nanotechnology

Technocracy XVI: A Post Human World? (2)

“One can’t deal with irrational luddites unless one understands them.”

– a transhumanist


It seems it’s not possible to be against some of the fundamental principles upon which transhumanism stands without being tarred with the Luddite brush.  This is despite the fact that Luddites were absolutely right in their fears, in that such an enforced change would rip out the heart of community and replace it with Blakes’ “Dark Satanic Mills” of the Industrial Revolution. Ultimately, it reinforced slave labour, poverty, class divides, the globalisation of the factory line and environmental destruction on a grand scale. This would develop into the corporatist-collectivist Three Establishment Model that would enforce a cartel banking system of debt sustained by perpetual war. The level of technological sophistication has advanced but the transhumanism revolution is based on the same mindset: Machines will do it all. It signifies “progress.”

Progress for who and by what means?

One might also say: “One can’t deal with irrational transhumanists unless one understands them – as tiresome as that may be.” (The last bit is optional).

TRANSHUMANThe Ultimate Hubris of Deux Ex Machina? | © unknown

Looking back at the themes in previous posts the reader may see that transhumanism and technocracy are potentially two sides of the same spinning coin which has yet to settle. Military, government, corporate and family dynasties are (s)warming to this new SMART vision of the world, a large percentage of whom follow specific esoteric traditions of the negative “left hand path” in occult fraternities. They believe themselves to be Divine Kings or mini-Gods in human form destined to rule over their inferior minions. It is largely for this reason that popular culture is now awash with transhumanist philosophy as part of a natural excitement surrounding the future of this technology and more covertly, as a continuance of social engineering care of Rockefeller social science and its numerous offshoots. Transhumanism is extremely important to the Elite despite what appears to be a hackneyed interpretation of biology and consciousness. Indeed, blurring the boundaries between man and machine is essential to the success of these extraordinary technologies.

The acronym “GRIN” is now commonly used to describe educational technology, information technology, nanotechnology, biotechnology, cognitive science, robotics, and artificial intelligence, all of which taken individually or as a generic platform have the capability to utterly transform societies. Ray Kurzweil agrees and recently told the Foresight Institute’s Eighth Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology: “By the end of this century, I don’t think there will be a clear distinction between human and machine,” [1] There is also the Harvard research team led by Professor of Chemistry Charles M. Lieber who has: “… developed a system for creating nanoscale ‘scaffolds’ that can be seeded with cells that grow into tissue.” Lieber reiterates the limited effectiveness of present monitoring and interaction of living systems but he believes: “Ultimately, this is about merging tissue with electronics in a way that it becomes difficult to determine where the tissue ends and the electronics begin.” [2]

If that fills you with dread then you might be holding on to the quaint notion that consciousness and the concept of immortality lie outside the limitations of the mind and body, let alone a bio-computer. Does that mean we cannot utilise technology to extend life as an add-on elixir fixed to matter alone? Perhaps not. Yet, it could be said that adding machine to flesh in an endless loop of self-assembly lines until the body is subsumed is a symptom of a human frailty; an official Culture of addiction and death as nihilistic void. In other words, the attachment to an idea – especially if it promises so much and casts out fear of the unknown – is tantalising beyond measure but that does not mean it is somehow anything more than another techno-religious overlay to assuage instinctual fears.  For transhumanists that’s probably a good thing until the complexity of machine literally outstrips biology. For with greater and greater complexity the more probability there is for consciousness to ignite. Nonetheless, for many, there is still a natural disquiet about the whole notion of the human BE-ing, with its mind made manifest in human form, left on the hard shoulder (or hard drive) of the information superhighway.

Rather than an obsession with what can be augmented and improved in the world of matter, ancient wisdom taught us to look within first, one might say to the world of “Spirit”, in order to change ourselves, to know ourselves and that this would naturally be reflected in external reality; building a centre within through which the Creative Universe may flow, unimpeded by implanted cortical processors and nanotubes. If we live from the assumption that the brain is all there is, if one’s belief system demands that there is no consciousness outside the friction of a man-made machine, where intelligence, intuition, biology (and countless anomalies) is merely a Darwinian by-product of selfish genes… then hitching a ride on the sparks created from such an effort may be as good as it gets. Where it will lead you however, might depend upon your essential “frequency” of awareness rather than the ever greater nanoengineering of your nervous system.

Is it possible to create a synthetic mimicry of soul growth? Is uploading the mind the same as uploading the soul? Do most transhumanists give credence to such a thing? Or is it merely a superstitious myth to be outgrown so that we may merge into something more akin to matter?

History tell us the latter comes by stealth every time, deceiving those whose bull-shit-o-meter isn’t sufficiently honed.

abstract-transhumanism-1162x1200-wallpaper_www-wall321-com_33

Illustration on Transhumanism and SMART society

Central to transhumanism is the idea that humanity is so imperfect as to be a bad evolutionary joke. Only machines can tip the balance towards the perfection we all supposedly long for, neatly packaged with the belief that man and toaster can be fused in perfect triadic harmony. Happiness and even hedonism are often seen as prerequisites for the transhumanist hipster. Aligned with the bio-ethical school of abolitionism which proposes the use of psychopharmaceuticals and genetic engineering to eliminate the possibility of painful sensations and emotions, we are again harking back to the work of Aldous Huxley’s use of certain drugs as a form of synthetic “paradise engineering.” Creating a form of emotional doping means that the ability to truly distinguish between objective and subjective reality becomes blurred. It becomes a) an escape into an inner comfort zone that uses a synthetic façade to dull the senses and cover up the human condition rather than confronting it. Or b) hot-wires the brain to create short-cuts to multidimensional pathways which may leave the mind reeling from such a premature exposure, though many have been changed positively from such revelations its a bit of a crap-shoot. Either way, this is useful to those overseeing a Technocracy. A neuro-pharmacological bind to virtual realities which by default, becomes Reality might be a rather convenient way to defang a generation of spiritual thinkers who already have the potential to ignite this Hieros Gamos, (the marriage of feminine/masculine) the alchemical seeds within, without recourse to merging with a fractal replication of low grade desire…

Perhaps part of humanity’s destiny is not to ping-pong from states of unhappiness to happiness but to go beyond this duality. Perhaps it is the case that for the human species to truly learn, suffering is part of our sojourn here on earth. When did anyone ever grow long-term wisdom from an artificially induced, state-mandated happiness? Most of the extraordinary creative brilliance has come from the “Dark Nights of the Soul” yet would these examples of creativity have had the chance to manifest under the philosophy of transhumanist hedonism that wishes to banish every shadow in favour of a subjective, synthetic perfection?

The drug culture of the 1960s and beyond may have led to spiritual revelation for many but it never reached practical application of that knowledge for the majority. In this sense, there is some cross-over between transhumanism and the less welcoming aspects of the New Age movement. The same lip-service is given to developing character and concepts of “Self” but little practical application above technology as saviour can be evidenced. Indeed, the very notion of what it means to struggle and forge a new human being within seems to be lost on transhumanists. This brand of transformation offers a complete “reboot” and upgrade – even a total refurbishment of the lowly organic.

Surely, instead of identifying exclusively with the external world and the technological horizons of urban life (which was already thoroughly disconnected with the natural world) they lose what it means to be biologically human. We may not need foreign bodies of nano-bots in the brain to realise our inherent potential because the latter may be beyond the whole idea of matter itself. Matter as tool, gross materiality as a symbol of higher dimensions, but not one to indulge and join. Unless that is, you choose the downward path of primal matter.

Primo_Posthuman Transhuman Body Prototype authored and designed by Natasha Vita-More (1997; 2009; 2012).

The assumption that we can simply adapt the human mind – dare we say, Spirit – to the parameters of a machine and assume that such an adaptation is “destiny” appears to display a “little picture” view of human potential whilst claiming the opposite. It may well be that the concept of evolution exists at many levels of perception, seen and unseen. After all, if you can get a tattoo, why not pay for a chip to be embedded in your brain so that you can be just like Keanu Reeves and download a karate program – eh viola! Instant learning. If you happen to be wealthy then your child’s education will move closer to brain-chip upgrades than any real notion of deep understanding and effort. Unpleasant memories? Just indulge in some cosmetic neurology and tinker around with the brain so that you can delete all the icky parts of your life you’d rather not remember, even though this is what makes us human and helps us build wisdom. The holographic nature of the brain and its plasticity also calls into question the spiritual efficacy of such augmentation. When non-local becomes local, does this root us to matter or as transhumanists claim, bootstrap us away from it into higher dimensions? Seems like we are back to the short cut route of psychopharmaceuticals.

As stated above, the more complex an organism whether made from circuits, flesh or combination of both, it is only a matter of time before consciousness develops and thus self-awareness. It may even be possible that there are no barriers to the seeding of sentience. However, the quality of that consciousness is the key issue. Once we are all plugged into SMART society we will be free to push our virtual reality to untold potentials – just as long as we’re plugged into the mainframe and suitably “modified and “enhanced” so that we can accommodate all that extra “intelligence.” Yet, enormously intelligent is surely not the same as enlightened. It just represents computational power. If that’s disbursed through a virtual matrix wired up to the same pathocratic visions, then all circuits and chips will lead to a technocracy characterised by yet another manifestation of neo-feudalism.

What is emerging is a cult of transhumanism which gives a bad name to technological progress because it offers a wholly simplistic view of the human being, while appealing to the biocentric narcissism. When you are divorced from healthy psychological living – which, to various degrees most of us are – no amount of wishful thinking will derive wisdom from external modalities grafted onto flesh or tapping into the personality – even dreams – no matter how efficient and certain such an environment may be. Nature’s unpredictability and the sticky, messy earthiness of organic life has a connection with the human condition, perhaps through our very DNA which is made up of exactly the same qualities that cannot be reduced down to rigid, silicon-based parameters, whatever the touted sophistication.

>Regardless of the tenuous link to “silicon as Nature” the latter will always find a way to make the seemingly perfect, imperfect in order to adhere to its Universal-Cosmic program of learning through friction and the experience of opposites. Rather than “improving” human beings, the net result may actually take us further down the road to techno-psychopathy and the degradation of what makes us human: the development of emotions and conscience.

Technology in this context has implications for the conception and act of creativity. When everyone can download a program to “paint” and click a button to “compose” everyone will be an artist/engineer but entirely divorced from originality and thus individuality. We will all begin to think and act the same way without having mastered the art of living through experience which is necessarily a slow process of building quality. If everything is at our fingertips, where is the effort and friction that creates new pathways of learning? We may have an increase in optimum efficiency and sensation at the expense of deeper feeling and the spark of original thought. With such an all-encompassing hard drive to implement a massive mainframe of effortless and instant technical know-how where does the impetus come from to challenge our self-satisfaction and self-importance? Tension and resistance is not about a puritanical masochism but the lodestar of creativity which may ultimately go beyond humans’ technological constructs.

extant-hberry

“EXTANT” (2013) CBS TV series produced by Steven Spielberg and starring Halle Berry. This is the usual fusion of Artifical Intelligence and Extraterrestrial life and government projects. The propaganda is easy to read as it is in most of Spielberg’s films and TV series. The message is overwhelmingly in favour of technologically advanced aliens, loveable transhumanist lab workers, cutesy androids and that we are all rather ignorant and hurtful if we think otherwise.

Nature and art are reflecting more and more the replacement of a buffered and synthetic reality where the subjective (ignorance, illusion, self-deception, Non-Being) is God rather than striving to know (Objective truth, Love, Knowledge, Being). All artists will continue to create but they will do so not from any intrinsic connection to objective reality but from a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy. This is the nature of replication. It’s wonderful for uniformity and functionality but lacks originality. It is necessarily divorced from the purely organic which ancient and modern wisdom alike tells us has a power or “chi” that is rooted in the bio-rhythmic cycles of Nature.

That does not mean that extraordinary new art forms cannot be born in virtual reality and new technology but cognitive roots must surely source their inspiration from the original as far as is possible. Otherwise, it can so easily lead to the homogenisation of “talent” where mediocrity rules, as explored in Official Culture. Inspiration and creativity demand the friction of experience tied to an organic emotional resonance; a direct contact with the elements of Earth, fire, air and water as a living, breathing system of  unmediated resonance. Just as social networks and technology are leading to definite benefits of networking there is also clear cognitive and neurological impairment in the young as well as increasing isolation and depression as a result of living our lives through mediated technology i.e. real-time separation through technological barriers as opposed to real-time contact.  It is the path of the alchemical shaman meeting the archetype of the trickster that lures you into lessons for soul growth, learning that shocks you awake, not by further augmenting our already inflated emotional buffers.

transhumanism-pop-culture1Transhumanism in popular culture

What of death?

Transhumanist philosophy, while rejecting religion, seems to embrace an evangelism against death as the archetypal grim reaper rather than a release and liberation; an aberration rather than the natural consequence of birth. The decay and renewal is part of organic life and it is the belief that we are separate from the natural world and not in control that distils a potent fear into an ideology that is supposedly sophisticated, but could just be an intellectually-heavy rationalisation stuck with software and hardware as insects to fly-paper. A techno-spiritual salvation as protection offers a short-term relief from uncertainty and eventual death of the body that lies behind it.

Freud would have been proud.

Antoine Wiertz Une tete de mort

“Une tete de mort” By Antoine Wiertz (1806-1865)

After all, a human being is not a computer though it may share many characteristics. As stated, the brain has remarkable plasticity and can change and grow according to an almost holographic template. We are made up of a microcosmic soup of infinite complexity at the cellular, molecular neuropsychological and perhaps even multi-dimensional level of consciousness. In this sense, is not transhumanism highly reductionist in its approach to social problems and their solutions? If so, implicit in these desires is the need for a fear-based immortality. Indefinite life-spans are to be engineered by transporting brain and mind (because the brain is the mind in the transhumanist reality) to a non-biological form. It is this same Social Darwinist assumption that the psychological sub-strata of all humans are alike and if we just manipulate the mass mind into a technological cure-all, everything will be rosy. Consciousness studies, neurology, quantum physics and the nature of awareness outside of the human body doesn’t even enter the picture.

With psychological reductionism aside, a total absence of psychopathy awareness handicaps any movement from the outset, whatever the perceived potential. Moreover, psychopathic personalities have no capacity for higher emotion and are ideally suited to the very technological accoutrements currently being pushed. If you have no conscience, no capacity for higher emotion and seek more and more sophisticated means from which to extract your “food”, what better way than to take your predation to the next level via high-end technology ? Yet, even here, the optimism of normal humanity is so in love with gadgetry that, with the best of intentions, this may be one Pandora’s Box that will be very difficult to close even halfway.

As Hadas Elber stated in her essay “Visions of Humanity between the post-human and the Non-Human.”:

“Contemporary history has been plagued by attempts to cure humanity of its schisms. The Third Reich, the Soviet Union and the Cultural Revolution in China were all ideological projects devoted to abolishing contradiction from the human subject and thus reconstituting him as the harmonious post-human. Whether or not these projects were faithful to Nietzsche’s original vision remains a matter of debate, but clearly they drew upon his tropes of human disease and post-human salvation.” [3]

The transcendent super-human as ideology is essential to this futurism and therefore doomed, precisely because of this  brand of hubris. If you have an external salvation there is no need for any sacrifice or faith which is where an inverted alchemy comes in. Sacrifice and faith is distorted to follow its shadow side. (More on this later).

As part of yet another curative attempt on behalf of this post-human harmony, early 2015 saw a landmark in human genetic modification. Despite significant scientific, ethical, and legal objections,the United Kingdom became the first country to allow human germline modification, genetic changes of which will be passed on to future generations. germline genetic modification allows “three-person in vitro fertilization,” which combines genetic material from two women and a man. Aside from giving more women the chance to have children – a laudable goal indeed – Marcy Darnovsky and Jessica Cussins of the Centre for Genetics and Society (CGS) highlighted the wide-ranging implications of what this really means:

“Genetic-engineering techniques now being developed, including “precision gene editing,” soon may enable specific changes to nuclear DNA in embryos that would directly influence specific inherited traits. How do we ensure that we don’t sleepwalk into a world of biotechnological eugenics in which genetic alterations or “enhancements,” driven by parental preference or fertility industry marketing, exacerbate existing social inequalities?” [4]

The answer is: we don’t. The genie is already out of the box.

geneticen.1Transhumanists are liberally sprinkled throughout the NSA and the DARPA team. Turning the human being into a programmable machine has long been the goal of the Elite, after all. Now it seems, they may have their wish by digitising our very DNA. With the usual preambles of “protection” “pollution control” and “greater healthcare” the White House gave tacit approval to the manipulation of DNA in the bid to create new life-forms. Of special note is the J. Craig Venter Institute which rivals Ray Kurzweil’s soaring optimism for automation and post human weirdness. Venter is a leading scientist in the field of gene mapping which has the omnipresence potential to merge with the surveillance state and the growing DNA database. Indeed, Venter’s goal is to plug into the Internet of Things in order to provide everyone with access to instant vaccines and “tele-transport medicine” via:

“… a box attached to a computer that would receive DNA sequences over the internet to synthesise proteins, viruses and even living cells.” He explains: “It could, for example, fill a prescription for insulin, provide flu vaccine during a pandemic or even produce phage viruses targeted to fight antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

On the more fanciful side, Venter also imagines the ability to transport the information to colonists on Mars, but even that apparently can’t be completely brushed aside. As he clearly states, “‘This isn’t a fantasy look at the future. We are doing the future.”  [5]

It is not the overall hubris that is worrying since that has always been an all too human frailty. It is the choice of a singular perception, this “doing the future” as Promethean benefactor. It can only become tied to the same 0.00001%” who would use it just as they have a fiat currency, television, media and factory lines of the past. It is here that normality swiftly becomes pathology before we have had time to blink. Recall one time Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff, Karl Rove, who in 2004, a few weeks before the election of puppet psychopath George W. Bush had this to say about journalist Ron Suskind and others who might consider truth rather important:

Guys like [Suskind] were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” … “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”  [6]

A pathologically egotistical and reflexive call to action that brushes aside objective reality in favour of stuffing the Creative Universe into their own tiny, subjective perceptions of reality. It is akin to much of the New Age philosophy of Create-your-own-Reality meme and mirrors the tunnel vision of transhumanists. If Venter and others like him see life as nothing more than a software program so, of course, that’s where the trajectory will take us. Unfortunately, we will all be sucked into that “future” as defined by technocrats and genetic engineers who see Nature and the Cosmos as a laboratory specimen to be broken up and fragmented into constituent parts in order to be manipulated and “improved.”

When man and machine can’t be distinguished or separated will that mean that timeless, unbounded consciousness is “upgraded”? Perhaps the quality of consciousness is merely another analogue of Wi-Fi, and we the physical GWEN towers of its radiation. All we need are greater and greater upgrades to a techtopian perfection which doesn’t exist….

transformers-3God-like Cyborg Aliens and apocalyptic effects, Michael Bay (2013)

There are many engineering visionaries waiting in the wings of bio-genetic “innovation” ready to fuse man to a synthetic biology. Men such as George Church who display the same nonchalant, eugenic inevitability as the eco-fascist who sees the culling of a few million people as part of the same fateful Directive. Yet, Church’s logic is hard to refute when set against the current inexorable drive to expand bio-ethical and technological frontiers.

He states:

“Almost all technology in this area is banned until it works,” … “In vitro fertilization was banned, and now it is immoral to deny an infertile couple their birth-right to have a child produced by their bodies. At some point, someone will come up with an airtight argument as to why they should have a cloned child. At that point, cloning will be acceptable. At that point, people will already be choosing traits for their children. What politician will tell a parent that they can’t spend their hard-earned money on getting an extra 50 SAT points for their child as long as it’s safe?” [7]

ChimeraAnd if you are busy cloning your mind to upload into NASDAQ listed avatar it is hardly likely at this stage that cloning one’s synthetic offspring will prove morally challenging. Ethics and morality are already undergoing a strengthening in relativism which is not in accordance with what we consider to be our basic human values. Perhaps the innovations will extend to unaccountable R&D teams stretching the boundaries of stem-cell research and who indulge in the marriage of both nanotechnology, tissue and “chimeras” – named after the creatures of Greek mythology. Human stem-cells added to animal foetuses are taking place under federal mandated programs. With no guidelines ethical or otherwise, what will be the outcome? Who defines how human a chimera must be before regulation and rules are applied? Pigs being born with human blood in their veins; sheep whose livers and hearts are largely human and mice with human brain cells are not science fiction but cold-blooded fact. Medical advances may eventuate but what of other, more long-term societal implications? The Pathocrats would see no disadvantage at all in using human-animal hybrids just as we use machines.

>Robert Streiffer, a professor of philosophy and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin offers this chilling scenario: “Imagine a human-chimpanzee chimera endowed with speech and an enhanced potential to learn — what some have called a ‘humanzee.’ There’s a knee-jerk reaction that enhancing the moral status of an animal is bad, but if you did it, and you gave it the protections it deserves, how could the animal complain?” [8]  If we believe that those “protections” would be forthcoming in a world of enforced supply and demand and disappearing ethics then we are sorely mistaken. As Harvard Professor of Government Michael J. Sandel observed: “”Chances are we would make them perform menial jobs or dangerous jobs …” [9]

There are more human slaves on this Earth than ever in history. Now we have the potential for a state-sanctioned resource for more. What about a future conjoining of ape and machine? This makes the film The Rise of the Planet of the Apes another case of predictive programming. There is also a possible reference to the very small breakaway civilisation of an Occult Elite who see global humanity as merely unconscious bio-chemical “machines” at the level of ape consciousness. (Perhaps they are right). Yet, transhumanism offers the bridge between the animal-human to a new alchemical transcendence.

Be nice. Humanity is awakening…Evolution becomes revolution … Managed awakening.

2011_rise_of_the_planet_of_the_apes-wideRise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) “Evolution becomes Revolution”

aiSteven Spieberg’s Artificial Intelligence (2001) Appealing to our emotions in order that we anthropomorphize new technology.  “His love is real, but he is not.”

SMART society, UN Agenda 21, sustainable development, nano-technology, the surveillance state, the Human Genome Project, and animal /human genetic engineering amassed together under techno-pathocractic state control: this is the kind of integration of technology that is hitching a ride on the euphoria of transhumanist visions. More importantly, this is about imbuing with new energy an ancient re-enactment of a techno-spirituality – if we can call it such – as part of an occult eschatology of the World State Establishment.

It is the monotheistic delusion of Hadas Elber’s stated “salvation” based upon authoritarian violence against freedom of thought, freedom of bodily expression and freedom of emotion that creates a false deity, a blood-thirsty Yahweh of Judeo-Christian doctrine and which continues to bind humanity today. It is the totalitarian nature of organised religion that demands obedience to intermediaries so that self-empowerment and responsibility is sucked into its maw.

Monotheism is an enormous lie based on Bible propaganda and the falsification of history that cuts the umbilical cord to the Universal Spirit. It has replicated that same authoritarianism in countless smaller cults which promise salvation via the subjugation of individuality and the fear of divine retribution. Consequently, these legions of intermediaries have been created between humanity and their Patriarchal God/Allah etc. Yet, transhumanists offer up the same intermediaries in the form of technocracy and technology; bodily self-harm and defilement of God in microcosm, under the guise of a technological transcendence. The negation of the ebb and flow of natural order is the antithesis of free-will and freedom and gives rise to the science which has particular relevance from the standpoint of coerced “group consciousness” where society integrates towards a New World Synthetic Organism.

In a metaphysical sense, can it not be said that there has always existed the potential for a “Christ consciousness” to  flow through co-linear units of individual consciousness who, by dint of their self-development across the personality spectrum, live to serve? By serving others they naturally anchor a qualitative energy disbursed across that network. It is the “one in manyness”, different, yet going in the same direction, that of Truth and the hope of Unity.  Is not the true disjecta membra of ancient wisdom the science of the soul? Perhaps, as certain archaeological finds now suggest, there may have been extremely advanced technology in the very ancient past, empirical evidence of which has all but disappeared due to catastrophic environmental upheavals. Nonetheless, some experts increasingly cite evidence suggestive of ancient technology within civilisations long since destroyed.

According to the Bagavad Gita, the Sumerian Texts and passages from the Bible, cross-cultural mythology and recurrent motifs allude to a destruction intimately connected to the withdrawal of technological power which echos the myth of the Edenic Fall. Could it be when technology becomes the new messianic intermediary, where sensate power becomes paramount, that the descent of humanity is once again re-enacted?

ancient_technology_abydosThe Abydos carvings showing what appears to be helicopters and other futuristic Vehicles Located in the Temple of Seti The First – Abydos, Egypt. Does this rise of technology ultimately destroy us in cycles of catastrophe? Source: www.aquiziam.com

The mythology of Atlantis is said to play a large part in occult lore, particularly within Rosicrucian circles (essentially behind the Illuminati flagship) who traditionally see Francis Bacon as an Illuminist forerunner of great distinction, not least due to his alleged role as the playwright behind Shakespeare but more importantly, his novel New Atlantis. The existence of Atlantis, though largely dismissed by much of mainstream academia, remains a compelling mystery with many collected nuggets of circumstantial evidence accumulated down through history, ranging from classic literature to archaeological remains which are still being revealed today. Many scholars on Atlantis agree that this was not a city or an Island but an Empire which extended across most of the globe around 9-10, 000 years ago. This would explain why so many nations and indigenous peoples have remarkably similar myths and folklore.

Illustration from the title page of one edition of New Atlantis by Sir Francis Bacon

Illustration from the title page of one edition of New Atlantis by Sir Francis Bacon

Reading between the lines of religious beliefs, much of the old theosophical “psuedo-history” and cross-fertilised mythology drawn from a variety of sources (Bible, the Bagavad Gitas, the Vedas, Plato, Sumerian Texts, Mayanism and modern day intuitive sources) all indicate that Atlantis was destroyed by a combination of earth changes, cyclic cosmic catastrophe and interestingly, as a result of the misuse of technology by an Elite priesthood that were initiates of an alchemical science which subsequently became ponerised.

According to Joseph Farrell and Scott De Hart writing in their 2011 book: Transhumanism: A Grimoire of Alchemical Agendas:

“The old Masters who made it the object of their lives to gather together once more these scattered fragments, and to thus reconstruct the Occult Doctrine of the Atlanteans, found a portion of their material in Egypt, in India, in Persia, in Chaldea, in Medea, in China, in Assyria, and in Ancient Greece, and also in the mystic records of the Hebrews, such as the Kabbalah and the Zohar. The common source, however, may be regarded as distinctly Oriental. The great philosophies of the East, in fact, may be said to have been built upon the base of these still more ancient teachings. Moreover, the great Grecian Secret Teachings are believed to have been based upon knowledge obtained from this same common source. So, at the last, the Secret Doctrine of the Rosicrucians may be said to be the Secret Doctrine of Atlantis, transmitted through the descendants of the people of that great centre of occult knowledge.

… an elite was established after the “Tower of Babel Moment,” after the fall of “Atlantis,” and that this elite was tasked to preserve the core doctrines that made the advanced civilization of “Atlantis possible.”

But what exactly was that doctrine?

Not surprisingly, the core of that doctrine is the by-now-familiar topological metaphor of the medium within Rosicrucian symbolical lore, the circle and cross, and even the swastika, become symbols of this primordial androgyny. But most importantly, this “bi-sexual” androgyny, or alchemosexuality. It is this bi-sexuality and in particular a masculine androgyny which has been interpreted materially in an atheistic framework.” [10]

And this “topological metaphor” was one of socio-cultural unity as a mirror of the Divine and achieved through a form of alchemy or esoteric self-development. The interest in powerful psychotronic weaponry, ethically dubious genetic engineering of food, animals and the resultant “Chimeras”  were all implicitly and explicitly described within these ancient writings and seen as a crucial part of both their ascendance and downfall. From one Edenic Fall to another within Atlantis itself. A similar “scientific technique” was the arbiter of what may have been a global totalitarian worldview. Rather than some obscure allegory or symbolism – though these are certainly present – such themes may suggest a recurrent fall from Edenic grace extending back to the very dawn of time.

Did the Atlantean elect and its people reach a point of cultural and socio-political decay as characterised by institutional psychopathy in much the same way that is manifesting today? Could we be facing an Atlantean re-run with the same patterns manifesting through a transhumanist reliance on technology as saviour?

Extremely speculative, but a line of inquiry that offers not only a vast field of possibilities, but distinct patterns of circumstantial confirmation.

Atlantis aside, America is clearly the nexus point of an historic pathology and together with Europe represents a modern Anglo-American Empire in the latter stages of a disintegration and prior to the strengthening of a full blown Pathocracy. The Occult Establishment might well be re-enacting the idea of an alchemical ascendance – an individual and collective spiritual “improvement” yet consciously inverted toward omnipotence as Divine Right. For this to occur, normal humanity has to be leveraged into its New World position according to such a Plan, where the philosophy of transhumanism as occult inheritance will allow a modern day hierarchical priesthood to become the Demi-Gods of old.

Perhaps this time, cognisant of cyclic catastrophes (if not their relationship to human-induced entropy) this breakaway elite is in the last phase of such a Grand Plan?

In the next post we will look at more ways in which transhumanism is very much part of the Occult Establishment traditions and how human sexuality and conscience is still being subverted to achieve a form of inverted alchemical transcendence for a select few.

 


* For more on the relics of ancient technology and hidden history a recommended article is: Houston anthropologist reveals irrefutable proof that recorded history is wrong by Debbie West,Tue, 12 Nov 2013.


Notes

[1] ‘Kurzweil: Rooting for the Machine,’ Wired News, 3 Nov 2000.
[2] ‘Merging the biological, electronic’ – Researchers grow cyborg tissues with embedded nanoelectronics.By Peter Reuvall, Harvard Gazette,August 26, 2012.
[3] ‘Visions of humanity between the Human and the Post Human’ by Hadas Elber-Aviram, Tel Aviv University, 2012.
[4] ‘Britain is on the Brink of a Perilous Vote for ‘Three-Person In Vitro Fertilization’ by Marcy Darnovsky and Jessica Cussins, Los Angeles Times, February 8th, 2015.
[5] ‘Craig Venter: ‘This isn’t a fantasy look at the future. We are doing the future’ By Zoë Corbyn The Observer, Sunday 13, October 2013.
[6] ‘Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush,’by Ron Suskind, New York Times MagazineOctober 17, 2004. Quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove).
[7] ‘Synthetic Biology Is Closer Than You Think’ Bloomberg November 5th, 2012.
[8] ‘Of Mice, Men and In-Between – Scientists Debate Blending Of Human, Animal Forms’, By Rick Weiss, Washington Post, November 20, 2004; Page A01.
[9] Ibid.
[10] p.220; Transhumanism – A Grimoire of Alchemical Agendas By Joespeh P. Farrell and Scott De Hart Publishered by FERAL HOUSE 2012.

Advertisements

Technocracy XV: A Post Human World? (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

 “The Purpose of Biotechnology is the End of Death.”

Martine Rothblatt, CEO Therapeutics Corp.


101_1215

© infrakshun

The above quote sums up the whole drive behind transhumanism – fear of death and the (androgynous) bodycentrism as arbiter of consciousness.

It would be churlish in the extreme to say that aspects of new technologies in the realm of medicine do not have enormous potential. Researching cures for diseases and the general enhancement of human life are unquestionably benefits to be welcomed, yet, altruistic advancement is not the perception that dominates in centres of power and influence. The presumption of innocence has been discarded along with any notion of privacy and independence. It is the same persistent beliefs which are being enforced by societies’ self-proclaimed wardens that humanity needs micro-managing because, like an unruly child we will only resort to bad deeds unless we are placed in various forms of shackles – seen and unseen. Monitoring and tagging the population is proceeding in order to banish every trace of uncertainty; to prepare the masses for large-scale social, economic and even environmental upheaval.

To the techno-religious ideology that flows through the currents of a SMART Surveillance Society (SSS) it is transhumanism which is set to be at the forefront of humanity’s technological transformation. A Technocracy is closely embedded in such values despite genuine protestations to the contrary. Those that do reject such a notion are not likely to remain in the vanguard for very long.

everymantranshumanism

© infrakshun

Technology, like any other tool in human hands, can be an extraordinarily powerful and liberating way to actualise our inner realities and manifest our desires. Since this series is about how psychopaths infect creativity and flip it on its head to induce entropy, then we should be monitoring very closely where this particular revolution is heading. From so-called primitive society, to the agricultural, industrial, and now the Eco-Smart-Information Age, there are extraordinary opportunities with their attendant risks. As new “change agents” work to manage and transform the old world into a new technocratic vision for all, the probability of this new transformation evolving into something other than the cherished ideals hold futurists so rapt, is very real indeed.

Awareness of ponerology in this context does not negate SMART society but perhaps considerably modifies its soaring ideals. This doesn’t mean we return to living in mud huts either. It does however demand that we use discernment and discrimination when new paradigms come along offering the kind of ideological Utopias so familiar down through history. This also doesn’t mean that technological change will not offer radical transformation. It just depends exactly what trajectory we are following and whether or not its coordinates have already been mapped in advance.

A revealing talk was given by South Korean Dr. Seang-Tae Kim, President of National Information Society Agency (NIA), South Korea on October 25, 2011 on the emergence of SMART growth. He spoke about the “Mega Trend of Future Society” and its “Paradigm shift” which will lead to SMART technologies redesigning the world. He believes this heralds a more “human-oriented” focus stemming from the rise of an aging population and the awareness of networking and a “knowledge-based economy.” Theories of “High Concept” creativity and empathy he believes, must be integral to SMART emergence to function. “Consumers” will be “Pro-sumers” generating enormous wealth outside of the normal capitalist channels thus stimulating a new innovation philosophy across bi-lateral networks of merging digital and analogue systems. A “Dream Society” characterises the New Revolution and it is brimming with hope and energy.

Seang-Tae Kim believes that a new technological humanism or human-oriented society can turn the highly volatile risks of an aging population, geo-conflict and the threat of Climate Change into a more streamlined and cost effective vision. Indeed, it is inevitable, he opines, due to the global budget deficit that demands change and where traditional government must be transformed into open government by the power of the people. For Seang-Tae Kim and other SMART-transhumanists, he advocates people power which is beyond the Fordism of the factory-line toward a more promising Post-Bureaucratic Age. He believes that local society and feudalism, government power and industrial society must naturally give way to an open-source infrastructure, an “eco-system of new values”, and a “value oriented eco-system.” This will apparently be predicated on a “platform strategy” which naturally encourages group power. (For a fascinating book on open source software and infrastructure see The Open-Source Everything Manifesto: Transparency, Truth, and Trust by Robert David Steele).

Exciting as that sounds, can such system bypass the integration, dependency and invasive nature of the SMART Surveillance State (SSS) away from pathogenic control? Does an “open source everything” mixed with the philosophy of transhumanism represent an inevitable push away from State centralisation and bland techno-homogeneity? Or, is this merely an end-game reinvention of Empire at a higher turn of the spiral? If the latter, how can we avoid SSS ideals being vectored into the same old patterns? Denial of the dark side of human progress has persistently got us into collective pickles. Yet, we remain strangely blind to the fact.

Like the transformation of society, the metamorphosis of the human being is an integral part of transhumanism beliefs. Sandwiched between the SMART Grid implementation, post-modernism, cyber-activism and virtual reality, transhumanism, sees the merging of man and machine as just a cosmic nano-second away. Replacing an arthritic hip or elbow joint with the help of embedded nanotech is something desirable to most people. Yet, this is small fry for those who wish to use nano-devices and neuro-prostheses to change us into something other than human – a post human.

In March 2012, media entrepreneur Dmitry Itskov made the ambitious claim that he planned to ‘transplant’ a human mind into a robot body in 10 years. According to the Russian this would herald the next stage of science and a ‘new human body.’ The promise of an atheistic immortality is the driving force behind the project which Itskov claims has more than 30 scientists working on it. Uploading minds without surgery would be the next challenge where bodies are left behind in favour of cybernetic super-humans merging with a bio-genetic, virtual world of limitless potential. The project is modelled after the James Cameron movie Avatar where human soldiers use sophisticated technology to inhabit the bodies of human-alien hybrids as they embark on an invasion of another world. [1]

Taiwan

Smart Society Building design in Taiwan Source: From Danish http://www.almeresmartsociety.net/Design in a smart society – Dream or Reality?’

This is a fairly accurate description of the dreams of your average transhumanist who believes that the merging of man and machine offer the best of all evolutionary outcomes. While the transhumanism movement has many different permutations of opposing views there are some fundamental themes that remain sacrosanct:

  • The evolution of humanity
  • Biotechnological enhancement that will extend and exceed ordinary human capabilities
  • A focus on longevity, radical life extension and immortality
  • A focus on human happiness that can become a permanent state of mind with the help of technology.

Transhumanists see the rise of the machines as a chance to reach an integration and synthesis of biology, genetics, cybernetics, naotechnology and artificial intelligence. In doing so, they believe we will transcend the limitations of human biology and the fixity of the machine to become a hybrid superman with a vastly more intelligent brain thus leading to a quantum leap in human evolution, otherwise known as the “Singularity.” This is a culmination of human evolution that has reached its sell-by date and must become fused with a SMART world convergence of biotechnology, robotics, and biometrics, inaugurating the next and most decisive step ever in the history of human evolution: The Post-Human Age. The technological component of the singularity posits a robotic “intelligence explosion” based on an exponential curve of “recursive self-improvement.” which will either draw humanity – or those choosing such a fusion – into its slipstream.

Another form of aggregate swarm intelligence; a technocratic version of the Hive Mind rather than true freedom and individuality?

Transhumanists tell us we can alter the nature and meaning of strictly organic evolution. The combination of new cognitive tools interfacing with artificial intelligence, molecular biology and the modification of emotional and mental states means the list of potential “enhancements” is never-ending. Although there is a chic, techno-spirituality, even an obvious alchemical metaphor within transhumanist discourse, the movement has historically remained an atheist/materialist ideology as the name implies. The belief has more potent implications for its direction than the mechanics of the movement itself as we shall see.

Moving back to our old Fabian and Social Darwinist Mr. Julian Huxley, it was he who coined the term ‘transhumanism’ in 1957, fitting technocracy neatly into his well-watered vision of evolutionary humanism, the genetic legacy of which he can thank his grandfather, Darwinist Thomas Henry Huxley. Transcendence, in strictly materialist terms was the goal. Transhumanism provided the imagination, hope and intellectual rigour to seed a new ideology and its conceptual framework. The systems theory of cybernetics would play a large part in its development and the parallel evolution of ecology and new physics which would be taken up with a passion, decades later.

Acting as a bridge to New Age philosophies that would surface in the late 1960s-1970s, a fusion of ecology, transhumanism and the Human Potential Movement can now be seen. (The influential Barbara Marx-Hubbard is one such Elite-lauded advocate of “bad seed” transhumanism). Two of Huxley’s close friends John Burdon, Sanderson Haldane and John Desmond Bernal who were major shapers of transhumanist thought also happened to be members of the communist party. Whereas Huxley was passionate about eugenics and saw it as integral to the development of transhumanism as a whole, Haldane was a population geneticist. Whilst not comfortable with what he saw as the “poor science” of eugenic theory, he nevertheless permitted its inclusion in the transhumanist vision. J.D. Bernal’s expertise lay in crystallography and molecular biology and shared his friend’s desire to see a new social order based around a gradual engineering of the social organism.

Another dear friend of Huxley’s was our equally dedicated Fabian guru of the 1920s and 30s: H.G. Wells. The writer’s extraordinary books did not just offer a way to funnel his eerily accurate predictions into popular literature but also served as microcosms of technocratic ideals. Wells saw Technocracy as the ideal way to manage the masses and he was wholly dedicated to the principle of neo-Feudalism as the way to control the destiny of nations.

NPG x12102; Sir Julian Sorell Huxley by Wolfgang SuschitzkySir Julian Huxley and Barbara Marx-Hubbard

By the 1960s other names were caught up in promoting the philosophy in popular culture and academia such as Ray Kurzweil, Frank P. Tipler, Eric K. Drexler, Hans Moravec and Marvin Minsky, all of whom contributed richer and more diverse versions of transhumanism and the Singularity. According to some, the human species has the potential to flower but not before artificial intelligence (AI) has competed for supremacy with humanity. Once this has been thrashed out in true Terminator-trilogy-fashion then humanity can get on with being the cyber-sapiens or Marx-Hubbard’s New Age version of “Homo-Universalis” and presumably upload themselves into any sector they choose.

Transhumanism reached a watershed in 1998 with the founding of the World Transhumanist Association (WTA) by philosophers Nick Bostrom and David Pearce, closely followed by their “Transhumanism Declaration.” This helped to bring prominence to other organisations and groups such as Extropy Institute and the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence. As the internet took off so did the transhumanist philosophy. Cyberspace was, after all, the natural medium for the propagation of the movement’s ideas.

Ray Kurzweil is perhaps the most well-known author, inventor and futurist introducing an almost evangelist fervour to his eschatological version of transhumanism. Kurzweil published The Age of Spiritual Machines, (1998) about the future of AI and biotechnology; Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever (2004) co-authored with medical doctor Terry Grossman and explored human health and nutrition; The Singularity is Near (2005) Transcend: Nine Steps to Living Well Forever (2009) and his latest How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed was published in 2012. All of the concepts contained in these books features in a recent documentary film Transcendent Man (2013)  exploring the life of Kurzweil.

What is more interesting however, February 2009 saw Kurzweil collaborate with Google and the NASA Ames Research Centre, to announce the creation of the Singularity University Training Centre for corporate executives and government officials. The mission of the university is to “assemble, educate and inspire a cadre of leaders who strive to understand and facilitate the development of exponentially advancing technologies and apply, focus and guide these tools to address humanity’s grand challenges”. [2] Ray Kurzweil does for transhumanism what Maurice Strong did for UN Agenda 21 since he appears to be on the advisory board of almost anything remotely AI or transhumanist-related. Which is why he is also on the board of Martine Rothblatt’s Therapeutics Corp.)

375px-Raymond_Kurzweil,_Stanford_2006_(square_crop)

Raymond Kurzweil at the Singularity Summit at Stanford in 2006 (wikipedia)

Moscow was the venue for the Global Future International Congress “A New Era for humanity” which took place in February of 2012 and in June 2013. Organised by the Global Future 2045 (GF2045) a non-profit organization that has: “… the goal of creating a network community with the world’s leading scientists in the field of life extension and to support them as an investment hub, contributing to various projects.” [3]

Hosted by Kurzweil, it offered an uncompromising vision of a future for post-humanity where bio /nanotechnology, AI, cognitive applications, and cybernetics would allow the mass replacement of our drearily inadequate selves. The distinguished panel of speakers and guests were writers, anthropologists, astrophysicists, NASA scientists, historians, sociologists, psychologists, philosophers and many others from specialist fields of technology. The message was yet another indication that the “accelerated” nature of technology and the “race to save the world” hadn’t lessened in its intensity, nor had the belief in technology as saviour.

On the website an introductory 7 minute video with a soaring orchestral score has a narrative which imparts the following nuggets to look forward to:

  • 2012: the emergence of new transhumanist movements & parties amid the on-going socio-economic crisis
  • 2012-2013: new centres for cybernetic technologies to radically extend life
  • 2014: The “race for immortality” starts
  • 2015: “Find ways to transfer our personality to an artificial carrier – the robotic human copy or “Avatar.”
  • 2015-2020: Robots to replace human manufacturing & labour, servant tasks; thought controlled robots to displace travel needs; flying cars, thought-driven communications implanted in bodies or “sprayed on skin.” timecover
  • 2025: The creation of an autonomous system providing life support for the brain that is capable of ‘interacting with the environment’; brains transplanted into avatar bodies greatly expanding life and allowing complete sensory experiences.
  • 2030-2035: Reverse-engineering of the human brain already being mapped out, wherein science comes “… close to understanding the principles of consciousness.”
  • By 2035: First successful transplantation of personality to other data receptacles and the “epoch of cybernetic immortality begins.”
  • 2040-2050: Bodies “… made of nano-robots” taking any shape, alongside holographic bodies.
  • 2045-2050: Drastic changes to the social structure and sci-tech development. Tipping the hat to the UN, conflict and violence is “not permitted.” Instead, the priority is given to “spiritual self-improvement.” “A New Era of neo-Humanity Dawns”…

According to the website: www.gf2045.com the Russian GF2045 group met to draft a: “resolution that will be submitted to the United Nations demanding the implementation of committees to discuss life extension Avatar projects as a necessary tool in the preservation of humankind.”

330px-Martine_Rothblatt

Martine Rothblatt in 2010. (wiki)

An attendee of the follow up conference in 2013 was aforementioned Martine Rothblatt founder and CEO (and fittingly transgender) of biotech company United Therapeutics Corp. Rothblatt has introduced the concept of “mind clones” where the human mind is created from a “mind-file” of our social networking data and other personality sources. S/he believes the capability to do so will be made possible in under twenty years time. She even used the personality of her dead wife to create a droid template example of what transhumanists would love to see as commonplace.  Cartesian dualism and atheist paradise? Or merely the next stage in our evolution?

Rothblatt sees “… the market opportunities as limitless” where everyone will be seeking to make a digital copy of their thoughts of their memories, thoughts and feelings to be made manifest in a droid of their making. Grabbing a slice of the artificial action, Rothblatt believes is inevitable: “We all want an i-phone, we all want a social media account and we are all going to want a mind clone.” [4]

Speak for yourself Martine.

And what would you know? Amazon and Google are extremely keen on this type of artificial intelligence.

(The concept of transgenderism and androgyny has an occult-esoteric element within transhumanist discourse, something  which Rothblatt appears to personify and something that will be explored further in the Occult Transhumanism).

To reiterate, it could be said that these imaginative interpretations of one possible future without awareness of the ponerological basis of psychopathy “demanding” anything (and worse still, receiving it) would be a recipe not for human freedom but more ways to welcome its opposite. An alternative future that is drawn from exactly the same technocratic tenets will be a decidedly Dystopian one and no less probable should we allow ourselves to be guided down these grandiose beliefs. That’s not to say we have not been affected positively by technology since the Industrial Revolution. Improvements in health and sanitation; air travel; photography; computers, medical advances and information technology have positively reshaped the world. Once again, it is the perception of reality that will define how these technological innovations are used and whether a healthy techno-culture can exist.

Biocomplexity_spiral

“The biocomplexity spiral is a depiction of the multileveled complexity of organisms in their environments, which is seen by many critics as the ultimate obstacle to transhumanist ambition.” (wikipedia)

The other problem with transhumanism is the adherence to a belief that evolution is dependent on machines to take us to the next level. Nature is inherently unpredictable and disruptive since that is the whole reason how non-linear evolution occurs – far from equilibrium. It is therefore outside human-implanted notions of intelligent design. Aside from obvious hubris, attempts to replicate, emulate nature may be partially possible, but to try and go beyond bio-complexity itself is to re-enact an unnecessary mythology which is Promethean/Luciferian in its ambition. 

There are many advocates who advise caution in the development of technology. Kurzweil, to be fair, does his fair share of warning the faithful of its potential slip into Darth Vader territory. Nonetheless, once the momentum gains more traction it is unlikely that any safeguards will be present, let alone feature as a primary component to secure an ethical and moral foundation. Indeed, as this series of posts has hopefully indicated, there are signs it is being absorbed into exactly the same mainframe of Official Culture and its overseeing Establishment.

At present, such an ideology is highly attractive to a variety of intelligent people, many of whom are sincere in their beliefs to improve societies. One advocate defined transhumanism in simplest terms as: “… the idea that human kind can use science and technology to become more than what we are and help those interested in doing the same and in protecting the freedom for all to decide for themselves how to be happy, in other words ‘Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness’.”  Surely, is this not something we ALL want? Unfortunately, the reality of transhumanism routinely goes way beyond such simple definitions, and their lies the problem since it plays into – and is promoted by – the more pathological elements of the movement.

Moreover, it is precisely this pathology to which transhumanism in particular lends itself, namely: clusters of psychopaths and social dominators straddling all social domains for whom this ideology undoubtedly appeals to the workings of their “machine minds”. Naturally, this won’t be acknowledged by its adherents since the dependence on our chosen belief tends to prohibit negative associations. Consequently, wealthy techno-psychopaths bring with them a great deal of charisma, PR and investment disbursed through the various connected branches that make up the movement: from Hollywood, media, social science and the military-corporate complex.

As rapid advances in AI, quantum computing, neurology and robotics continue then it is simple logic that the time will approach when a digital map of the human brain will be placed into machines and eventually surpassed just as Rothblatt has indicated. It is then that a potential separation will occur between two types of human beings, perhaps labelled the “organics” and the “post-humans” and in much the same way as normal people are unconsciously separated from a variety of psychopaths and sub-categories of the same.

If we are already embedded in the SMART infrastructure how likely is it that we will have a choice which breakaway civilisation to follow? Or, will “group consciousness”, communitarian “consensus” and SMART “efficiency” simply decide for you?

 


Notes

[1] ‘Who wants to live forever? Russian project aims to transplant a human brain into a ‘Davros’-style robot body within 10 years’ By Rob Waugh Daily Mail, March 2 2012.
[2] ‘The Singularity Is Near: Mind Uploading by 2045?’by Tanya Lewis, June 17, 2013. | ‘Future of Artificial Intelligence in Mind Clones’ bloomberg.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bqZp9TPYVk
[3] FAQ | “Singularity University.” Singularityu.org. September 9, 2008.
[4] Gf2045.com

Technocracy X: Nano-Science (2)

 “We cannot rely on trial-and-error approaches to deal with existential risks… We need to vastly increase our investment in developing specific defensive technologies… We are at the critical stage today for biotechnology, and we will reach the stage where we need to directly implement defensive technologies for nanotechnology during the late teen years of this century… A self-replicating pathogen, whether biological or nanotechnology based, could destroy our civilization in a matter of days or weeks.”

― Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology


dna_nano_tech-wideThe military is the largest investor in the U.S. Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). The share of the NNI budget given to the Department of Defence (DoD) since the program started has reached $6.6 billion with part of the expenditure going to DARPA and the departmental laboratories of the Navy, Army and Air force, the rest ending up at universities as research grants or as part of the Multi-University Research Initiative (MURI).[1]  Though spending has been fluctuating since 2007, there remains steady interest in nanotech’s military capabilities. Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) revealed from their research that: “… government funding for military R&D dwarfs that spent on social and environmental programs across the industrialized world …” with military R&D fixed towards “… a narrow weapons-based security agenda.” [2]  Which means the marginalisation of conflict prevention and analysis of the roots of conflict and its links to poverty, the environment, security and health issues continue to be under-funded. Nanotech advances are being hijacked away from improving civilian life with “game-changing” technology as the culprit.

A fervent need to make these grand visions a reality was given a sturdy platform for realisation back in 2007 from the DoD and their little known advisory body called the Defence Science Board (DSB) whose paper entitled: “DSB 2006 Summer Study on 21st Century Strategic Technology Vectors” laid some important groundwork for the future. In an attempt to place nanotech at the top of the military agenda the paper drew their attention to “synergistic combinations” of all forms of nanotech and their “… truly revolutionary capabilities in human performance enhancement, medical treatment and prophylaxis, miniaturization, life extension, robotics, and machine intelligence …” [3]  It was unabashed in its agenda for clandestine tagging and tracking, where: “A combination of nanotechnology, biology, and chemistry promises to provide significant increases in capability to conduct pervasive surveillance on a global basis.”

spybee

prototype for cyborg-bee © unknown

Some of these other applications currently in R & D or primed and ready for action include the following:

Nano-biotechnology – or miniaturized biotechnology is the recent development of merging biology research with nanotechnology, most notably using biomolecules, bio-membranes and nano-photonics for vaccinations and virus research. Particularly active in medical fields the new science is seeking to generating cures; develop stem cell treatments, creating muscle tissue and artificial proteins. The convergence between computers and biology is of primary interest where eventually computing will be sourced from a biological platform where “Colonies of live neurons can live together on a biochip device.” [4]

Nano-electronics – The development of molecules with useful electronic properties which can then be used in nano-devices. This includes synthetic chemical methods and the creation of synthetic molecular motors. Other forms include carbon nano-tubes which have taken over from silicon-based chips. Now, the race is on to fit billions of these tubes onto computer chips thereby increasing the chip performance to “… run at more than three times the frequency and consuming just a third of the energy.” [5]

DNA nanotechnology – the construction of structures out of DNA and other nucleic acids. This branch has a special relationship to nano-medicine and “SMART drugs” for targeted drug delivery, the development and creation of vaccines and the adjacent field of nano-electronics with real world applications in both fields looming large. [6]

Nano-robotics/weaponryself-sufficient machines operating at the nano-scale. Applying nano-robots in medicine are proving difficult due to a multitude of problems adapting to the biology of organic systems, though progress is there. However, military nano-robotics in combination with cybernetics is moving ahead in leaps and bounds. There are still very little scholarly articles on the nature and pace of advances on military robotics along with only a sluggish attempt at raising the ethical and moral issues inherent in the use of such weaponry. What is clear is that the military is getting very excited by it all due to the unlimited scope of applications. Reduced to the size of perhaps 0.1mm or less, autonomous mini and micro-robots could be deployed on the ground, in water and in air, using the same propulsion principles found in larger electronic and mechanical systems. All forms of movement are mimicked such as human legs, various types of hopping, flapping wings like a bird, flagella, and even side-winding movements of a snake. The multi-purpose nature of robotics means that weapons systems targeting, reconnaissance, communication and surveillance are easily utilized. Insects and small mammals are already being integrated into bio-cyborg hybrids with nervous system and brain interfacing with cybernetics, software and electrodes.

cyborg-mothcyborg moth | © unknown

Returning to our whacky friends down at DARPA and their various sponsored companies and subsidiaries, we find they are still churning out helpful prototypes for new ways to spy, maim and murder. Some of these latest offerings are still prototypes, in the manufacturing stage or on the drawing board. They comprise:

1) Nano-Scouts – real insects and simulated bird-like technologies which act as the eyes and ears of intelligence. Flies and mosquitoes have embedded nanotech capabilities which allow them to determine the presence of certain chemicals, changes in moisture levels or barometric pressure, and be able to sense movements, temperature, and vibration.[7]

2) Nano-Poisons – A variety of toxic substances with nanomolecules carefully tailored to illicit the correct responses. By interfering with neuro-chemical inhibitors and release agents introducing precise “onboard” quantities of synthetic poisons behaviour modification is taken to a whole new level. Almost any type of mind control would be available from encouraging the victim to lie obsessively to provoking suicidal thoughts; stimulating a person to react violently or to kill. And of course, a Brave New World of somatic release could be programmed where the person cannot help but love everyone and where anger and aggression is blocked. Nano-molecules would effectively quadruple the effectiveness of purely psychological methods of mind control.

3) Nano Force Fields –nano-coatings which can hermetically seal a vehicle or building by allowing particles to seek out air gaps and block them.

4) Nano Mind Erasers – Want to take out a politician or spy without fuss or bother of assassination? Then, inducing the equivalent of instant Alzheimer’s is the answer. Wiping the sections of the brain clean using micro fields programmed to flare up as tiny, molecular neutron bombs would do the trick.

5) Nano Needles – With no visible wounds and invisible to the naked eye these weapons represent an up-dated version of the old KGB poison-tipped umbrella. The needles could be shot from a suitably modelled gun to paralyse people. Presumably the lethal nature of the needles would be dependent on their carrier capability.

6) Nano Heart-Stoppers – Nano-blood flow restrictors and Stroke Inducers – Long known to be a part of military-intelligence operations the assassination of sensitive targets such as politicians, heads of state and celebrities. Undetectable in the blood stream, nano-molecules could mimic heart attacks or strokes; restrict the blood flow causing an array of symptoms, even inducing personality disorders.

7) Nano-Naut Swarms These are ‘SMART dust’ particles which act as an information or sensor clouds capable of analysing areas with sharp detail and relying back information to HQ. As reported in the MSM in early February 2013, the British Army has been deploying tiny nano-drones in Afghanistan for over two years. At just 10cm long and weighing only 16 Grams they are used to relay full motion video and still images back to the devices’ handlers. But technology is advancing as fast as weapons can be bought.

8) Cyborg Insects – could be the delivery tool of much of the above allowing viruses and lethal substances to be to their individual or mass target, something that Bill Gates and his forays into mosquito-driven vaccines would no doubt happily welcome. Spying and surveillance capabilities have also been successfully tested and deployed. One of DARPA’s less malevolent offerings, the Nano Hummingbird was named One of Time Magazine’s 50 best inventions of 2011. Shaped like a humming-bird the mini robot is remotely-controlled without an external power source and can fly, hover, move forward and backward in the air while shooting Hi-Resolution video.

9) Programmable Matter – Starting in 2007, with DARPA support, Carnegie Mellon delved into the possibility of creating hardware and software to make material that can programmed to morph into 3-Dimensional shapes – essentially, shape-shifting. Named the Claytronics Project, the brains behind this venture believe that it has the capacity to change every facet of human experience. They consider claytronics to be a platform for a new form of called “Pario” with the reproduction of moving 3-D objects the primary goal. In other words, the quest to program the world around us. Just a few years later in 2010 with a “self-folding origami” robot which can literally fold itself up and crawl away. Meantime, shape-shifting sand made an appearance in 2012 where; “New algorithms enable heaps of ‘smart sand’ that can assume any shape, allowing spontaneous formation of new tools or duplication of broken mechanical parts.” This of course begins to the blur the whole fields of nanotechnology bioengineering, cybernetics, biological-based pharmaceuticals, programmable vaccines and the advance of synthetic biology.

The US Department of Defence is also researching the feasibility and applications of robotic mosquitoes. So far testing has found that they can be remotely controlled with an on-board camera and a microphone. They will be able to land on unsuspecting dissidents or terrorists with the potential to take a DNA sample or leave RFID tracking nanotechnology on your skin. Flying in through a crack in your window or attaching itself to your clothing in passing would prove no problem for these adorables. No doubt law enforcement and Homeland Security are salivating at such a prospect. [8] In fact, sightings of insect-like drones have been occurring for years in the US, most frequently at activist demonstrations and marches. According to a 2006 Flight International report: “… the CIA had been developing micro UAVs as far back as the 1970s and had a mock-up in its Langley headquarters since 2003.”

robot_insectAssuming such machines can fly onto a local protester’s arm and then wing its way back to its controller with a fresh little DNA sample to analyse, this compliments another disturbing scenario as described by authors Andrew Hessel, Marc Goodman, and Steven Kotler who “…outline futuristic human genome work that evolves from the very real GE $100 million breast cancer challenge.” In this scenario: “freelancers receive bids to design personalized virus offering customized cures for the sick.” An individual succumbs to colon cancer and instead of going the route of standard chemotherapy he chooses an immediate payment of $1000 to have his genome decoded over two days. Virologists of the near future will have information about the disease and the exclusive genome sequence. The design cure will be outsourced the winning bid providing the formula to rid your body of the specific cancer. Targeting the US President by criminal cartels or terrorist cells would be relatively easy.

A 2010 release of secret cables by WikiLeaks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered US embassies “… to surreptitiously collect DNA samples from foreign heads of state and senior United Nations officials.” [9]With that in mind, an article by Atlantic magazine takes the next logical step in personalised bio-weapons and micro-drones.

Picture an African President busy with civil war and child soldiers. Perhaps his DNA had been sampled as part of a UN / US mandate. A drug is tailored to that genome sent to an online bio-marketplace and synthesised into actual genetic material. The authors explain that it is here that “… the future of drones and virology could intersect.”

The article continues:

A few days later tablets are delivered to a group that dissolves them and injects the liquid into a handful of micro-drones. The team releases the drones and infects the people in the African leader’s circle of advisors or family. The infected come down with flu like symptoms, coughs and sneezes that release billions of harmless virus particles — but when they bring their symptoms in the vicinity of the African leader — the particles change. Once the virus particles are exposed to that very specific DNA sequence, a secondary function within their design unlocks.[10]

Perhaps the formula contained a “fast-acting neuro-destructive disease that produced memory loss and, eventually, death.” For the African leader or any other head of state which was proving an obstacle to US hegemony “the symptoms could be tailored an infinite number of ways. Designed to reflect a uniquely local affliction like Dengue Fever, or to appear like symptoms of a genetic condition.” [11]Combined with the inherent nature of the military-coporate-banking complex and with their puppet Obama who sees no problem with murdering American citizens via remote drone attacks discarding any notions of law and democratic due process, then you can be sure that such a scenario will take place in the very near future – if it hasn’t already.

The above scenario set against military nanotechnology and other forms of “non-lethal” warfare is justified due to the threat of terrorism and the belief that we can all bring an end to the world’s violence and crime. It is believed that technology will save the day on the battlefield and in civilian life. If left to these people it would rapidly start to resemble an endless battle in itself, which is the general idea. Convincing people not to act on their “evil” thoughts by allowing nano-dust particles to seep into their brains is bread and butter behaviour modification. For anyone else, it is a step towards a Huxleyian nightmare.

Although many commentators prefer to believe that the fail-safe mechanisms of quantum computing and the intelligence apparatus would be enough to protect mainstream society, they fall into the trap of believing that those of conscience are presently guiding humanity. Once again, you cannot use a juvenile dictionary to explain a psychopathic reality that is operating on an entirely different cognitive and perceptual mainframe.

The fractal nature of the nano-world of military applications means that advances in weaponry would take place exponentially with a modus operandi that would excite any social dominator beyond all measure. Using the premise of the molecular assembler, a device capable of breaking and creating the chemical bonds between atoms and molecules, it means duplication is not only feasible and efficient but a requirement once the technology is up and running. Think of the white Storm-trooper clones in the Star Wars films – very much military-technocratic ambrosia. As nanotech guru Eric Drexler explained: “a state that makes the assembler breakthrough could rapidly create a decisive military force – if not literally overnight, then at least with unprecedented speed.” He further observes: “A nation armed with molecular nanotechnology-based weapons would not require nuclear weapons to annihilate a civilization. In fact, it seems that a rather surgical system of seeking and destroying enemy human beings as cancerous polyps could be developed–leaving the nation’s infrastructure intact to be repopulated.” [12]

irobotStill from ‘I Robot’ (2004) Twentieth Century Fox

A research paper sponsored by the European Commission for a 2004 conference on the military uses of nanotechnology and the hazards to society at large, came to some sobering conclusions. While the benefits in medical and non-military domains was clear and should not be unduly hindered provided regulations and ethical boards were swiftly introduced, there were a number of indirect ways that society could be: “detrimentally affected” through the “diffusion of the technology.” The paper offered some examples, including the temptation for the National Security State and related agencies, corporations and criminals to purloin micro-sensors and robots for spying, as well as: “the use of small autonomous systems for criminal attacks – and in particular terrorism – including attacks on critical infrastructures.” They also included a third possibility, that of:

“… implanted systems and other forms of body manipulation for ‘improving human performance’. Deciding what kinds of body manipulation should be permitted, and under which circumstances is a problem of peacetime civilian life, and should be handled by civilian society. However, military R&D and deployment of such systems could establish a fait accompli before society is able to carry out a thorough debate on the desirability of particular technological developments.”

And there’s the problem.

The last thing psychologically compromised persons enjoying their place at the helm of Official Culture is to see the involvement of local communities and civic society. Genetically modified organisms and foodstuffs went this way as did television, banking, media, warfare and most other socio-political power structures which required either secrecy, perception management or corporate monopolisation to ensure a singular reality. Nanotech will be no different if it is allowed to continue without regulations and in the hands of those who wield power for their own ends. If we have humans behaving in psychopathic ways then it doesn’t require the greatest leap of imagination to realise that military robots will be a reflection of their state of mind and intentions. Pathocratic control systems require global dominance in all domains and nanotech represents a mighty leverage in the race to achieve it. Horizontal proliferation would be nearly unavoidable with small, self-replicating systems where in principle, a single copy would be sufficient for growth in another country or sub-state entity.

The report goes on to state:

Military robots with sizes from nanometres to metres would bring threats on an unknown scale. If they could kill, they could constitute new forms of weapons of mass destruction more potent than known biological warfare agents. With non-lethal effects, such as disruption of personality, mass attacks could lead indirectly to the breakdown of a society and the death of a large portion of its members. Partly as a result of their smallness, but mainly owing to their potential for self-replication and the production of additional weapons on site, nano-robots would create extreme uncertainty. [13]

Given the nature of nanotech, automated decision making would grow based on its tendency for a kind of peak, fractal replication to emerge, once technological thresholds have been reached and surpassed. When this level of technology fuses with the mentality of unlimited growth much like the standard economic mind set currently dominating, then a virtual arms-race at the molecular level could ensue with entirely unforeseen consequences. Military production overlaid with ideological insanity.

C60a

“Buckminsterfullerene C60, also known as the buckyball, is a representative member of the carbon structures known as fullerenes. Members of the fullerene family are a major subject of research falling under the nanotechnology umbrella.” (uploaded by Mstroeck at English Wikipedia Later versions by Bryn C at en.wikipedia)

Alongside the massive drive to foist genetically modified foods on global populations agribusiness is fascinated by the part nanotech can play in making food production and consolidation more efficient. However, using molecular assembly principles “nano scale carriers” will soon be used for delivering fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and plant growth regulators. A case is being made to reduce environmental impact with nanotech. It is believed that this will improve stability and lessen environmental degradation in terms of chemical runoff and other related problems. An example of these carriers would be the use of clay nanotubes for pesticides which will apparently reduce the amount of pesticide use by 70–80 per cent. Nanoparticles can act to help mollify and transform resistant chemical compounds in to non-toxic ones while waste water treatment and disinfectants have the potential to be markedly improved. Fluorescent labelling by “quantum dots” (QDs) using bio-recognition molecules for anti-bacteria and disease control will be supplemented with an array of rapid detection and enzymatic biosensors. There is even a device called the “E-Nose” inspired by the human nose which, through the use of nanoparticle gas sensors can detect precisely the quality and quantity of gas present. [14]

Socio-economic demands will ensure that wireless nanosensors in crops designed to monitor and collate data on agronomic intelligence processes such as planting and harvesting cycles will become more and more important. Water levels, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and other treatments will also be under the nanosensor umbrella in the hope that maximization of crop yields and a reduction in resource input will be the end result. [15]

Biotechnology at the nanoscale is already having some success in the battle against plant resistance and environmental stresses such as drought, salinity and diseases. Nanobarcodes will be used for authentication and tracking in agricultural food and husbandry products. As knowledge grows in the area of plant gene traits and nanotechnology-based gene sequencing it is taken for granted that such process will offer new ways to reduce costs and maximize profits. [16]  With undoubted benefits that nanotechnology can provide, this is still inside the constraints of Official Culture. Farming has already been transformed into a leviathan of corporate efficiency where community, civic and independence has been sacrificed. Nano-farming may increase the overall efficiency and provide intermittent benefits, but will it have the capacity to transform agriculture away from agribusiness corporatism?

If new endeavours are dominated by the matrix of the 4Cs and the 3EM then it will limit the hope for social renewal and become just another tool to increase exploitation still bound by the same lowest common denominator. Consumerism, far from being modified or somehow reduced under this new technology will only intensify mechanisation, commodification and the encoding organic life, this time at the molecular level. Nanotechnology may have a place in improving humanity’s lot but not by being grafted onto a socio-political and economic framework that caused the problems in the first place.

Quite apart from providing new innovative tools for medical advances and the promise of an agricultural revolution, evidence so far in relation to health and environmental concerns doesn’t exactly promote confidence. Some of the latest research results show that:

  • Rats breathing in nanoparticles were found to exhibit inflammation, skin aging and stress responses.
  • DNA and chromosome damage which in turn “linked to all the big killers of man, namely cancer, heart disease, neurological disease and aging”.
  • Carbon nanotubes – the possible replacement for silicon – have shown to have the potential to cause mesothelioma ( a form of cancer).
  • Nanoparticles and nanofibres have shown to cause lung disease in a similar way to asbestos. [17]

Mark Wiesner Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Duke University in Durham N.C., has argued for a rethink as to the way nanoparticles are selected and defined in relation to potential impacts on human health and the environment. His international team of researchers from the federally-funded Centre for the Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology (CEINT), based at Duke University in the United States, have raised a number of issues which need to be addressed if nanotechnology is to prove viable and ethically responsible. He believes there is presently confusion as to what truly constitutes a nanoparticle where “… materials often do not meet full definition of having special properties that make them different from conventional materials.” According to Wiesner, a key question that needs to be answered: “… is whether or not a particular nanoparticle has toxic or hazardous properties that are truly different from identical particles in their bulk form,” and this due to the fact that: “Many nanoparticles smaller than 30 nanometers undergo drastic changes in their crystalline structure that enhance how the atoms on their surface interact with the environment.”

The professor explains further:

“…because of the increased surface-area-to-volume ratio, nanoparticles can be highly reactive with other chemicals in the environment and can also disrupt certain activities within cells. … “While there have been reports of nanoparticle toxicity increasing as the size decreases, it is still uncertain whether this increase in reactivity is harmful to the environment or human safety,” Wiesner said. “To settle this issue, toxicological studies should contrast particles that exhibit novel size-dependant properties, particularly concerning their surface reactivity, and those particles that do not exhibit these properties.” [18]

Perhaps it is not the health and environmental issues which are really the problem. We humans are extraordinarily creative and ingenious. All the above is driven on the assumption of cybernetics and its systems theory as viable working models; the idea of “nested” organic systems and dissipative structures which are interrelated and interconnected by virtue of their functional similarity. *This means that bio-engineers and technocrats look at nanosystems as providing the potential for exponential growth via automatic and autonomous emergent properties. As described previously, this opens up a whole new pandora’s box when matter becomes programmable.

nanotubes_carbone

Carbon Nanotubes Source: tpe-nanotechnologie-cb.e-monsite.com/

According to nano scientists this follows that society and the human condition is about to “reshaped” in very positive ways: cleaning the environment, easing the pressure for natural resources, tackling hunger, curing AIDS and other invasive diseases; giving new life to paraplegics whilst enhancing the human body. However, will these laudable aims be set against a background of unresolved questions which threaten to undermine the human species? What has happened to new advances in technology in the past?

Nanotech advocates display frightening naïveté in this regard and an often ironic binary evaluation of what are highly complex issues, notwithstanding an ignorance of ponerology and psychologically compromised cultures. It is a contradiction to say that strengthening our democratic processes will somehow ensure responsible ethics which will insulate against the darker applications of nanotechnology when overwhelming expenditure is already focused in the hands of those who seek weapons advancement and shareholder profits. A barrier to accountability will remain as tenacious as it has proved to be in narcotics, conventional weapons and trafficking. It benefits the Establishment just as nanotechnology promises to do.

Futurist David Brin’s prescription to cultivate a “transparent society” where privacy is effectively non-existent is dangerous as it opens the backdoor for just about every totalitarian precept going. The self-replicating nature of molecular nanotech has given rise to end time scenarios where machines take over the world replacing humanity and organic life. Eric Drexler coined the term “grey-goo” otherwise known as ‘ecophagy’ to illustrate such a cybernetic apocalypse.[19]Think along the lines of “the Collective” from the Borg in the Star Trek TV series or the “Hive mind” so beloved of humanists and transhumanists. Expansion derives from assimilation and adaptive properties – “group think” in a futurist setting.

transmission-5speed-gears.ai

Corporations will be regulated insofar as it does not impinge on the market value of nanotechnology. This means regulations in medical and consumer arenas where it matters less will be followed. Where it is most needed however, is in domains such as weaponisation and agriculture and which will likely follow the traditional route of lobbyists and cartel economics – the path of least resistance. Meanwhile, legislation will have a very tough time keeping up with the rise of nanotechnology especially when environmental and privacy laws are only applicable to those adhering to the public domain and wholly irrelevant to government /corporate experimentation outside such accountability.

Although the military is driving nanotech advances (as with all things) the testing ground has begun with many “passive” or “first generation” commercial applications finding their way to the market place. As explored in the previous post the list is endless. If sunscreen products in the US contain nanoparticles and thus freely pass through the blood-brain barrier then the background of complex toxicology issues must remain at the forefront. In the same way, as GMOs, Wi-Fi and cell phones all have serious health questions hanging over them and health and environmental concerns of nanomaterials at this early stage have been completely ignored. Issues of privacy and confidentiality are also profoundly important.

The precautionary principle means that it is essential not to jump in feet first with this technology when there is an absence of suitable definitions regarding nanoparticle properties which could help scientists determine what represents a threat to the environment or human health. Despite certain advocacy groups calling for government regulation, the only principle which governs decisions is the one leading to the quickest possible profit. Nanotech forges ahead, in love with itself and its seemingly unlimited potential.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that it will go the same way as GMOs since the focus behind the drive to conquer nature, deny death and embrace immortality is exactly the same. Until regulation, insurance and extensive public discussion is forthcoming it is likely the more negative scenarios surrounding nanotech will play a greater role. After all, once the perceived genie is out of the bottle the consequences of its “magic” are more difficult to manage. This means that with all the wondrous potential for cleanng up the environment patents will arrive forcing us to pay for such ecological magic just as it was with the so-called “Green Revolution” of genetically modified crops. This means an expansion of selective wealth where transformation happens according to your pocket and status thereby replicating the same old divisions and class divides.

To reiterate the immovable direction of technology: it is the military and nano-weaponry which will determine the future of nanotech as a whole not whether a surgeon can provide life-saving operations or the disabled individual can begin to walk again. Altruism is not the primary currency of social exchange in a world shaped by psychopaths. Nanosystems will be nurtured on the same directive until such time we can wrest control.

 


* Dissipative Structure – A system that exits far from thermodynamic equilibrium thus dissipating the heat generated to sustain it. It has the capacity of changing to higher levels of orderliness leading to self-organization. These systems contain sub-systems that continuously fluctuate.


Notes

[1] ‘More soldiers in nanotechnology labs?’ By Michael Berger, nanowerk.com August 22, 2007.
[2] Ibid.
[3] http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2006-02-Summer_Study_Strategic_Tech_Vectors_Vol_I_Web.pdf
[4] NanoMedicine – A Review by K.K. Senthil Kumar, International Journal of Innovative Drug Discovery, Vol. 2 / Issue 1 / 2012 / 40-47 (from International Journal of Biopharmaceutics)
[5] ‘Carbon nanotubes fit by the thousands onto a chip’ By Jason Palmer, BBC News, 29 October 2012.
[6] DNA nanotechnology and transhumanism seem to fit snugly together in terms of their technological vision for humanity. Whether or not most persons working in the field are predisposed to this belief is irrelevant but the belief that vaccinations across the board are absolutely necessary and beyond reproach is a powerful part of the medical establishment. As such, the transhumanist paradigm naturally joins forces with materialism, atheism and corporatism to unfold their agenda accordingly. Journalist Sayer Ji has this to say on the subject:

“Not only have humans strayed from their mammalian roots by creating and promoting infant formula over breast milk, and then promoting synthetic immunity via vaccines over the natural immunity conferred through breastfeeding and sunlight exposure, for instance, but implicit within the dominant medical model is to replace natural immunity with a synthetic one. This is the philosophy of transhumanism, a movement which intends to improve upon and transcend our humanity, and has close affiliation with some aspects of eugenics.
The CDC’s immunization schedule reflects a callous lack of regard for the 3 billion years of evolution that brought us to our present, intact form, without elaborate technologies like vaccination — and likely only because we never had them at our disposal to inflict potentially catastrophic harm to ourselves. The CDC is largely responsible for generating the mass public perception that there is greater harm in not “prophylactically” injecting well over 100 distinct disease-promoting and immune-disruptive substances into the bodies of healthy children. They have been successful in instilling the concept into the masses that Nature failed in her design, and that medical and genetic technologies and interventions can be used to create a superior human being.
In this culture of vaccination, the non-vaccinated child is “inferior,” “dirty,” perhaps even “sub-human” to those who look upon vaccination as the answer to what perfects the human immune system.
Transhumanism participates in a dialectic which requires a simultaneous and systematic dehumanization of those who do not share the same way of thinking and behaving. The eugenic undertones of mass vaccination and the cult of synthetic immunity are now only thinly veiled, as we move closer to the point where a psuedo-scientific medical dictatorship lays claim to our very bodies, and the bodies of our children.
The point of no return (if not already traversed) is only around the corner: the mass introduction of DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccine technology. Vaccines moved through the following stages (a tortured history of failures and massive “collateral damage”): Live Vaccines > Attenuated Vaccines > Subunit Vaccines > Toxid Vaccines > Conjugate Vaccines, only now reaching towards converting our living tissue into “vaccine-making factories” through the use of DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccines, which are designed to directly alter cells within the vaccinated person’s body so that they create the antigens normally provided by vaccines themselves.
While not yet in use, clinical trials are now underway to obtain FDA approval. If we do not educate ourselves now and act accordingly, their mass implementation is inevitable, and our very genomes will become the next target of the vaccination/transhumanist agenda.” – ‘The Vaccination Agenda: Implicit Transhumanism’ By Sayer Ji, Contributing editor, Activist Post, January 24, 2012.
[7] Most Innovative Defense Technology’ 2008 Award Nominee – Nano SCOUT AeroVironment Inc.| http://www.defense-update.com/ | ‘The dragonfly built to spy – Tiny flying robots have the military abuzz, says Mark Harris’ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tech.
[8] A COMBINED EXPERIMENTAL-NUMERICAL STUDY OF THE ROLE OF WING FLEXIBILITY IN INSECT FLIGHT Lingxiao Zheng, Xiaolin Wang, Afzal Khan, R. R. Vallance and Rajat Mittal1 Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, George Washington University, Washington DC 20052 Tyson L. Hedrick 2009. http://www.me.jhu.edu/fsag/Publications/Papers/AIAA-2009-382-170percent5B1percent5D.pdf
[9] ‘Hacking the President’s DNA’ November 12, The Atlantic Magazine, By Andrew Hessel, Marc Goodman and Steven Kotler.
[10] ‘Micro-Drones Combined With DNA Hacking Could Create A Very Scary Future’ By Robert Johnson, Oct. 28, 2012. Business Insider | http://www.businessinsider.com/
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘A Glimpse Into China’s Post-Nuclear Super-Weapons: An Interview with Lev Navrozov on Nanoweapons by Ryan Mauro for http://www.worldthreats.com Sept. 26, 2003. | Quotes sourced from Engines of Creation By Eric Drexler (1986).
[13] ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’ ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/ntw/pdf/soa_en.pdf
[14] ‘How helpful is nanotechnology in agriculture?’ By Allah Ditta 2012 Adv. Nat. Sci: Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 3 033002 doi:10.1088/2043-6262/3/3/033002 Vietnam Academy of Science & Technology, 29 May 2012. IOP Science | http://iopscience.iop.org/2043-6262/3/3/033002/article#ansn431989bib05
[15] Ibid.
[16] ‘The potential and challenges of nanopore sequencing’ Nature Biotechnology 26, 1146 – 1153 (2008) Published online: 9 October 2008 | doi:10.1038/nbt.1495
[17] ‘Tiny Inhaled Particles Take Easy Route from Nose to Brain’ August 3, 2006, University of Rochester Medical Centre. | Wu, J; Liu, W; Xue, C; Zhou, S; Lan, F; Bi, L; Xu, H; Yang, X et al. (2009). ‘Toxicity and penetration of TiO2 nanoparticles in hairless mice and porcine skin after subchronic dermal exposure’. Toxicology letters 191 (1): 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.05.020. PMID 19501137. | Jonaitis, TS; Card, JW; Magnuson, B (2010). ‘Concerns regarding nano-sized titanium dioxide dermal penetration and toxicity study’. Toxicology letters 192 (2): 268–9. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.10.007. PMID 19836437. | Schneider, Andrew, ‘Amid Nanotech’s Dazzling Promise, Health Risks Grow’, March 24, 2010. | ‘ Nanofibres ‘may pose health risk’,’ BBC News, August 24, 2012. | ‘Is Chronic Inflammation the Key to Unlocking the Mysteries of Cancer?’ By Gary Stix, Scientific American, July 2007.
[18] ‘When Nano May Not Be Nano’ Duke University, Depart. Civil & Environmental Engineering September 14 2009.
[19] ‘Some Limits to Global Ecophagy by Biovorous Nanoreplicators, with Public Policy Recommendations’ By Robert A. Freitas Jr. April 2000. | www.rfreitas.com/Nano/Ecophagy.htm

Technocracy IX: Nano-Science (1)

Ted: I don’t like it here. I don’t know what’s going on. We’re both stumbling around together in this unformed world whose rules and objectives are largely unknown, seemingly undecipherable or even possibly non-existent, always on the verge of being killed by forces we don’t understand!

Allegra: That sounds like my game, all right.

Ted: It sounds like a game that’s not gonna be easy to market.

Allegra: But it’s a game everybody is already playing.

Existenz


The above quote is taken from the 1999 film Existenz by Canadian director David Cronenberg who has been fascinated by the interaction between man and machine for much of his career. In the film, we are introduced to a near-future scenario in which virtual reality games interface directly with the body via “game pods” which have replaced electronic consoles. The pods are attached to “bio-ports”, which have been inserted in the players’ spines, through an umbilical cord of bio-cybernetic flesh. Gaming companies Antenna Research and Cortical Systematics, compete against each other. A resistance group made up of “realists” are fighting to prevent the “deforming” of reality by such technology.Though seemingly an enjoyable fantasy, it is fast becoming close to reality.

Cronenberg’s film touches on many issues associated with the hugely popular world of virtual reality and the move towards integrating the human body with computer circuitry, in this case, as an entertainment tool. This hyper-realistic world seems to provide a seductive alternative from a society which is failing people through a lack of values and the emotional and spiritual nourishment it sorely needs. The integration of synthetic environment modelling, biotechnology, genetic engineering, cognitive technology, neuroscience and SMART visions are all being applied to the future of military and law enforcement under the guiding hand of Pathocratic rule.

And what of nanotechnology and its place in this saw-see between the dark and light of humanity’s destiny?

One of the most exciting, potentially beneficial forms of technology which underlies much of the current practical advances in cutting-edge science is nanotechnology or the manipulation of physical, chemical and biological properties of matter at an atomic and molecular scale. Many scientists believe nanoscience on its own, potentially heralds a change on the scale of the Industrial Revolution.

The United Kingdom’s Institute of Mechanical Engineers (IME) produced a report in early 2015 titled: Nanotechnology: The Societal Impact of The Invisible which gave a useful summary of the benefits, risks and public concerns, though with a subtle bias in favour of nanotech overall. According to the IME report there is a distinction to made between the science and technology of this field.

“The field of nanoscience grew out of the technological advancements brought about by the tunnelling microscope, enabling scientists to begin to understand and characterise the nature of materials at the atomic level. Conversely, nanotechnology in its purest sense is the design and application of functional systems at the molecular level to create usable structures and devices”.

Nanomaterials are present both in Nature and in synthetic production, the latter essentially attempting to improve on what already exists in the natural world. These organic and in-organic structures include viruses, wax crystals on leaves, Spider silk, the bottom of gecko feet, Butterfly wings, cement, scales, paper, corals, colloids (milk and blood) skin, feathers, horns and hair, clays, opals, pigments and smoke.

Nanotechnology is apparently much more than the “very small” with precise nano-scale and recognised by what is called an  SI prefix for one billionth (n) or 10-9 (0.000000001). Some examples follow:

image

Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution: 27th Report, Novel Materials in the
Environment: The case of nanotechnology, 2008.

What makes nanoscience so compelling, even magical, is the capacity to buck the rules of Newtonian physics, where materials behave in accordance to quantum laws. This is due to the fact that the properties of materials change at the nanoscale, with a percentage of the atoms involved taking a highly significant role in the process of malleable change. The IME report describes it in the following way:

As the size reduces so the physical properties e.g. the melting/boiling point, conductivity fluorescence, magnetic permeability, absorption rates, strength and chemical reactivity begin to change; properties that the very same substances may not exhibit at the micro or macro scales. Newtonian physics no longer applies and the material behaves according to the laws of quantum physics. Nanomaterials are closer in size to atoms and molecules than they are to bulk materials, and due to this ‘smallness’, electromagnetic forces become more dominant than gravitational ones. Typically, a material or particle is referred to as ‘nano’ when it is 1–100nm in size. However the quantum effects generally occur around the 1–30nm range. At these scales it is necessary to use highly specialised microscopes, known as scanning tunnelling microscopes (STMs) which were developed in the early 1980s.

Which brings us to the process of building miniature structures at the micrometre scale, otherwise known as “microfabrication” which now extends into the nanosphere. This process obviously uses ultra-sophisticated, precision engineering techniques and high level design to carry out such manipulations. An example of how advanced such microfabrication has become hails from a 2014  German/Israeli team of engineers and their creation of a nanoscale ‘robot.’ According to the IME report, It: “…has has the potential to be small enough to manoeuvre inside the human body and possibly inside human cells.” They state further:

The robot has a tiny screw-shaped propeller that can move in a gel-like fluid, mimicking the environment inside a living organism. The filament that makes up the propeller is made of silica and nickel and is only 70nm in diameter; the entirepropeller is 400nm long, making it 100 times smaller than a human blood cell. It is so small,that its motion can be affected by the motion of nearby molecules (known as Brownian motion). The scientists were able to control the motion of the propellers using a relatively weak rotating magnetic field.

So this gives you some idea of the size we are talking about here. Nanotechnology is highly adaptable and takes four main  forms all of which are currently in commerical use.

The IME report lists these as:

    •  C60/Fullerenes – Fullerenes[20], named after Buckminster Fuller, the architect who pioneered the geodesic dome, are groupings of 60 carbon molecules often written as C60 and nicknamed buckyballs. Fullerenes are known for their strength and lightness; for example, when compressed to 70% of their original size, they become twice as hard as diamonds.
    • Carbon Nanotubes – Carbon nanotubes were first developed in 1991 and have an array of fascinating electronic, magnetic and mechanical properties; conducting heat and electricity far better than copper. They are at least 100 times stronger than steel, but only one sixth as dense.
    • Nanoparticles – Nanoparticles can be metallic, mineral, polymer-based or a combination of materials. The most common are titanium dioxide, zinc oxide and nanosilver. They have multiple uses: as catalysts, drug delivery mechanisms, dyes, sunscreens and filters.
    • Nanowires – Nanowires are extremely narrow threads (less than 50nm wide) and have the potential to be used in electronic devices. While they are still being developed, the hope is that they could enable further miniaturisation of electronic chips.

The latest hot topic in nanotech is molecular self assembly or self-assembled nanostructures. Using concepts of supramolecular chemistry, and molecular recognition these are brought together to induce single-molecule components to automatically arrange themselves into some useful conformation. In other words, this is the process by which molecules construct themselves into natural structures without external manipulation. Since molecules naturally bond at this level certain molecules are introduced to trigger particular outcomes. It is this automation that is the bedrock of nanotechnology. Research and Development is currently receiving millions of dollars to create self-assembly machines so that: “… in the near future, mass production self-assembly systems will be developed which would allow the mass assembly of electrical interconnections on semiconductor chips in large quantities with high speed and high precision.”

nanoflower

‘Nano Flower,’ a 3-D nanostructure grown by controlled nucleation of silicon carbide. (photomicrograph taken by Ghim Wei Ho, a Ph.D). Source: – redOrbit.com

In plain language, it means nanostructures will self-assemble and replicate under an autonomous yet regulated process, achieving more and more sophistication from each generational synthetic platform.

For now, business is booming with 670 nanotech companies in Europe and funded nanotechnology initiatives developing in countries such as Nepal, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Globally there are more than 2,000 firms dealing in the production of nano materials and/or research and development. Employment in nanotechnology increases year by year with an estimated 300,000 to 400,000 people in Europe  and over 2 million in the USA. The worldwide prediction of those employed in nanotech by the year 2020 is said to be 10 million. Public funding around the world involves large sums with:

“… total global funding reaching approx $10bn in 2011 (equivalent to c7.7bn). According to Observatory Nano[29], China surpassed the USA in 2011 for the first time, taking the top position as the biggest investor in nanotechnology research with public funding of c1.8bn. Russia and the USA have almost same level of funding (c1.6 and c1.44bn respectively) with Germany, France and the UK the biggest EU investors. The total public funding in the EU (including that from the Seventh Framework Programme) rose to c2bn in 2011, corresponding to approx 25% of the global total.”

A BCC Market Research report values the global market for nanotechnology products at $26 billion in 2014 with and estimate of about $64.2 billion by 2019. This is a “ compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 19.8% from 2014 to 2019.”

1417160533_NAN031F-0

Global Nanotech Market 2013-2019 ($ Millions) Source: www.bccresearch.com/

Despite the IME report findings revealing what the public already knew (intense distrust) and even though nanotechnology has been in the public domain for over 40 years with future profits and investments increasing annually, the  industry and its science is: “…failing to engage with society in an open and clear way and governments continue to lack impetus in committing to international regulation.” Yet, the proliferation of nano-products has been enormous during the past decade. This is just a small sample:

• Engine oil • Car wax • Catalysts to improve fuel consumption • Anti-bacterial fabrics • Tyres • Air and oil filters • Anti-scratch finishes • Air purifiers Clothing and Textiles • Anti-bacterial and anti-odour clothing • UV-resistant and protective clothing • Wrinkle and stain-resistant apparel • Flame-retardant fabrics Electronics • Displays electronics • Data memory • Anti-bacterial and antistatic coatings on keyboards, mouses, cell phones • Batteries • Organic Light-Emitting Diodes (OLED) and LEDs • DVD coatings • Computer processors and chips • MP3 players • Xboxes and PlayStations Cosmetics • Skin cleansers • Lipstick, mascara, make-up foundations • Make-up removal • Sunscreens • Skin creams and moisturisers Food and Additives • Nutritional supplements • Anti-bacterial utensils • Plastic wrap • Energy drinks • Cleaning products • Fabric softeners • Food storage containers • Cutting boards • Nano-tea, chocolate shakes, canola active oil Household • Anti-bacterial coatings in appliances • Irons, vacuums • Self-cleaning glass • Filters • Anti-bacterial furniture and mattresses • Air purifiers • Anti-bacterial, UV-resistant paints • Solar cells • Disinfectant sprays Sports Equipment • Tennis rackets and balls • Hockey sticks • Ski wax • Wet suits • Anti-fogging coatings • Golf balls and clubs • Baseball bats • Skis and snowboards • Bicycle parts Personal Care/Health • Contact lenses • Hearing aids • Cellulite treatment • Shampoos, hair gels • Insect repellents • Man-made skin • Home pregnancy tests • Body wash • Toothpaste • Deodorants • Anti-bacterial creams • Bandages • Drug delivery patches • Anti-bacterial baby pacifiers, mugs and bottles • Anti-bacterial stuffed toys • Stain-resistant plush toys

How many people are aware that they are already using and ingesting products which contain nano-materials? Very few. In the cosmetics sector would you mind if you were slathering your face with nano-materials? According to the report most people are ambivalent but not in outright opposition, even though the same polling stats showed that knowledge of nanoscience and technology was very low.

The Cancer Research industry has also apparently leapt at the chance to explore nanotech, continuing to ignore substantial alternative fields of research in diet, nutrition and other modalities which have presented consistent results in tackling cancer. The Cancer research industry has a lot of money riding behind it and only one way, reductionist science is allowed in  despite NO successes in curing the disease. What has developed is a dependent relationship to Big Pharma with a whole new range of expensive drugs for amelioration and palliative care. For example, Cancer Research UK is: “… funding multidisciplinary projects that are already bringing together collaborative teams of cancer researchers and scientists from the engineering and physical sciences. The new scheme is set to fund about ten projects each year with up to £500,000 each.”

(An extensive infographic entitled ‘How Nanotechnology Could Reengineer Us’ gives an overview of what nanotechnology could offer the human body, by “re-engineering” us).

So “progress” explores new avenues yet remains strangely one way… None more so than in the field of military and weapons companies. Indeed, by the year 2030 the UK Ministry of Defence sees nanotech playing a vital role across every aspect of society from nano-solar cells to: “… nano-robots designed for a range of purposes – including medical robots used internally in humans and micro-platforms for reconnaissance.”

If you recall the exploration into SMART Agrimatics, it will come as no surprise that nanotech is having a significant impact across the entire agricultural production cycle. Agrichemicals are a prime source of innovation as are the use of nano-sensors in combination with SMART technology. From nano-enhanced packaging to food-related products nanomaterials are slowly being adopted despite nebulous legislation and public suspicion. Though nanotech implementation in foodstuffs and animal husbandry still remains largely at the R &D stage, according to IME: “ The future application of agri-nanoproducts does however seem certain; the USA is already looking to license some products for use in the coming years, heralding a complete change in the way we grow, maintain and process food.”

There is no doubt there is great beauty, and awe-inspiring innovation in the field of nanotechnology with huge benefits for humanity in so many fields. However, this series is about the dark side of such technology and how these innovations always gravitate to the shadows since that is polarity dominating at this time.The Institute of Mechanical Engineers believe that although there is significant optimism regarding the future of nanotechnology there is still widespread suspicion that that this technology will not ultimately go where it is needed most i.e. for society and consumers. For this reason scientists in this field are not trusted. The fact that there is still no real engagement with the public about their concerns doesn’t help and the IME suggest descreasing that dislocation. Interestingly, they perceive the main reason for this as a misunderstanding on the part of the public:

“It has been suggested that the reason why some people express these views is that the established scientific community genuinely don’t consider what they do to be of any consequence to the wider population. Rather, the spotlight falls on technological advancement rather than highlighting consumer and societal needs. This is not done out of any malice or superiority on the part of the technologists; in truth, the technical community sees it purely as the everyday, the norm, and requiring little external endorsement or explanation.

That may well be but it is a subtle form of arrogance and a lack of awareness about society as a whole. More dangerously, if they have little need to inform the public and do not feel they have a duty to do so, then they fall into the hands of those forces that covet such a separation, namely corporate interests and the State. It is almost cliche now that scientists become so involved with the creativity of their work that they are often seen as geniuses on the one hand, and out-of-touch with the wider world. They are perceived as existing in a kind of intellectual bubble where accusations of outsourced ivory towers and naivete about the larger forces at work can easily stick. It is in this sense that there is most certainly technological advancement for its own sake predicated upon this community “normality,” and therefore a way in for institutionalized hubris. This is especially true in lieu of the massive potential changes we are talking about here.

Engineers in the global defence industry have no problem rationalising their satisfaction and subsequent salary that they receive from this line of “creative work”. They are doing what they love. One individual designs the a console and  another the software for Apache helicopters in Iraq which have notched tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Is there a responsibility there? Or do they fall back on: “If I didn’t do it, someone else would.” The same applies to the dark side of nanotechnology. Official Culture makes it much easier for us not to care and to compartmentalise our conscience, even our emotional life, away from deeper connections to our fellow man and woman.

The historical perspective of technology as an automatic saviour as well as a traditional source of State control lends itself to both a philosophical and practical critique since that is exactly the reality we are facing. The progression is not one of technological emancipation for societies where it counts, it is one of State warfare and corporatism. That is where the greatest innovations in Research and Development generally end up, with the by-products effecting the social and material ecology as a mirror of what is denied. Scientists in this context, can only be effective if the overall system in which they live is designed to foster a natural cooperation of expert and layman which leans overwhelmingly toward a socio-economic framework that is inclusive and just. Clearly, this is very far from the case. Quite apart from endemic corruption in science in general, nano-scientists, and the “technical community” are no exception when they are wholly governed by the military-corporate complex and inside Official Culture, whether they are able to see that or not. Thus it matters little whether they have good intentions, rather what the real world dictates from the outside in.

Meanwhile, the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) has referred:

“… to the possibility of information dominance through nano-electronics; virtual reality systems for training; automation and robotics to offset reductions in manpower, reduce risks to troops and improve vehicle performance; higher performance platforms with diminished failure rates and lower costs; improvements in chemical/biological/nuclear sensing and casualty care; improvements in systems for non-proliferation monitoring; and nano-/micromechanical devices for control of nuclear weapons.” [1]

Across the Three Establishment Model (3EM) the idea of enhancing human performance through the convergence of nanotechnology biology, information, cognitive science and warfare is highly seductive because it adds a technological ontology to their plans for society not least for their desire for a synthetic immortality. The promise of nano-implant devices, slowing down or reversing ageing, direct brain–machine interfaces and ‘artificial people’ has been discussed at various conferences and seminars across America since the early 2000’s. This may have something to do with the fact that “… the USA is spending far more [on nanotech] than any other country, and maybe more than the rest of the world combined.” [2]Since future science is part of the armoury of the power elite’s ideology for a World State, governments in Europe, Asia and the United States have invested almost $5 billion dollars between them, contributing to the projected annual market of around one trillion US dollars. [3]

 


Notes

[1] ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’ ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/ntw/pdf/soa_en.pdf
[2] Ibid. (“Figures on military NT R&D funding in other countries are difficult to obtain. The conjecture is supported by the following: the USA spends about two-thirds of the global military R&D expenditure at large (BICC, 2002); in the field of MST, according to a cautious estimate the US military R&D spending was more than ten times that of Western Europe (Altmann, 2001: 46); conference and internet presentations show an verwhelming preponderance of US work in military NT.”)
[3] ‘Apply nanotech to up industrial, agri output,’ The Daily Star (Bangladesh), 17 April 2012. | Health Risks Of Nanotechnology: How Nanoparticles Can Cause Lung Damage, And How The Damage Can Be Blocked Science Daily, June 11, 2009.

Technocracy VII: DARPA’s Technophilia (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

 “Fifty years is ample time in which to change a world and its people almost beyond recognition. All that is required for the task are a sound knowledge of social engineering, a clear sight of the intended goal – and power.”

Arthur C. Clarke


In 1964 the director of the CIA Richard Helms who was overseeing much of the experiments in mind control came out with a statement in his memo to the US senate and the Warren Commission which said: “Cybernetics can be used in ‘moulding of a child’s character, the inculcation of knowledge and techniques, the amassing of experience, the establishment of social behavior patterns … all functions which can be summarized as control of the growth process of the individual.’”

Such a wish to mould the masses has not been relinquished.

The human enhancement – or “optimization,” as the military now like to call it – has been a trenchant fantasy for decades. Recall Hollywood movies such as The Terminator (1984) Robocop (1987) and Universal Soldier (2001) which explore the idea of a comic-book annihilator dispensing justice and vengeance against those who don’t have a taste for American culture. Making soldiers into a literal army of unquestioning, bio-genetic, pharmaceutically-enhanced killing machines has proved problematic to say the least. This is partly due to the fact that while huge numbers of soldiers are suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and record numbers committing suicide on duty and during their return to civilian life, they understandably don’t fancy having their body transformed into a Captain America cyborg, even if their emotional body has been put through the shredder.

However, Pentagon financing keeps rolling in to the Defence Advanced Research Projects Area (DARPA) with national-security goals and the War on Terror acting as guidelines for military R&D and the convergence of nanotech. (Their website features competitions and public-friendly history lessons on how essential these types of innovations are to our human survival). Artificial systems including neuro-functional implants and ‘biological input/output devices’ will form the basis of a modified biochemistry to counter sleep deprivation, muscle fatigue, reaction time and endurance. This would be complemented by nano-medical monitoring of the soldier’s performance and the administering of therapeutic drugs and hormones according to programmed cycles of release. Other enhancements are possible. Electrodes might be connected to sensory organs, sensory nerves, motor nerves or muscles and appropriate brain-cortex areas. [1]Layered over the fleshly part of this “Terminator” would be a finely-tuned integrated system of equipment, body armour and uniform designed to achieve optimum levels of combat (and carnage) capability if required.

Indeed, in 2015 the DARPA boys have been using gene modifying optical technology to develop a ” ‘cortical modem’ which plugs directly into a person’s DNA and visual cortex.”  Thus, according to online journal CNET: Not only does this unique device help someone overcome blindness or poor eyesight, it generates a built-in heads-up display (HUD) that appears right in before their very eyes.  The implants create an augmented reality projection that appears like magic in your natural vision and without the need for helmets or special eyeglasses.” [2]

Undoubtedly, this new technology named optogenetics has positive implications for the blind and visually impaired. So too, it may prove an exciting prospect for virtual reality enthusiasts and computer gamers with an upgrade that would go beyond and integration of the virtual and material world never before experienced.

Mouse OptogeneticsMouse Optogenetics | Source: Guardian

Whenever there is a public and political reaction to transhumanist philosophy military or otherwise, the PR adapts and words change. Though $4 billion dollars has been syphoned away from cyborg soldier research to the SMART technology of unmanned drone warfare, R & D is still going on in the background. [3]The spiralling growth in military spending has long been out of control with over $152 billion going unaudited each year – and that’s not including CIA funded black operations under the radar of Congress. The outer layer of fraud, abuse and overtly criminal behaviour that’s going about its business behind such contracts is being missed by the Defence Department’s Inspector General. A 2008 report to Congress described: “undetected or inadequately investigated criminal activity and significant financial loss,” where: “personnel, facilities and assets are more vulnerable to terrorist activities.” [4]

Yeah and we know who the real terrorists are…

Part of the U.S. Department of Defence and created 50 years ago in response to the Soviets’ launch of Sputnik, DARPA are clearly dedicated to countering asymmetric warfare. They also acquire significant amounts of tax-payers cash to do it. The team are particularly excited to be re-designing our notions of what it means to be human, using the guinea-pigs of the US military as the model. Though no longer listed on DARPA’s website and only included those projects safe for public eyes, we can go back just a few years and read about all sorts of whacky “breakthroughs” such as the $4.5 million attempt to build a miniature, unmanned Osprey that can perch discreetly on trees, rooftops and flagpoles to spy on “foes” (or civilians, which is essentially the same thing.) $5 million was given to work laser-guided bullets able to turn at a 90 degree angle and “with a greater than 2km range.” Not forgetting the “cognitive swarm recognition technology” which is part of a program to spot rocket-propelled grenades before they are actually launched. Apparently this might involve a crossover project called “transparent displays” which exploits “… the optical plasmon phenomenology characteristics of nano-scale structures.” [5]

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of DARPA’s modus operandi is the delving into the world of psychology and neurology in order to produce an invincible human fighting machine. Mind reading, cognitive enhancement, pharmaceutically-based mind control, and brain-machine interfaces all offer avenues of million dollar research contracts sourced from the same MKULTRA influences which have changed little over the past fifty years. Adaptation and synthesising of the hapless soldier’s brain is a primary target of research. As a 2003 Wireless News report stated: “Direct neural control of complex machines is a long-term U.S. military goal. DARPA has a brain-machine interface program aimed at creating next-generation wireless interfaces between neural systems and, initially, prosthetics and other biomedical devices.” [6]Or the $3 million funded Systems of Neuro-Morphic Adaptive Plastic Scalable Electronics, or SyNAPSE, a program that will: “… develop a brain inspired electronic ‘chip’ that mimics that function, size, and power consumption of a biological cortex,” … “If successful, the program will provide the foundations for functional machines to supplement humans in many of the most demanding situations faced by war fighters today.” [7]

The latest experiments have called for the next step in understanding the portion of the brain called the neo-cortex which is used for sensory and motor commands, spatial reasoning, language and those requiring conscious thought. In other words, higher brain functions. On September 19, 2013, Networld reported that DARPA is most interested in: “… new concepts and technologies for developing what it calls a ‘Cortical Processor’ based on Hierarchical Temporal Memory.”

In April of the same year, the Obama Administration announced a project called “Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies” or the BRAIN Initiative which was funded by the 2014 budget. With DARPA lurking in the background and giving “support,” the initiative involves the collaboration of several science foundations and organisations. Dr. Francis Collins, the Director of the National Institutes of Health who shared his enthusiasm in a White House statement explained how: “… the BRAIN Initiative will focus largely on realizing new tools for imaging, recording, and eventually controlling neurons.” He said that project stresses the: “Great promise for developing such technologies” including: “… intersections of nano-science, imaging, engineering, informatics, and other rapidly emerging fields of science and engineering.” [8]

This research falls under the $3bn allocated by the Obama White House to develop technology identifying brain circuits, with financial assistance once again, from National Institute of Mental Health, who has: “… promised to move its seven-figure funding away from research into conditions such as schizophrenia and depression towards a system that looks at how brain networks contribute to difficulties that are shared across diagnoses.” The project is called Research Domain Criteria or the RDoCProject, rumoured to be an “… eventual replacement for the diagnostic system used by current-day psychiatrists.” The identification and modification of key brain circuits is the overwhelming interest in this field. [9]

KONICA MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA© infrakshun

There is no question that medical advances involving nanotechnology, neurology and neuropharmacology are destined to improve those suffering from disabilities and diseases ranging from blindness to multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer’s disease. In this context, the medical future is bright. Whether the desire to achieve a healthier and happier humanity will achieve pole position is a moot point at this stage. It is exactly the same mentality behind DARPA and the MKULTRA programs of mind experimentation of the 1940s-1970s which provides the majority of financial support and thus the continuation of that mind-set, with their attendant goals. The pace of change is awe-inspiring in the field of neuroscience and outsourced military applications spreading tentacle-like through Big Pharma, medical and educational institutions. Scientists have reached the point where computers can analyse MRI data from the brain and reconstruct thoughts, while others have broken new ground in making the first brain-to-brain interface. Rats were the primary focus followed by the human subjects using  Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. [10]

Although almost all advances in neuroscience necessarily feed into the military-intelligence apparatus, the real action can be found in the marriage of cybernetics, biology and artificial intelligence. For instance, though it might seem like trying to count the flames in an inferno, one of the avenues of exploration currently occupying scientists is how to unlock memories stored in the brain in order to create a fully autonomous brain – housed in a robot.

In 2008, Kevin Warwick, a professor at the United Kingdom’s University of Reading explained in an Agence-France Presse report that the robot (named Gordon) has a brain which is: “… composed of 50,000 to 100,000 active neurons. Once removed from rat foetuses and disentangled from each other with an enzyme bath, the specialised nerve cells are laid out in a nutrient-rich medium across an eight-by-eight centimetre (five-by-five inch) array of 60 electrodes.”

The report continued:

“This ‘multi-electrode array’ (MEA) serves as the interface between living tissue and machine, with the brain sending electrical impulses to drive the wheels of the robots, and receiving impulses delivered by sensors reacting to the environment.

Because the brain is living tissue, it must be housed in a special temperature-controlled unit — it communicates with its ‘body’ via a Bluetooth radio link. The robot has no additional control from a human or computer. From the very start, the neurons get busy. ‘Within about 24 hours, they start sending out feelers to each other and making connections,’ said Warwick.

‘Within a week we get some spontaneous firings and brain-like activity’ similar to what happens in a normal rat — or human — brain, he added. [11]

Across the pond four years later, Brown University based in Rhode Island had created the first wireless, implanted, brain-computer interface. The wireless BCIs were implanted in pigs and monkeys for just over a year. The opportunities to test human subjects is imminent.  Not wishing to be outdone by their colleagues down the road, the University of Rochester Medical Centre in New York have carried out revolutionary work in the diagnosis and treatment of brain disorders. They hope their latest research will push new boundaries – ethical constraints notwithstanding. In the same year, scientists successfully grafted human glial cells into the brains of mice, thereby sharply enhancing their cognitive capacities. Improvements were seen across most brain operations such as memory, learning, and adaptive conditioning. The fact that scientists created human chimeric mice which is open to public scrutiny should give you some idea as to what is happening with those fully-funded projects which are conveniently away from public and judicial oversight. [12]

Just in case chimeric mice become passé then it will no doubt come as a relief to those whose bread and butter relies on such innovation that they can just grow their own brains in test tubes. At least, according to the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology in Vienna. On August 28, 2013 it was reported by the UK’s Independent about a beakthrough which saw scientists “grow a brain in a laboratory for the first time.” Affectionately named: “cerebral organoids” these miniature human brains were grown from skin cells in a laboratory and are no more than 4mm and: “… equivalent in development to the brain of a human foetus at about nine weeks’ gestation, and even have the complex three-dimensional structure of a real embryonic brain.” [13]  Brain resource issues may not be a problem for the Post Human.

DARPA has pooled its own resources to come up with yet another deterrent against the (largely non-existent) threat to the techno-military complex. The idea is to combine brain data from human sentry duty with machine-vision systems. Named logically as The Cognitive Technology Threat Warning System (CTTWS) it consists of: “… a wide-angle camera and radar which collects imagery for humans to review on a screen, and a wearable electroencephalogram device that measures the reviewer’s brain activity. This allows the system to detect unconscious recognition of changes in a scene—called a P300 event.” [14]

800px-Actroid-DER_01

“The Intelligent Robotics Lab, directed by Hiroshi Ishiguro at Osaka University, and Kokoro Co., Ltd. have demonstrated the Actroid at Expo 2005 in Aichi Prefecture, Japan and released the Telenoid R1 in 2010. In 2006, Kokoro Co. developed a new DER 2 android. The height of the human body part of DER2 is 165 cm. There are 47 mobile points. DER2 can not only change its expression but also move its hands and feet and twist its body. The ‘air servosystem'” (wikpedia)

Distinct from artificial intelligence systems which rely on standard computer programming, researchers have complemented cerebral organoids by constructing a tiny machine that “looks and thinks” like a human brain allowing robots to act independently. Substantial amounts of data from decades of studies into electrical activity in the brain, otherwise known as electroencephalography (EEG) played a vital part in advancing robotics to the next level. Teams based in various locations over America have managed to create robots which, according to James K. Gimzewski, professor of chemistry at the University of California: “… will be able to be able to learn and explore the terrain and work its way through the environment without human intervention.” Using the cybernetic and systems theory concepts of self-organisation this led the researchers to the creation of: “… nano-scale interconnected wires that perform billions of connections like a human brain, … capable of remembering information” thus processing data transcends current notions of computer capability. Gimzewski believes: “This could represent a revolutionary breakthrough in robotic systems.” [15]

DARPA’s continuing quest to find the perfect cyborg has resulted in the Darpa Robotics Challenge started in 2013. That challenge consists of developing software to bring to life a 330Ib cyborg named Atlas with a funding tag of $34m available to the winning team. According to The Guardian, copies of the Atlas Cyborg were given to teams that will: “… compete to win military prizes for designing the best software to bring Atlas to life. Already Atlas, and its predecessors, can rapidly climb stairs, do more push-ups than any human, and even pass for a person while donning a chemical protection suit.”

atlas

Atlas Robot developed by DARPA Source: http://makezine.com/

The Pentagon is as coy as can be about the future applications for a number of reasons, not least because they are a dangerous liability and ethically dubious. CIA drone attacks in Pakistan have killed up to 3,587 people since 2004, up to 884 of them civilians. Human Rights Watch has created a campaign to raise awareness about the rise of drone warfare based on the unethical premise of machines. According to the organisation robots will have: “… the power to make their own decisions about killing humans” which is not exactly a pleasant thing to consider. An international coalition has now formed which hopes to: “… call for a global treaty that would impose a ‘pre-emptive and comprehensive ban’ on artificially intelligent weapons before they are developed.” [16] This has led to the formation of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control (ICRAC).

As Obama’s drones are increasingly deployed in the skies over many American cities and happily carving up civilians with asymmetric glee, we can be sure that this is a revolution of sorts. Officials thought it prudent to throw an “official statement” to assuage the minds of those ready for such meaningless PR, and stated in Nov. 2012 Defence Department policy statement: “Autonomous and semi-autonomous weapon systems shall be designed to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force.” The document added further that: “complete engagements in a time-frame consistent with commander and operator intentions and, if unable to do so, [must] terminate engagements or seek additional human operator input before continuing the engagement.”


See also: “The Pentagon is building a ‘self-aware’ killer robot army fueled by social media” By Nafeez Ahmed


The above essentially means that the military will be permitted to do as they please with their new toys. If the machines don’t do as they are told then humans will take over to complete the missions. Exercising “judgment” seems to be the fail safe, which is even less reassuring considering the woeful legacy of the US military.

If you imagine getting machines to think like humans in a military setting is disturbing, medical discoveries will continue to surge ahead nonetheless, serving to buffer the disquiet forming in most minds – outside of DARPA, that is. Apparently, the excitement of the challenge is paramount, regardless of the consequences. The idea is to create machines which are as close to functioning humans as possible with the added bonus that they will kill on command. This will take us further down a road of mind control research in programmed assassins which characterised the post-World War II and Cold War machinations. This time, with the added dimension of cybernetic, bio-engineering. After all, developing cyborgs are much less expensive than fully automated robots and far more predictable than the fallibility of hypno-programmed humans. A blend of the two brings expendability to new levels.

What if the government could change people’s moral beliefs or stop political dissent through remote control of people’s brains? A leaked document reveals that the US government, through DARPA research, is very close to accomplishing this. (See The Manchurian Reality for the historical background)

A program using “Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation” (TMS) where the temporal lobe of the brain is stimulated with electromagnetic fields, continues the tradition. The objective in this particular example is: “… to remotely disrupt political dissent and extremism by employing in tandem with sophisticated propaganda based on this technology.” Such research is given the PR gloss that its focus is foreign war games when in fact, it is more likely to target a domestic populace as social and economic strife increases. According to phase 3 of the study paper entitled: entitled “Toward Narrative Disruptors and Inductors: Mapping the Narrative Comprehension Network and its Persuasive Effects,” the ideal is to terminate lines of thinking in favour of thoughts they we would not normally be prepared to believe. In a military context we can assume that this is not about persuading people to see through Establishment deceptions – quite the opposite. [17]

Electro-stimulation and ultrasound technology have a long history in mind control experimentation upon which DARPA has eagerly capitalised. As part of its Faculty Award Program, the department kindly made a grant available to Dr. William J. Tyler, Assistant Professor in the School of Life Sciences at Arizona State University and co-founder and the CSO of SynSonix, Inc. With initial work supported by the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM) Army Research Laboratory (ARL). So, we know that medical uses are secondary here. After addressing the undoubtedly welcome potential for curing neurological diseases and brain injury, the professor informs us in a US Dept. of Defence article that: “… we have been working to develop methods for encoding sensory data onto the cortex using pulsed ultrasound.” He explains that a new technology has been developed: “… which implements trans-cranial pulsed ultrasound to remotely and directly stimulate brain circuits without requiring surgery. Further, we have shown this ultrasonic neuro-modulation approach confers a spatial resolution approximately five times greater than TMS and can exert its effects upon subcortical brain circuits deep within the brain.”

The upshot of this work and other research into brain circuitry is that it will be applied to US war-fighters where the professor states he will be putty in his benefactor’s hands looking forward: “… to developing a close working relationship with DARPA and other Department of Defense and U.S. Intelligence Communities to bring some of these applications to fruition over the coming years depending on the most pressing needs of our country’s defense industries.” [18]

I think we already know what those “pressing needs” are.

What is effectively a “Helmet of obedience” opens itself to a wide range of applications. Tyler is a busy worker bee. He has also created another plaything for military loons on his website MyBrainCloud.net which offers: “… a concept application of non-invasive brain stimulation using pulsed ultrasound, which is likely to emerge in the future. The concept is essentially to provide individual users with a personalized connection port through which various brain stimulation protocols can be administered in an open access manner using cloud computing. This technology has many broad applications ranging from at-home medicine to recreational applications such as interactive video gaming and virtual experience downloading.” [19]

The page has since been taken down.

HAARPHigh Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP)

At this point, we might usefully remind ourselves of the relatively modern use of High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP).

Before it was apparently “closed down” it was based in Garkona, Alaska, and jointly funded by the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air Force, the University of Alaska, and DARPA. HAARP was officially designated as an advanced weather research project focused on the ionosphere. It has been cloaked in mystery as to its true nature, in part due to an official stance of “national security” and the repellent legacy of US experimentation in the field of technotronic warfare and mind control. It seems part of the experimentation involved the use of electromagnetic frequencies and directed energy beams pulsed into the delicate upper layer of the atmosphere called the ionosphere around 1000 km above the Earth’s surface. The aim was/is to heat up specific areas which can create lenses of magnified effects. On the official website at http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/we can read: “HAARP is a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes.”

Though there is very little to go on regarding the nature, development and future direction of HAARP, Physicist Dr. Bernard Eastlund has given a lot of food for thought from his 1985 US patent entitled: “Method and apparatus for altering a region in the earth’s atmosphere, ionosphere, and/or magnetosphere” filed in 1985. If such a patent can be made available publicly you can be sure classified research is well in advance of similar prototypical research. From this patent, he states:

[The] temperature of the ionosphere has been raised by hundreds of degrees in these experiments.

A means and method is provided to cause interference with or even total disruption of communications over a very large portion of the earth. This invention could be employed to disrupt not only land based communications, both civilian and military, but also airborne communications and sea communications. This would have significant military implications.

It is possible … to take advantage of one or more such beams to carry out a communications network even though the rest of the world’s communications are disrupted.

[This invention] can be used to an advantage for positive communication and eavesdropping purposes.

Exceedingly large amounts of power can be very efficiently produced and transmitted.

This invention has a phenomenal variety of … potential future developments. Large regions of the atmosphere could be lifted to an unexpectedly high altitude so that missiles encounter unexpected and unplanned drag forces with resultant destruction or deflection. Weather modification is possible by, for example, altering upper atmosphere wind patterns or altering solar absorption patterns by constructing one or more plumes of atmospheric particles which will act as a lens or focusing device. Ozone, nitrogen, etc. concentrations in the atmosphere could be artificially increased.

Electromagnetic pulse defenses are also possible. The earth’s magnetic field could be decreased or disrupted at appropriate altitudes to modify or eliminate the magnetic field.

Though differing in scope and logistical capabilities this is exactly the type of experimentation which HAARP may still be carrying out, albeit under a entirely different set up.

Though many researchers posit HAARP was indeed a vast geo-engineering project linked to reducing climate change by saturating the atmosphere with specific chemicals – the infamous chemtrails controversy – it seems this was a sub-division of experimental research and a likely cover for something else. The evidence may surface that it is not restricted to weather but a continuation of experiments gained from mind control research, something which the Establishment has been interested in since the days of Nikola Tesla. The real action may stem from this long rumoured experimental mass mind control, in line with the US military’s goal of full-spectrum dominance by 2020.

Author and researcher Nick Begich Jr. and his influential book: Angels Don’t Play This HAARP, suggested that experiments in the ionosphere have advanced greatly to the extent that earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes can be triggered (Hurricane Katrina, 2005, Haitian earthquake of 2009) and localised as part of an on-going geostrategy. More importantly, he theorises that it is the product of decades of research which has resulted in a mind control device of considerable power.

Given that there has been decades of proven experiments in mind programming, huge advances in military technology such as Silent Sound Spectrum carried out by the US government, this is very far from outrageous. Begich’s claims and that of other researchers are supported by public patents relating to HAARP a sample of which follows:

  • C. W. Hansell (1945) “Communication system by pulses through the Earth”, U.S. Patent 2,389,432.;
  • R. L. Tanner (1965) “Extremely low-frequency antenna”, U.S. Patent 3,215,937;
  • G. F. Leydorf (1966) “Antenna near field coupling system”, U.S. Patent 3,278,937;
  • B. J. Eastlund (1987) “Method and apparatus for altering a region in the Earth’s atmosphere, ionosphere, and/or magnetosphere”, U.S. Patent 4,686,605;
  • B. J. Eastlund (1991) “Method for producing a shell of relativistic particles at an altitude above the earths surface”, U.S. Patent 5,038,664.

The history of DARPA’s main avenue of research has always been neuroscience, nanoscience and cybernetics adapted to military applications.  Though often designated as a classic conspiracy theory and therefore not worth investigating, it appears even the European Parliament expressed unease at the project in the document: “Minutes of 28/01/1999 – Final Edition, Environment, security and foreign affairs, A4-0005/1999: ‘Resolution on the environment, security and foreign policy’: stating that it: “… considers HAARP by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body before any further research and testing.”

Good luck with that.

 


Notes

[1] op. cit. ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’
[2]’DARPA implant could give people Terminator-like vision, coldorbit.com February 18, 2015
[3] ‘The Rise and Decline of Military Human Enhancement’ By Michael Burnham-Fink, Science Progress January 7, 2011. http://scienceprogress.org/2011/01/the-rise-and-decline-of-military-human-enhancement/
[4] ‘Pentagon Watchdogs Swamped by Military Spending; $152 Billion a Year  Goes Unaudited’ Wired May 2008.
[5] Ibid.
[6] ‘Toward a Brain-Internet Link,’ Rodney Brooks, WirelessNewsFactor, 10 December, 2003.
[7] ‘DARPA 2009: Brain On A Chip, Transparent Displays’ by Noah Shachtman, Wired February 2, 2008.

[8] ‘Obama has announced a $100-million brain mapping project’ io9.com, September 19, 2013.
[9] ‘Vaughan Bell: news from the borders of mental illness’ guardian/Observer September 29, 2013.
[10]’Computer can read letters directly from the brain’ Science Daily August 19, 2013.
[11] A ‘Frankenrobot’ with a biological brain, (AFP) Aug 13, 2008
[12] ‘First human brain-to-brain interface allows remote control over the internet, telepathy coming soon’, extremetech.com/ August 28, 2013
[13] ‘Scientists ‘grow’ a brain in a laboratory for the first time.’ by Steve Connor The Independent,August 28, 2013.
[14] ‘Sentry System Combines a Human Brain with Computer Vision’Lucas Laursen, MIT Tech Review, November 27, 2012.
[15] ‘DARPA Building Robots With ‘Real’ Brains’ http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org 9 Apr 2013.
[15] ‘Rights group launches campaign to ban ‘killer robots” phys.org Apr 23, 2013 by Danny Kemp
[16] ‘Secret DARPA Mind Control Project Revealed: Leaked Document’ – Whistleblower Reveals Military Mind Control Project At Major University. Activist PostJuly 29 2013.
[17] ‘Remote Control of Brain Activity Using Ultrasound’ Armed with Science, http://www.science.dodlive.mil
[18] http://www.tylerlab.com/projects/ultrasound/future

Technocracy VI: The Technocrats Tap in (3)

“Surveillance induced morality: relics of cultural retardation”.
 .
– Marc Maron
.

How many times have we heard the response: “If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear”?

This almost child-like wish to place faith in the unsullied purity of the authorities and Daddy State seems to know no bounds.

The success of mass surveillance is defined by the same gradualism. Endless new devices and gadgetry help to insulate our concerns about technology and how it can be used. It doesn’t matter how altruistic the intent is, whether it means to reduce suffering or create a more socially responsible culture, social justice is a concept struggling to keep its head above the water of pathogenic pollution. Whether biotech or nano-tech, since military, geo-political strategies and social pathologies dominate they will be pulled into the same codes of conduct mandated under Official Culture. Suffering will continue under flares of revolution until the psychopath is denied influence in ALL spheres. Access to technology which will disburse wealth and true freedom cannot take place until such a realisation manifests to the extent it dismantles traditional power structures. To think otherwise, will simply perpetuate the cover. Such a trajectory has only been possible due to the relatively rapid rise of the National Security State apparatus rooted in the 3EM riding high on updated myths propagated to ensure a smooth transition.

In combination with ECHELON and or MAIN CORE we have a global surveillance grid sitting on top of European and US intelligence mining that is the most invasive in history. This technological construct is imbued with power from a perception that can only multiply and augment in the same way we continually seek new “apps” and add-ons to our consumerist ethos.  A technocratic centralisation is the only direction. The promise of open source software will only prove liberating when the central mainframe of core influence is dismantled. Otherwise…Open source initiatives will operate within carefully defined parameters, in much the same way as our credit cards, cell phones and i-pads. Technology is not the culprit here – it is the reliance on the limited applications which is displacing our incredible, untapped creative power. This displacement only leads to the atrophying of our individual and collective creativity. And this is where artificial intelligence and transhumanist ideology offers an unprecedented threat.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. More on this later.

1024px-Menwith-hill-radomes

RAF Menwith Hill, a large site in the United Kingdom, part of ECHELON and the UKUSA Agreement. Photo Credit: Matt Crypto (wikipedia).

The International Campaign Against Mass Surveillance (ICAMS) produced the excellent document: ‘The Emergence of a Global Infrastructure for Mass Registration and Surveillance’ back in April 2005 which detailed in precise terms the nature of these myths, edited extracts of which will serve as an adequate summary of what this transition really means:

Myth #1: We are merely being asked to sacrifice some of our privacy and convenience for greater security.

“The object of the infrastructure that is being constructed is not ordinary police or intelligence work but, rather, mass surveillance of entire populations. In this infrastructure, everyone will be treated as a suspect, and state agents will maintain data profiles on all of us. […] The elimination of risk Indeed, it is now evident and documented that the United States and other countries are acting aggressively on information, seizing and detaining people without reasonable grounds, and “rendering” them to third countries or extraterritorial camps run by the U.S., where they face torture during interrogation and indefinite detention. Alongside the global system for mass registration and surveillance is emerging what some commentators are calling a “global gulag”,4 in which unknown numbers of people are languishing. What is at stake in this new world order is more than mere privacy, or even democratic processes, legal systems, and civil liberties. Basic human rights are in jeopardy.”

The document also lists the The Registrations of Populations as integral to the surveillance state with a long history of isolated test-runs across the world and with the shadow of abuse inherent in such data mining. Examples are given of Japanese internment in America the Second World War, the 1994 genocide that took place in Rwanda and the Pass Laws of apartheid South Africa. Such highly detailed information derived from Registration: “… is the tool by which those in power can easily single out and target certain kinds of people – not for what they have done, but for who they are.” And further: “By creating inclusion, the system also creates exclusion. For practical purposes, a person without a mandatory identity document will not exist – or will exist only as a risk to the state.”

Myth #2: These initiatives facilitate travel.

“But something else is happening, too. The private sector is being pressed into service as the state’s eyes and ears. Just as it has done with the acquisition of private-sector databases and airline passenger record systems, the state is using the private sector to exponentially increase its surveillance capacity in the realm of electronic communications and financial transactions. And, instead of relying on the inconsistent practices of businesses, governments are starting to tell businesses how to design their information systems, what information to gather, how long it must be stored, what must be checked and reported, and what must be given directly to state officials.

Compelling service providers to “build in” surveillance capacity to their systems means that within minutes of receiving a warrant from a court, real-time interception of a person’s Internet or voice over Internet use can be implemented with just a few computer strokes, making a connection between the computerized listening stations of law enforcement and the service provider’s system.”

The FBI’s various software can be used to search for keywords in the trillions of gigabytes of information that is continuously vacuumed up whether from your bank accounts or blogs. Data mining is the future of crime prevention which is already merging with the dubious practice of entrapment. In George Orwell’s 1984 Winston, the main protagonist in the novel appears to describe the present: “It was inconceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate, they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live – did live from the habit that became instinct – in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard.” The only difference in our world, our surveillance will comprise of various degrees of robot and artificial intelligence from the basic models already appearing in our malls to sophisticated androids capable of human simulation. They will assess are bio-signatures and voluminous data files and make mathematical probabilities of threats to the system which will slowly build itself around us.

Myth #3: If one has nothing to hide, one has nothing to worry about.

“An example of the many mistakes that were made in that era was the naming of academic Owen Lattimore as the Soviet Union’s top spy in the U.S. He later was fully cleared of the charges. In his account of the affair he noted that the F.B.I. and other agencies had ‘built up on him a dossier of ‘a man who might have existed’. Again, as a historian of the period has observed, ‘that phrase catches the very essence of the creation of the national insecurity state: a data world that shadows, mimics, and caricatures the real world’ We may think that anyone looking at our personal data with the proper explanation would conclude we are innocuous, but, in fact, in the data world we have no control over our “virtual identities” or the interpretations that others make of them.”

This goes to the central premise of conditioning that comes about from living under inverted totalitarianism and the necessary glut of authoritarian followers who allow its manifestation. We do not notice the dismantling of the foundation upon which are human values and ethics reside due to the buffering of our intuition and conscience. This is achieved through propaganda, psychic driving and memetic engineering of our consciousness all cemented with the human propensity for wishful thinking and denial.

We keep coming back to the uncomfortable fact that we naturally seek sanctuary in the delusion that there is nothing to worry about because we cannot entertain the possibility that we may have to alter our beliefs and attempt a deconstructive introspection. When such a painful process begins it can shatter the ego-mask that buffers us from the terror of the situation. When our personality is largely empty of substance this can be akin to inviting death of identity and belonging. So, having nothing to worry about is a preferable hook upon wish we can willingly attach.

In modern times, nothing comes closer to a collective seduction than the human races’ relationship to technology. We are firmly caught in its web of convenience, innovation and compliance in much the same way we are enthralled by the chemical hit of sex. In that sense, the surveillance state is just another compromise on the road to achieving the new nirvana of the post-human.

Have we really learned those lessons? Or have we merely changed our focus?

Boundless-heatmap-large-0001

“The worldwide heat map from the NSA’s data visualisation tool BOUNDLESSINFORMANT, showing that during a 30-day period, 97 billion internet data records (DNI) and 124 billion telephony data records (DNR) were collected.” (wikipedia, creative commons | Source http://jobkaster.com/ Author National Security Agency)

Myth# 4: The technology being used is objective and reliable.

“First, the factual base on which the technology rests is unreliable. The ‘best information available’ on which data mining or risk-scoring technology depend is often inaccurate, lacking context, dated, or incomplete. It might even be dirty information – extracted by torture, or offered by an informant who is vulnerable or is acting in bad faith. Secondly, the criteria used to sort masses of data will always be over-inclusive and mechanical. Data mining is like assessing ‘guilt by Google’ key-word search. And since these systems use broad markers for predicting terrorism, ethnic and religious profiling are endemic to them. … a precautionary principle is at work when human beings are making the risk assessments.”

A surveillance state is surely an oxymoron by virtue of the fact it is created not from the wish to protect but the incentive to control. Technology is only as trustworthy as its programmer and by extension, the context in which the capabilities of technology are applied. By the same token, human beings are fallible and since machines are born from the quality of our own minds they will mirror the glitches and unpredictable anomalies so much are part of a learning universe – despite protestations to the contrary. The more complicated and sophisticated machines become the more they will transcend their in-built limitations – that is spark that consciousness seeks. But the Surveillance State is linked to wider philosophical beliefs where development and trust in technology is based on the notion of an evolutionary salvation. Such a suggestion is usually rejected by transhumanists who insist that technology is merely the next stage in human evolution; our destiny is to embrace singularity and merge with the machine for optimum transcendence. By implication, the surveillance state will cease to exist since it will become superfluous to our needs.

Once again, this presupposes that such a system of malevolence will naturally evolve into one of benevolence and those at key nodal points of its power will simply transcend along with us. More likely is that the rooted dominance that gave rise to inversion will offer more of the same, where the worm-hole of singularity is really nothing more than a sublime devolution by delusion, the end result of which is absorption of all that is individual and original in exchange for group-think and technocratic compliance. Sophisticated, yes, even ecstatic at times, but like an addictive drug, when you realise you are hooked and seek to escape in search of authentic experience, it will be too late. From reliability and trust projected onto the machine will ultimately invite the law of repulsion.

Myth #5 and 6: Terrorist watch lists are a reliable product of international intelligence cooperation and consensus / Governments want to implement these systems to protect their citizens from terrorists.

“There is no due process afforded individuals or groups to allow them to challenge the inclusion of their names on a list. And, once the “terrorist” label is fastened to them, actions are taken against them without normal legal protections being afforded (protections such as presumption of innocence, the right to know the evidence and allegations against one and to respond, the right to remain silent, and habeas corpus). This is the essence of the risk assessment model: it treats as intolerable risks the very legal protections that are fundamental to free and democratic societies. In short, the U.S. lists have “been created haphazardly and without the carefully constructed checks and balances that such powerful instrument[s] demand.” And the lists are certainly bloated. At various times, news reports have put the numbers of names on the U.S. lists in the millions.”

Despite the fact that 99.9 per cent of those listed are largely innocent of any crimes at all, the Terrorist Watch List is drawn directly from the idea that al-Qaeda/ISIL and most terrorist atrocities are representative of a real, external threat. Such a disastrous policy has shown to be a cynical manipulation of the mass mind and comprehensively debunked if one reads the research from authors and experts in the field alongside the current geo-strategy and its outcomes in the last one hundred years.

The official story of global terrorism is a monumental fabrication – a product of a compartmentalised mutation of myth used to promote the economic and socio-cultural status quo. It is a cleverly disguised tool of opportunism for social control with the rise of police states and war without end as the norm. Indeed, such an inversion is truly insidious as the pathology begins to make inroads into the psyche of normal human beings. As the ICAMS authors state: “As people begin to realize that every transaction in their personal lives is potentially being watched – and that their innocent actions and beliefs can be easily misconstrued by risk assessors in their own and other countries, they will begin to internalize the social control that is being exerted by governments, watching what they say, what they criticize, who they associate with, and what they profess to believe in.”

DigiGes_PRISM_Yes_we_scan_-_Demo_am_Checkpoint_Charlie_June_2013

Germans protesting against the NSA surveillance program PRISM at Checkpoint Charlie in Berlin. (wikipedia,)

This is happening fast. The official culture of psychopathy requires these myths not only to keep populations in a state of fear and disempowerment but more importantly, so that the banking architecture and profits from the arms race, weapons manufacturing, narcotics, human and organ trafficking continues until nothing more can be squeezed out of the husk. Implosion is the only avenue left. Yet, from this breakdown, will we have a true community template of freedom which encourages a free-flowing exchange or will we walk as somnambulists into a mainframe of control from which comfort and efficiency is a high-resolution mask? This set of technocratic controls represent both the future safeguards against this implosion and the ultimate resource of future exploitation when machine-based society dominates over a depopulated world.

Other myths include that of “Western Democracies defending democracy and human rights around the world”; “such initiatives make us safer”; “Guaranteeing security is the paramount responsibility of governments” and the platitude that “at least, these initiatives are better than doing nothing.” All of which are much propagated lies within the MSM, think-tanks and PR outfits which prey on the naive and ill-informed. As ICAMS asserts:

“Careful examination shows that the global, mass registration and surveillance initiatives that have been described in this document are not “better than doing nothing”. They divert resources away from activities that would provide us with better security, they are not effective, and the harm they do to democracies, individuals, the rule of law, and global security is not proportional to their utility, or even to the risk they are supposedly addressing.”

Biotechnology and transhumanist discourse in general, is wholly identified with the idea of accelerating human design and manipulating the rate of perceived evolution. This is in accordance with a one-dimensional philosophy that discards the idea of natural rhythms and cycles that may have their own rates of change and which may not be immediately accessible to the fallible and very subjective human mind. This is hardly surprising due to the movement’s secular roots. However, what if – as a very rich tradition of often suppressed ancient wisdom suggests – there is indeed a precise symmetry and purpose in the way the planet, cosmos and Universe functions and organises itself? Most transhumanists appear to reject this possibility and assume that a “genetic designer label” can be stamped onto biology based on what they consider to be a sacred evolutionary direction. As with most strictly materialist perceptions, in true Baconian tradition the control of matter, mind and Nature is the objective divorced from the idea of consciousness existing outside the constraints of matter. A Masters-of-the-Universe mentality seeks to upstage Nature and the planet itself, bending it to their “post-human” will.

That is not to say there are not some great minds in the transhumanist movement and that there is nothing of value to be found there. But when there is no real discernment between what is considered to be pathology and normalcy and where beliefs are already predisposed to psychological corruption, then it just becomes yet another hijacked ideology. There is also the opportunity to ask questions as to whether we base our future on the lessons of the past or presume to forge ahead and base our decisions on a technological train of wishful thinking. Will we be downloading and uploading a reality that is sacrificing authenticity for artifice?

Can we say that the Elite families of the West have changed; that all is in the past and they have comprehensively turned over a new leaf? Evidence so far suggests that this particular mind-set has merely adapted and refined its methods. Depopulating the world, identifying, logging, tagging and micro-chipping the remaining populace and herding them into tightly controlled mega-cities via economic hardship is one future the Pathocrats envision. Meanwhile, buying up vast tracts of land under the banner of environmentalism will provide them with suitable means to live with the benefits of advanced bio-genetic/cyber technology at their fingertips – most likely with the view to extending their life-spans. Far-fetched or not, psychopaths and those drunk on power seldom think of failure. Vast amounts of money has been channelled for decades into massive underground bunkers presently dotted around the US and Europe some of which can house over 2 million people. To bring “Order out of Chaos” one must first introduce the Chaos to the extent that all manner of alternatives are wiped clean, leaving only one Singularity. They intend to be safe and warm away from all their created carnage and for as long as it takes.

The same vision that has hijacked the normal expressions of creativity for the last two hundred years or more has embraced the Information Age. If a virus goes unnoticed within all societal domains and even begins to define the nature of society, then any future innovations and apparent evolutionary surges will be made under the impetus of the same macro-social pathogen and thus subverted towards anti-human goals until such time it begins to lose its grip. The internet provides us with an immense opportunity to access massive amounts of information and turn it into knowledge through clusters of networks. We have the opportunity to develop and apply that knowledge/awareness in ways undreamt of. Consequently, a real battle for freedom is already taking place in various fields of technology between what we might call the entropic /machine consciousness which seeks to dominate and coerce reality into its tiny perceptions and the human / creative consciousness that seeks to co-create, disburse and expand alongside the Earth and Universe. As a very real human global brain awakens it remains to be seen how it will be wired up and if those “synapses” will be able to make unbreakable bonds based on freedom, truth, responsibility and love.