Next Level
Founded in 2002, the mission of the Law Project for Psychiatric Rights (PsychRights) is to mount a strategic litigation campaign against forced psychiatric drugging and electroshock throughout the United States akin to the successful effort of the N.A.A.C.P. in the 1950's and 1960's to end legal segregation. This includes addressing the horrendous psychiatric drugging of children in the United States, especially poor children on Medicaid and in foster care. PsychRights does not view strategic litigation as the sole means to reform the U.S. mental health system into one that is helpful rather than harmful, but that it is likely a necessary component, just as desegregation litigation was in the 1950's and 1960's.


Jim Gottstein grew up in Anchorage, Alaska where his father was a prominent businessman and his mother one of the most beloved women in town. Jim was on track to go into the family grocery and real estate empire, studying for a business degree at the University of Oregon when the law found him during his required Business Law class. He didn't miss a question the entire class and realized law was a good fit. He managed to get into Harvard Law School as the only sky-diving applicant from Alaska that year.

After graduating from law school in 1978, Jim went into private practice in Anchorage with Robert M. Goldberg, primarily representing Alaska Native organizations. In 1982, he experienced a psychotic break due to sleep deprivation and was introduced first hand to the mental illness system. He was told he would be permanently mentally ill and to forget about his law career. Luckily, he escaped psychiatry and the experience led him to legal representation and other advocacy for people diagnosed with mental illness not as lucky as he. Jim opened his own law office in 1985, generally focused on business matters, and is now mostly retired from the private practice of law. In 2002, Jim founded the Law Project for Psychiatric Rights (PsychRights.org) to mount a strategic litigation campaign against forced psychiatric drugging and electroshock, and to inform the public about the counterproductive and harmful nature of the drugs and shock.


Heroes and Villains Populate the Pages of The Zyprexa Papers, by Susan Rogers, Key Update, May 18, 2020.
“The Zyprexa Papers” is a deep dive into the Bizarro World of psychiatry, Big Pharma, and the judicial system. As Jim writes, “To me, it is crystal clear locking people up and drugging them against their will is not ‘for their own good’ but instead very harmful to them. One of my goals in writing this book is to show this truth.” Mission accomplished.
David Healy, MD, Review on Samizdat Health Writer’s Co-operative, March 21, 2020.

This much is well-known. The papers have been widely distributed and have opened some peoples’ eyes. Gottstein doesn’t detail the content of these papers — what every non-person knew about the capacity of these drugs to cause diabetes, metabolic syndrome, suicidality and other problems. The fascination lies in how little of this appears to be known by the psychiatrists who might lock you and me up and inflict treatment on us and how pharma takes psychiatrists for idiots.

It’s rather like how little Germans during World War II knew about what was happening in their country. And just like German functionaries drew up specifications for drainage in vehicles to transport people to concentration camps, much as they would have done for transporting animals, so also Judge Weinstein dealing with Gottstein’s actions stuck rigidly to the legal specifications without questioning what in fact was going on. And if that sounds grimly American, everything we know about what pharma gets up to comes from legal actions in the US and a handful of lawyers like Gottstein. The rest of the world has made no contribution to what we now know.

Many people coming to this book might figure that the Bigley saga plays second fiddle to what is after all called The Zyprexa Papers. A switch from the dizzying heights of New York courtroom drama to an Alaskan backwater. But Bill Bigley’s case is the beating heart of this book. The Zyprexa papers are the bait for Gottstein’s masterly portrayal of how the system treated Bill and will treat you and anyone you know who comes into contact with it.

The Zyprexa Papers by Jim Gottstein, Eric Maisel, PhD., February 4, 2020.
"The Zyprexa Papers. Sounds like a thriller starring Denzel Washington and Julia Roberts. It’s not. It’s the riveting account of Alaska attorney Jim Gottstein's encounter with the pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly, a battle centered around Eli Lilly's wanton misuse of the drug Zyprexa."
Big Pharma Meets Big Diagnosis, Big Courts, and Big Psychiatric Hospitals, by Paula J. Caplan, PhD, Mad in America, January 31, 2020.
"Jim Gottstein’s blockbuster new book, The Zyprexa Papers, is essential reading. It should be required reading for every well-meaning friend or family member of someone who suffers emotionally, as well as for legislators who genuinely want to weed out corruption and harm."

Moral Courage and Our Common Future—A Foreword to Plague of Corruption

By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman, Children’s Health Defense
2 May 2020


“And yet, it moves!” Galileo whispered those defiant words in 1615 as he left the Roman Inquisition tribunal before which he repudiated his theory that the Earth—the immovable center of the Universe according to contemporary orthodoxy—revolves around the sun. Had he not recanted, his life would be forfeit. We like to think of Galileo’s struggles as the quaint artifact of a dark, ignorant, and tyrannical era where individuals challenged government-anointed superstitions only at grave personal risk. Dr. Judy Mikovits’ story shows that stubborn orthodoxies anointed by pharmaceutical companies and corrupt government regulators to protect power and profits remain a dominant force in science and politics.

A pioneer in the field of human retrovirology

By any standard, Dr. Judy Mikovits was among the most skilled scientists of her generation. She entered professional science from the University of Virginia with a BA degree in chemistry on June 10, 1980, as a protein chemist for the National Cancer Institute (NCI) working on a life-saving project to purify interferon. The quality of her work and her reliable flashes of genius soon propelled her to the apex of the male-dominated world of scientific research. At NCI, Mikovits began what would become a twenty-year collaboration with Dr. Frank Ruscetti, a pioneer in the field of human retrovirology. While heading up the lab of Robert Gallo in 1977, Ruscetti made scientific history by co-discovering with Bernie Poiesz the first human retrovirus, HTLV-1 (human T-cell leukemia virus). A retrovirus is a “stealth virus” that, like HIV, enters the host without alerting the immune systems.

It may then lie dormant for years without causing harm. Before killing a person, a retrovirus will usually destroy their immune system. As a result, many retroviruses cause cancer. With an escalating understanding of retrovirus behavior, the Ruscetti/ Mikovits collaboration and Mikovits’s award-winning PhD thesis from George Washington University in 1991 changed the paradigm of HIV-AIDS treatment, turning the disease from a death sentence into a manageable condition.

Integrity before personal ambition

From the outset, the most daunting obstacle to Mikovits’ career advancement was her scientific integrity. She always placed it ahead of personal ambition. Judy Mikovits never meant to wade into a public health brawl. She never considered herself a renegade or revolutionary. Judy’s relatives mainly worked in government or law enforcement. They believed in the bedrock American principles of hard work, respect for authority, and, above all, telling the truth. That backdrop made it impossible for her to abandon her high natal standards of honesty and integrity even when they became a hindrance.

After leaving NIH, she worked a stint for Upjohn—leading a project to prove the safety of the company’s blockbuster Bovine Growth Hormone. When Mikovits discovered the company’s formula could cause precancerous changes in human cell cultures, she refused direct orders from her boss to hide her discoveries. Mikovits’ revelation suggested that the ubiquitous presence of the hormone in milk could lead to breast cancer in women who drank it. Her refusal to back down precipitated her departure from Upjohn and her return to NIH and graduate school. Judy’s war on BGH eventually led to Upjohn abandoning the product.


Read Complete Text

Operation Openscript - Opening the Dialogue for Oversight on Bioethics and Bioterrorism

Operation Openscript - Opening the Dialogue for Oversight on Bioethics and Bioterrorism
Watchdog on Biodefense, bioterrorism, bioethics,
genetic engineering and biotechnology, science, and medical malfeaseance
The Story of Dirty Profit, Inhumane Weapons Development,
Science & Medical Fraud, and Illegal Testing on the Population...

A potent, developing resource. The following excerpts copied on 14 Jun 2020.

Lyme Disease, Mycoplasma, and Bioweapons Development Timeline

Bio-Threats - Vaccines & Other Dangers

Chronic Illness & Disease - 27 listed

Whistleblowers - 41 people listed

Documentaries - 47 complete films all online

Title 50 1520
WAR and NATIONAL DEFENSE. In subsection 1520 it's parameters are as follows:
Sec. 1520 - Use of human subjects for testing of chemical or biological agents by Department of Defense; accounting to Congressional committees with respect to experiments and studies; notification of local civilian officials.
Although this statute was officially repealed and gives the impression of being outlawed, they are still allowed to keep this going in times of War or National Emergency and since we have been under some form of war state or national emergency since the 1970's, this exception may have become the rule.

Mapping the Genome and Modern Genetics: Eugenics Repackaged for Modern Times

John P. Thomas, Health Impact News, 4 July 2015

This is part II of a series on the relationship between the eugenics movement and modern genetics. It examines whether true health and true happiness lie in the human genome. Are we really bound to the set of genes that we received from our parents? Or can we overcome what we were given? What are the factors that activate or deactivate certain genes? How can we control the expression of our genetic make-up to promote our health and the health of our children? Can we trust everything we hear about the benefits of genetic research?

Is there a dark side to genetics? Is there reason to suspect hidden motivations of certain groups who want us to be convinced that our genes, and only our genes, control every aspect of our health and well-being? Is it wise to believe that we have no other options than to suffer while scientists look for genetic cures for all that ails us?

The previous article reviewed the history of the eugenics movement and examined how it was given a facelift and transformed into what we now think of as the modern science of genetics. It discussed the eugenics program of Adolf Hitler that terminated the lives of eleven million men, women and children.

Hitler was strongly influenced by Darwin’s theory of evolution and by Americans who were promoting eugenics. He closely followed the teachings of university professors in the United States who were teaching eugenics and using the principles of Darwin’s theory of evolution to form a “superior” race of people in America. The previous article questioned whether there remains a link between the eugenics movement of the past and modern genetic science. Do they still share common goals?

The superior race that American eugenicists and Adolf Hitler envisioned was intended to be free of disability, poverty, and chronic illness. It was to be a “beautiful” race of people (as they saw it) that consisted of men and women with blond hair and blue eyes. They would be a select class of people who were physically perfect, physically fit, intellectually superior, and financially prosperous.

Modern eugenics does not seek to create a superior race, but it does have the potential for creating a superior class of people who will be distinguished by the absence of certain diseases, which they will call “health.” They will possess a certain set of traits that someone among them has determined to be “best” for humanity.

Both movements sought, and are seeking, to achieve high and lofty goals supposedly for our benefit. They promise to provide rapid restoration for all that ails us. They seek to improve the defects that exist in humankind and create a future in which disease, illness, and poverty will only exist in the memories of older generations, because genetic defects will have been corrected or eliminated. [1]

The previous article noted that the theory of Darwinian evolution and its implementation through eugenics disregards individual and personal choices concerning human reproduction, and it devalues human life itself. Darwinism and eugenics replace the love-based commitment between family members with allegiance to the state. They replace the worship of God with the worship of eugenic principles and evolutionary theory. They turn the hearts of the people away from valuing and protecting human life, and desensitize society to death. They teach people to accept the fact that the lives of some people must be sacrificed for the greater good of the “superior” ones who remain.

At the heart of the eugenics movement was a deep seated belief in the superiority of the white race, and the need for eliminating other races that they determined to be inferior. It called for the cleansing of the white race as well to eliminate all people and families who showed evidence of having defective genetic material (germplasm).


Read Complete Text

Eugenics in the United States Today: Are We on the Same Path Nazi Germany Followed?

John P. Thomas, Health Impact News, 27 Jun 2015

Creating an Elite Class of Super Humans

This is the first part of a two part series exploring the relationship between the controversial eugenics movement of the past and modern genetics. [Part II is here.] Eugenics was dedicated to cleansing and purifying humanity from “inferior” members with the hope of solving various social problems related to poverty, disability, and illness. To accomplish this, it sought to create a superior race of people and to use forced sterilization and extermination to eliminate future generations of defective human beings. Darwin’s theory of evolution was used to justify the practice of eugenics. Later, when eugenics fell from favor, modern genetics began to grow up from the ashes of the former movement.

When Adolf Hitler applied Darwin’s theory of evolution and the principles of eugenics to the goals of the German state, the result was the murder of eleven million men, women and children. These lives were sacrificed in the name of eugenics. Eugenicists were seeking to improve the conditions of life for humanity by creating a “superior” race of people.

The eugenics movement had a very dark side, which led to social control, loss of reproductive freedom, and the loss of life. Should we be concerned that modern genetic science might have a dark side as well? Will the fruit of genetic research be misused by ill-intentioned people to gain control over others as happened with eugenics in the past? Has modern genetics completely severed itself from its roots? Or, might it become the tool that will be used to try to create a master class of genetically superior human beings in America?

What are the deceptions and dangers of the modern genetics movement? Does true health and true happiness lie in the human genome? Are we really bound to the set of genes that we received from our parents, or can we overcome what we were given? What are the factors that activate or deactivate certain genes, and how can we control the expression of our genetic make-up to promote our health and the health of our children? What are the motivations of certain groups who want us to believe that genes control every aspect of our lives – that we have no other options than to suffer while genetic scientists look for genetic cures for all that ails us? Are we really more than our genes or is our genetic code all there is?

These questions and many more will be examined in these articles. Let’s begin by learning about the development of eugenics.


Read Complete Text

The haunted house of eugenics - An interview with Edwin Black

Lansing City Pulse, December 10, 2003

Few people knew that the United States helped to fund Nazi eugenics. In his new book, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race the award-winning author Edwin Black documents the collaboration of American corporate philanthropic organizations with Nazi Germany researchers to create a white, Nordic master race. Black has also documented the forceful sterilization of 60,000 Americans in genetic-control campaigns taking place as recently as 1900. The journalist, who is also author of the best-selling book “IBM and the Holocaust,” will speak at 5:30 p.m. Thursday, Dec. 11, in the Gold Room of the MSU Union. Sponsored by the Center for Global Culture/Great Lakes World Affairs Council, the event will be followed by a discussion with the author at Barnes & Noble in East Lansing. Daniel Sturm interviewed Black.

Nazi doctor Joseph Mengele, who did inhumane experiments with twins in Auschwitz, is a well-known horror figure. Now you tell us in “War Against the Weak” that Mengele was financed by the Rockefeller Foundation.

Rockefeller spent a great deal of money financing Nazi scientists and eugenic institutions in Germany, among them Otmar Freiherr von Vershuer. Vershuer was particularly interested in twins. With twins you could unlock the mysteries of defective reproduction, they thought, and also with twins you could discover the secret to multiplication of the master race. Vershuer sent his assistant, whose name was Joseph Mengele, into Auschwitz to finish the program originally financed by Rockefeller. But of course, Mengele went there after the war began.

Did the Rockefeller Foundation know that they were funding Nazis?

They knew it from the very beginning, because Rockefeller was funding the Nazi eugenicists throughout the entire pre-war period. Rockefeller was receiving constant letters of protest because of its open involvement with Nazi medicine.

In the first 65 years of the 20th century more than 60,000 Americans were sterilized. What was the mindset behind this?

Clearly, it is the urge to create a master race. But this urge attached itself to so many other societal movements—the women’s movement, the labor movement, the educational movement, and medical movements. Eugenics and the life science behind it infected so many other social welfare movements that it was easy to say, “we were trying to make a better society, we were trying to use our educational dollars better, we were trying to wipe out tuberculosis.” While what they really wanted to do was make the “problem people” disappear.

This was the time when agronomists became capable of breeding better strains of corn, and doctors similarly bent on breeding a eugenically superior race. But weren’t doctors and supporters of eugenics aware of the inhumane effects of their acts?

It was originally mainly a non-medical movement. It was a movement of animal breeders, agronomists, anthropologists, and these types of people, who were trying to engineer a society. In the beginning there was very little medical backing for it, unless you want to include psychology and psychiatry. Obviously, there were great surgeons who later supported eugenics, including sterilization.

You write that many people who were sterilized never discovered the truth until decades later.

Black: That’s right. Of the 60,000 Americans who were forcibly sterilized, many underwent the procedure without knowing what was happening. Typically, they would ask a young hillbilly girl: Do you like the movies? And she’d say yes. Do you like the funnies? And she’d say yes. Would you mind if we did something to help out your health? And she’d say yes. She wouldn’t know what was happening. The incision would be very small, the operation would take just a couple of minutes, and she would be sterilized.

Why did it take so long to uncover the relationship between Rockefeller/Carnegie and Nazi Germany?

To a large degree, it takes the mindset of an investigative reporter who thinks like a criminal and acts like a cop. The historian will ask for permission, while people like me start when we’re told “no.” When lawyers and other entities tried to stop me from seeing the records, they even claimed doctor-patient confidentiality for Joseph Mengele! That’s when we get going. I have a large team of reporters, researchers, historians, and writers. People are welcome to volunteer at “researchers needed” on my Web site, at edwinblack.com.

In the 1930s and 40s, the University of Michigan Medical School in Ann Arbor was an outspoken proponent of eugenics. Can you tell us more about Michigan’s role in the eugenics movement?

Michigan was one of 27 states with eugenic sterilization laws. Doctors in Michigan forcibly sterilized more than 2,388 people by 1943, and 3,786 by 1964. In Indiana, where sterilization began, there were 1,231 cases.

For many the Nazi movement seems like a dark age that’s long gone. But you say there’s a new eugenics movement on the horizon, as great as its precursor. Companies fear that insuring people predisposed to “certain genetic effects” would increase their costs.

Yes. It’s no longer based upon racist dogma and national flags, it is more based upon the economic worth of an individual, globalization, and the profit margin an individual can offer the corporate world. It will come in the form of insurance exclusions and employment denials. This is why the anti-genetic discrimination act has just passed in the Senate and is waiting for approval in the House.

So that’s a good thing, isn’t it?

It’s a good start. But human engineering is so globalized and high-velocity a science that it is preceding far faster than any local jurisdiction can keep up with it.

Your give the example of a Quebec man who died in an automobile crash, but his life insurance payout was canceled when the company learned that he was born in a region with a high rate of a degenerative disease that causes a debilitating relaxation of the muscles. How far away are we from this scenario?

This was a test case, but the insurance company told me they intend to implement it. This company even said that they would cancel death benefits in automobile collisions because of smoking. We are not far away from it at all. This approach is now being advocated and implemented on an ever-increasing rate. The insurance world says very clearly that they cannot survive unless they rewrite the rules. They originally were redlining, then they were green lining, and now they are gene lining.

This Civilization Is Finished - Conversations on the end of Empire—and what lies beyond

Rupert Read and Samuel Alexander (2019)

I have come to the conclusion in the last few years that this civilisation is going down. It will not last. It cannot, because it shows almost no sign of taking the extreme climate crisis—let alone the broader ecological crisis—for what it is: a long global emergency, an existential threat. This industrial-growthist civilisation will not achieve the Paris climate accord goals;[2] and that means that we will most likely see 3-4 degrees of global over-heat at a minimum, and that is not compatible with civilisation as we know it.

The stakes of course are very, very high, because the climate crisis puts the whole of what we know as civilisation at risk. By ‘this civilisation’ I mean the hegemonic civilisation of globalised capitalism—sometimes called ‘Empire’—which today governs the vast majority of human life on Earth. Only some indigenous civilisations/societies and some peasant cultures lie outside it (although every day the integration deepens and expands). Even those societies and cultures may well be dragged down by Empire, as it fails, if it fells the very global ecosystem that is mother to us all. What I am saying, then, is that this civilisation will be transformed.[3] As I see things, there are three broad possible futures that lie ahead:

(1) This civilisation could collapse utterly and terminally, as a result of climatic instability (leading for instance to catastrophic food shortages as a probable mechanism of collapse), or possibly sooner than that, through nuclear war, pandemic, or financial collapse leading to mass civil breakdown. Any of these are likely to be precipitated in part by ecological/climate instability, as Darfur and Syria were. Or

(2) This civilisation (we) will manage to seed a future successor-civilisation(s), as this one collapses. Or

(3) This civilisation will somehow manage to transform itself deliberately, radically and rapidly, in an unprecedented manner, in time to avert collapse.[4]

Read Complete Book

World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity 1992 and 2017 and beyond ...

4 Nov 2019 — Third Warning

— Press Release: World scientists declare climate emergency, establish global indicators for effective action OSU, 4 Nov 2019
— Ripple, W.J., Wolf, D, et al. “World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency,” (WSWoaCE) Bio Science, biz088, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz088
Alliance of World Scientists - 23,000 subscribing members from 180 countries; WSEoaCE 2019 Condensed Version
— “Climate crisis: 11,000 scientists warn of ‘untold suffereing’ - Statement sets out ‘vital signs’ as indicators of magnitude of the climate emergency, Most countries’ climate plans ‘totally inadequate’ - experts,” Damian Carrington, The Guardian 5 Nov 2019

3 Dec 2018: Stuart Scott speaking at COP-24 on
World Scientists’s Warning to Humanity
1992 and 2017 and beyond ...

The World’s Scientists’ Warning to Humanity actually dates back to 1992 when the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, DC, published this paper signed by 1700 scientists, including over half of the then-living Nobel laureates.

The first sentence says it all: “Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment.” And the warning was that “We, the undersigned senior members of the world’s scientific community hereby warn all humanity of what lies ahead. A great change in our stewardship of the earth and of life on it is required if vast human misery is to be avoided and our global home on this planet is not to be irretrievably mutilated.”

Very strong language. So did we change? Not much. Unfortunately our leaders did not take heed. Other things were pre-emptive in their minds than taking care of our common home.

Fast forward, 25 years in late 2017, another group of scientists published this peer-reviewed scientific paper in BioScience.

At its publication, it had been signed by over 15,000 scientists from around the world and an additional 8,000 or so have signed it since. It holds records in terms of the number of scientists who’ve signed it in citations. It is a very, very, powerful statement. But again, it does not seem to be that we are taking heed.

It made reference to the first Scientists’ Warning and this one was called: “A Second Notice”. My own feeling is that it should have been called: “Final Notice”. I’m not sure we’ll get another chance.

So, I’d like to go in very briefly to the ecological stressors that were cited by this Second Warning, the second notice.

Read/See transcript with inlined images

Between the Devil and the Green New Deal

We cannot legislate and spend our way out of catastrophic global warming
Jasper Bernes, commune, 25 Apr 2019

From space, the Bayan Obo mine in China, where 70 percent of the world’s rare earth minerals are extracted and refined, almost looks like a painting. The paisleys of the radioactive tailings ponds, miles long, concentrate the hidden colors of the earth: mineral aquamarines and ochres of the sort a painter might employ to flatter the rulers of a dying empire.

To meet the demands of the Green New Deal, which proposes to convert the US economy to zero emissions, renewable power by 2030, there will be a lot more of these mines gouged into the crust of the earth. That’s because nearly every renewable energy source depends upon non-renewable and frequently hard-to-access minerals: solar panels use indium, turbines use neodymium, batteries use lithium, and all require kilotons of steel, tin, silver, and copper. The renewable-energy supply chain is a complicated hopscotch around the periodic table and around the world. To make a high-capacity solar panel, one might need copper (atomic number 29) from Chile, indium (49) from Australia, gallium (31) from China, and selenium (34) from Germany. Many of the most efficient, direct-drive wind turbines require a couple pounds of the rare-earth metal neodymium, and there’s 140 pounds of lithium in each Tesla.

It’s not for nothing that coal miners were, for much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the very image of capitalist immiseration—it’s exhausting, dangerous, ugly work. Le Voreux, “the voracious one”—that’s what Émile Zola names the coal mine in Germinal, his novel of class struggle in a French company town. Capped with coal-burning smokestacks, the mine is both maze and minotaur all in one, “crouching like some evil beast at the bottom of its lair . . . puffing and panting in increasingly slow, deep bursts, as if it were struggling to digest its meal of human flesh.” Monsters are products of the earth in classical mythology, children of Gaia, born from the caves and hunted down by a cruel race of civilizing sky gods. But in capitalism, what’s monstrous is earth as animated by those civilizing energies. In exchange for these terrestrial treasures—used to power trains and ships and factories—a whole class of people is thrown into the pits. The warming earth teems with such monsters of our own making—monsters of drought and migration, famine and storm. Renewable energy is no refuge, really. The worst industrial accident in the history of the United States, the Hawk’s Nest Incident of 1930, was a renewable energy disaster. Drilling a three-mile-long inlet for a Union Carbide hydroelectric plant, five thousand workers were sickened when they hit a thick vein of silica, filling the tunnel with blinding white dust. Eight hundred eventually died of silicosis. Energy is never “clean,” as Muriel Rukeyser makes clear in the epic, documentary poem she wrote about Hawk’s Nest, “The Book of the Dead.” “Who runs through the electric wires?” she asks. “Who speaks down every road?” The infrastructure of the modern world is cast from molten grief.

Dotted with “death villages” where crops will not fruit, the region of Inner Mongolia where the Bayan Obo mine is located displays Chernobylesque cancer rates. But then again, the death villages are already here. More of them are coming if we don’t do something about climate change. What matter is a dozen death villages when half the earth may be rendered uninhabitable? What matter the gray skies over Inner Mongolia if the alternative is turning the sky an endless white with sulfuric aerosols, as last-ditch geoengineering scenarios imagine? Moralists, armchair philosophers, and lesser-evilists may try to convince you that these situations resolve into a sort of trolley-car problem: do nothing and the trolley speeds down the track toward mass death. Do something, and you switch the trolley onto a track where fewer people die, but where you are more actively responsible for their deaths. When the survival of millions or even billions hangs in the balance, as it surely does when it comes to climate change, a few dozen death villages might seem a particularly good deal, a green deal, a new deal. But climate change doesn’t resolve into a single trolley-car problem. Rather, it’s a planet-spanning tangle of switchyards, with mass death on every track.

It’s not clear we can even get enough of this stuff out of the ground, however, given the timeframe. Zero-emissions 2030 would mean mines producing now, not in five or ten years. The race to bring new supply online is likely to be ugly, in more ways than one, as slipshod producers scramble to cash in on the price bonanza, cutting every corner and setting up mines that are dangerous, unhealthy, and not particularly green. Mines require a massive outlay of investment up front, and they typically feature low return on investment, except during the sort of commodity boom we can expect a Green New Deal to produce. It can be a decade or more before the sources are developed, and another decade before they turn a profit.

Continue Reading

"We Charge Genocide" The 1951 Black Lives Matter Campaign

by Susan Glenn
Mapping American Social Movements Project
University of Washington

Almost seventy years ago, the Civil Rights Congress (affiliated with the Communist Party) engaged in a campaign to hold the United States accountable for genocide against African Americans. Detailed within are the 152 incidents that the Civil Rights Congress offered as evidence in support of this claim. These killings of unarmed Black men and women by police and by lynch mobs took place between 1945 and 1951. They are displayed on the interactive map and detailed one by one in a descriptive list below.

We Charge Genocide: The Historic Petition to the United Nations for Relief from a Crime of The United States against the Negro People (1951) is as relevant today as it was in its own time. The seventy-eight page petition was delivered to the United Nations in Paris in December 1951. The petition sought to demonstrate that the government of the United States was in violation of the U.N. Genocide Convention. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide had been adopted in 1948 in the aftermath of the Holocaust.

The Genocide Convention defined “genocide” as “acts committed to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, or religious group as such.” These “acts” included “killing members of the group,” “causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group,” and “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” In addition to the “attempt to commit genocide,” other punishable offenses defined by the Convention included “conspiracy to commit genocide,” “direct and public incitement to commit genocide,” and “complicity in genocide.” Another distinctive feature of the Genocide Convention was that it made the crime of genocide a punishable offense under international law whether it was committed “in time of peace or in time of war.”

We Charge Genocide, which was produced by William Patterson and the Civil Rights Congress, charged that under the legal rubric laid out by the United Nations, the United States, which failed to enforce its own Constitution, must be punished under international law for its genocidal acts against African Americans.

In his Introduction to the petition, Patterson emphasized the relationship between Hitler’s crimes against the Jews and America’s crimes against African Americans. “Out of the inhuman black ghettos of American cities, out of the cotton plantations of the South, comes this record of mass slayings on the basis of race, of lives deliberately warped and distorted by the willful creation of conditions making for premature death, poverty and disease. It is a record that calls aloud for condemnation, for an end to these terrible injustices that constitute a daily and ever-increasing violation of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.”

We Charge Genocide documented 152 recent killings, and 344 other crimes of violence against African Americans and other human rights abuses committed in the United States against its own citizens from 1945-1951. This represented only a small sample, as most crimes against black people went unrecorded. The evidence presented in the petition had been culled from the black press, including the Pittsburgh Courier, The Black Dispatch, the Amsterdam News, and from reports by the Tuskegee Institute, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the American Jewish Congress Commission on Social Action, the Urban League, the American Council on Race Relations, the American Civil Liberties Union, the labor press, and hearings by city, state and federal agencies. The petition also emphasized that countless African Americans died each year because they did not have the same quality health care, jobs, education, and housing as whites. Because of their substandard existence, the petition charged, the average life expectancy of African Americans was cut short by eight years.

Ninety-four individuals signed the petition. William Patterson flew to Paris in 1951 to personally deliver it to members of the United Nations Committee on Human Rights. The petition received favorable publicity overseas but was denounced in the United States and disavowed by other civil rights groups. When he returned to the U.S., Patterson had his passport revoked by the State Department and was banned from further travel abroad. Patterson was a Communist as were many other signatories to the petition and in the fierce Cold War climate of 1951 We Charge Genocide was considered a dangerous document.

Below are details on 152 incidents as recorded in the petition. The information has not been independently verified. The incidents are displayed on the interactive map and below that described in a chronological list.

Continue Reading

Considering Systemic Collapse and Our Profound Dependence on Electricity

Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing
and rightdoing there is a field.
I’ll meet you there.
— Rumi

It becomes ever more difficult to understand how this way of life that depends on unlimited energy can survive the staggering demands continuing to be made of Mother Earth and all our relatives. In roughly the past 100 years “first world” cultures have become utterly dependent on titanic and continuous supplies of power, first-and-foremost electric power. For decades, the sheer magnitude of increasing coal, wood (so-called biomass), gas, and uranium -fueled power generation plant operations threatens the health and very survival of all Mother Earth’s offspring, including humanity.

Given that at this point (December 2019), there is no indication of preparing to slow down, much less putting the brakes on the rapacious and insatiable 24/7 profit imperative of the global stock market, a reasoned assessment of the most likely future timeline is what Oren Lyons described almost 3 decades ago at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. Back then he laid out the “very serious situation of control factor and of course lack of ethics on the part of business internationally.” He described speaking with many CEOs of the largest corporations who, although they have families and are concerned, “during the day, at their work, they’re destroying the world. And they don’t have options.”...

Here we are, 27-plus years later. What has changed? Will a genuine and necessary sea-change in the direction of how we collectively think reach the requisite critical mass to even begin to actually slow down production and expenditure of energy? The just-completed COP-25 meeting indicates our system of corporate control/governance has, once more, not ‘seen the light.’ The writing has been on the wall for a long time. The majority of signs still indicate “business as usual” will continue until life as we know it collapses once this system reaches and impacts the looming-ever-larger blank wall.

Continue Reading