By Theodore & Walid Shoebt
2016 saw the success of the Brexit referendum, around which the world’s conservatives danced the dance of fickle delusion. Those who questioned their delusion were chided as bringers of “fake news,” as though these two words can refute the dark reality of Brexit which we have been warning about since the day of the 2016 referendum. Britain leaving means the UK no longer having any veto power, no longer having any influence, and no longer having any contribution in the military defense of the EU. While the Brexit fanatics praised this loss as “taking back control,” what gain and what control does Britain have by leaving? The fanatics will say that none of this matters, and that the only important thing is Britain having “sovereignty.” So, while you elevate your sovereignty, Britain leaves a power vacuum in the EU, and who will fill it? Germany is already working to fill in the gap that Britain is digging in. So, while the fanatics indiscriminately praise Brexit as a victory of sovereignty, they do not care to see that their vision is leading to a revival of German power.
Brexit is helping to facilitate the revival of German military strength, which means another reich. It is of no surprise, then, that the the main strategist of Brexit — really the one who led to the referendum victory — is a eugenist who wants Britain, thanks to Brexit, to enact Darwinist policy. The Germans of the Third Reich wanted eugenics, and there were plenty of British fascists (like Houston Chamberlain) who revered the Reich and wanted eugenics. Today, the Brexit ideologues desire for eugenics, while their Brexit is leading to the revival of German power. Looking at this through an historical lens, we are not shocked.
Dominic Cummings, who is the senior advisor for Boris Johnson, is considered to be the mastermind behind getting enough British people to vote for Brexit. But what has not been pointed out enough is that he is a eugenist. Cummings is not just a nominal eugenist who tries his best to keep his beliefs to himself, he is an outspoken proponent of eugenics and wants to apply eugenic policy on the population.
In February of 2019, Cummings wrote an article on genetic scanning entitled, On the referendum #30: Genetics, genomics, predictions & ‘the Gretzky game’ — a chance for Britain to help the world. In this piece, Cummings writes how Britain should have a health policy in which citizens will be genetically examined, including the unborn. Cummings affirms that “We should plan for free universal ‘SNP’ genetic sequencing as part of a shift to genuinely preventive medicine” and how this type of technology “enables us to take DNA from unborn embryos, do SNP genetic sequencing costing ~$50, and make useful predictions about the odds of the embryo being an outlier for diseases like atrial fibrillation, diabetes, breast cancer, or prostate cancer.”
Cummings also specifies how this method will “revolutionise” in-vitro fertilization and that “Instead of picking embryos at random, parents will start avoiding outliers for disease risks and cognitive problems.” While there is nothing wrong with working to prevent disease, there is definitely something wrong with murdering the unborn because they have defects or diseases. Cummings doesn’t just want to measure the genetic makeups of people to detect diseases, but to measure their “intelligence.” He makes this clear while referencing his friend, the geneticist Stephen Hsu of the Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) which Cummings happily endorses. As Cummings writes:
“Hsu predicted that very large samples of DNA would allow scientists over the next few years to start identifying the actual genes responsible for complex traits, such as diseases and intelligence, and make meaningful predictions about the fate of individuals.”
In the world of Cummings and Hsu, embryos are chosen for their best genetic qualities while the others are terminated. In the same article by Cummings he recommends an article by Hsu entitled On the genetic architecture of intelligence and other quantitative traits, in which Hsu writes how this method of genetic scanning “can be used in reproductive applications, ranging from embryo selection (choosing which IVF zygote to implant) to active genetic editing (e.g., using powerful new CRISPR techniques).” For Hsu, choosing the best embryo would prevent “the child who struggles in school” from being born and would increase the population of people with college degrees:
“For typical parents, choosing the best out of 10 [embryos] might mean the difference between achild who struggles in school, versus one who is able to complete a good college degree. Zygote genotyping from single cell extraction is already technically well developed, so the last remaining capability required for embryo selection is complex phenotype prediction. The cost of these procedures would be less than tuition at many private kindergartens, and of course the consequences will extend over a lifetime and beyond.” (brackets mine)
What this is is the continuation of the same eugenic ideology of the 19th century, only now the language is tweaked just a little bit so that instead of calling someone a ‘defective,’ an ‘undesirable’ or ‘inferior,’ they simply describe them as someone who fails at school and not deserving of being born. Both Cummings and Hsu want embryo selection to be a part of government medical systems. For example Hsu envisages how “many countries will not only legalize human genetic engineering,but even make it a (voluntary) part of their national healthcare systems.” In a footnote Hsu takes inspiration from both Israel and Denmark stating that “Genetic Diagnosis or Screening (PGD or PGS) of embryos can already be covered by national health care plans” of these countries. In Denmark, unborn babies with Down syndrome have been nearly exterminated as a result of 98% of women choosing to abort after having a genetic screening of the embryo. Carsten Søndergaard, the Danish ambassador to Ireland stated:
“In general it should be noted that it is not the policy of the Danish health authorities to eradicate Down’s (sic) syndrome, but it is their duty to provide the pregnant woman with the best possible basis for her to make her own decision about her pregnancy.”
The fact that Hsu — an ally of Cummings — is in favor of Denmark’s policy of enabling the eradication of people with disabilities, and that he is a serious figure in the business of genetic screening, reveal his and Cummings own sinister motivation.
Hsu writes that these methods will allow him to “gain insights” into “how natural selection led to human intelligence.” Yet, Cummings’s friend, Hsu, wants to be the natural selector of who lives and dies in the name of “intelligence.” Hsu wants to do this through a company which he cofounded called Genomic Prediction, which screens out embryos deemed likely to have “mental disability”. Hsu’s argument? If he doesn’t do it, then someone else will do it anyway. “I think people are going to demand that [embryo screening for disabilities]. If we don’t do it, some other company will,” says Hsu (brackets mine). This company of Cummings’ friend gives people the “option” (a term they love to use for marketing) to choose the embryo they want and to reject the ones with most chances of having ‘defects’ or an IQ of 25 points below the average.
“What that corresponds to is way-above-average intellectual potential,” says Hsu. The term eugenics simply means “of good stock,” and it is applied for the purpose of engineering society to have more people “of good stock.” Thus, what Cummings and Hsu want is eugenics by the very definition of the word. They can spin it as much as they want to convince people that what they are endorsing isn’t eugenics, but it is obvious that their ideology is Darwinism. The immense acceptance of this dangerous science reveals that all the talk that has gone on for decades about the Holocaust and the policy of the Nazis has not been registered enough. For even a Jew, Simeon Fishel (and many other Jewish scientists), has applauded the work of Hsu. “I take my hat off to what they’re doing, it’s a potential revolution,” says Fishel who also went to on to support the preference of superior embryos over others:
“What’s wrong with ranking an embryo if you can rank a child?… I think there are plenty of people who’d choose embryo Oxford [rather] than embryo A-level failure.”
So if a child potentially can fail school, then he deserves to die. If such people are so willing to kill an embryo because it is classified as ‘stupid,’ then they will be willing to kill you after labeling you as ‘inferior.’ They will praise the slaughter of children because they have physical handicaps and acclaim such bloodshed as “science.” After this, a list of other crimes shall be done with the acceptance of the “intelligent.” A bullet in the head will be called a victory for science, and the extermination of a village will be deemed as progress. When it comes to the goal of breeding ‘geniuses’, the priority of ethics is thrown out the window. When Hsu was asked by the Guardian about the ethics of screening embryos for intelligence he replied: “Let me just decline to answer that at the moment.”
Hsu predicts that it will be “billionaires and Silicon Valley types” who will be the first “to do IVF even though they don’t need IVF.” Once the wealthy and elite do this, says Hsu, then the rest of society will follow.
Looking at the writings of Cummings, it is actually quite obvious that he is obsessed with the idea of human engineering (eugenics, really). From 2007 to 2012, when Cummings was the most influential adviser to the education secretary, Michael Gove, he worked to have the ideas of ‘genetics and IQ’ taught in British education. He recounts this in his essay:
“During my involvement in education policy 2007-12, I never come across a single person in ‘the education world’ who raised the work of Robert Plomin and others on IQ, genetics and schools, and whenever I raised it people would either ignore it or say something like ‘well obviously IQ and genetics has no place in education discussions’. I therefore invited Plomin into the DfE to explain the science of IQ and genetics to officials and Ministers.”
He wanted for the ideology of genetics and intelligence to be a central focus of scientists and despised the resistance to discuss the connection between IQ and the human genome:
“There is strong resistance across the political spectrum to accepting scientific evidence on genetics. Most of those that now dominate discussions on issues such as social mobility entirely ignore genetics and therefore their arguments are at best misleading and often worthless.”
When Kevin Brennan found out about Cummings’ eugenist views, he recounted that it “sent a chill down the spine”, as it should. But what is also eery is the fact that so many British people admire Cummings and support his cause of Brexit and never have even a slight wince at the fact of his eugenist agenda. They will argue that Cummings’s Darwinist goals are not connected to his aspiration for Brexit, but Stephen Hsu, his fellow eugenist, affirmed in December of 2019 that Cummings’ aspiration for Brexit is to make Britain into a central hub for “science”:
“What does he [Cummings] want? Why is he doing this? Not for money, not for fame. For love of country and human progress and civilization. Dom’s dream is to make the UK a global center for science, technology, and education. He may succeed, he may fail. But he will get his chance to further shape the history — the future — of his homeland. Don’t bet against him.”
And by this — in light of everything we have observed here — it is clear what is meant by “science”. In fact, Cummings wants the NHS (National Health Service) to have genetic screenings for intelligence. To quote Cummings:
“It is already the case that farmers use genomes to make predictions about cows’ properties and behaviour … It is already the case that rich people could use in vitro fertilisation to select the egg which they think will be most advantageous, because they can sequence genomes of multiple eggs and examine each one to look for problems then pick the one they prefer. … Once we identify a substantial number of IQ genes, there is no obvious reason why rich people will not select the egg that has the highest prediction for IQ. … [I]f this sort of thing does become possible, then a national health system should fund everybody to do this.”
And concerning Cummings’ view on “education”, the eugenic agenda is also clear given that in his essay on education he, praising (of course) his eugenist ally Hsu, he writes: “Hsu thinks that once the genes are identified, then engineering higher intelligence might become feasible”.
In his essay on education, Cummings affirms Francis Galton, the nephew of Charles Darwin and the one who coined the term eugenics, writing how “Francis Galton concluded that talent in various fields was primarily genetic”. In this same essay, Cummings — in a section entitled Endnote: Problems with Science, Cummings presents a quote from the Jewish scientist Robert A. Weinberg (without giving any commentary of his own), when he, after being asked what will happen if it is discovered that there are differences between races based on genes, said then that “for the first time there could be a racism which is based not on some kind of virulent ideology”. In other words, what is appropriate is not illogical racism, but a racism based on ‘facts.’ Because science is the new religion which the whole world must submit to, and scientific consensus are to be accepted like ecclesiastical councils, if scientists all agree that race differences are genetic, then government policy enacted on people because of their genes is then acceptable.
Cummings’ essay on education gained the attention of people in Silicon Valley who would invite Cummings to attend a conference called SciFoo, which is organized by Google and hosted by Google’s cofounder Larry Page. It was in this conference where Cummings would meet his hero Stephen Hsu. British journalist Carole Cadwalladr describes the link between Cummings’ envisioning of Brexit and his experience in the Silicon Valley SciFoo conference:
“A 133,000-word essay on education that Cummings wrote proved to be a key incident in the story of the [Brexit] referendum campaign. The essay led to an invitation to Sci Foo, an exclusive invite-only ideas conference hosted by Larry Page, the co-founder of Google, at the Googleplex in August 2014.
And this led him to meet certain people, including Steve Hsu, a physicist at Michigan State University he quotes liberally in his essays, blogs and Twitter account. Hsu’s research into IQ and intelligence, and in particular his project at a state-run genomics lab in China, has troubled some people with what Daniel HoSang, a professor at the University of Oregon, describes as its “Eugenicist overtones”. But in his blog, Hsu writes how Cummings encouraged him to study Bismarck and he urged others to take note of Cummings’s work in politics.
Cummings came away more convinced than ever that it was scientists doing fundamental research who held the key to the future, not politicians. And when it came to building a team for the referendum, his first action was to “hire physicists”.”
To admire Otto von Bismark — the German political leader who united Germany and formed the Second Reich and wanted to purge Germany of Polish people — is akin to admiring the founder of the Third Reich, Adolf Hitler.
In a 2014 article published in the Sunday Times, Cummings bashed politicians who don’t understand or are too afraid to talk about IQ and genetics, described his experience in SciFoo and warned against politicians hindering the scientific studies on intelligence and genes. The article reflects Cummings’ ideology on how the government needs to have policies that would favor his eugenic views. For example, Cummings ends the article by saying:
“If the cleverest people in the world continue to push scientific frontiers, while regulated by the people who now dominate politics and have no understanding of the technological foundations of our civilisation, we will suffer avoidable disasters and fail to mitigate the unavoidable disasters.”
Interestingly enough, when Cummings wrote his essay on education, it was the controversy surrounding its eugenist ideology that got him invited to the 2014 SciFoo conference of Google in Silicon Valley. As Cummings recounts:
“Last year I worked in the Department for Education as special adviser to Michael Gove. A long essay I was writing was leaked. One section in particular caused a brief media storm — the section on IQ, genetics and education.
A consequence of this media storm was that my essay was spotted by one of the people who organises an annual meeting called SciFoo. It is a gathering of top people from science and technology from around the world. They are invited to Google’s HQ in California, where Larry Page, Google’s co-founder, hosts the event.”
So what we know from this is that people in Google liked Cummings’ eugenic views and invited him to the conference to be amongst well known scientists such as Hsu who he first met at the Scifoo meeting. Cummings recounts how he looked through the window of “Google’s HQ at a glittering sunset in Silicon Valley”. Cummings reminisces how he met Hsu at Google’s SciFoo conference in 2014 where scientists discussed bio engineering:
“I had a fascinating discussion/tutorial at SciFoo with Steve Hsu. Steve Hsu is a professor of theoretical physics (and successful entrepreneur) with a long interest in IQ (he also runs a brilliant blog that will keep you up to speed on all sorts). He now works part time on the BGI project in China to discover the genes responsible for IQ.”
Stephen Hsu wrote an article reflecting on the 2014 SciFoo Google conference in which he recognized Cumming’s role in the agenda of using the political apparatus to push for their ideology of genetics:
“Few scientists know how to use the political system to effect change. We need help from people like Cummings.”
What these reveals is, firstly, the connection between internet eugenists like Cummings and figures within Google and Silicon Valley, and secondly, that we cannot disassociate Cummings’ aspiration of Brexit from his eugenist ideology.
The tie between Cummings and Hsu is not surprising given the fact that Cummings gives a whole hearted and enthusiastic endorsement of BGI (the Beijing Genome Institute), a genetics focused organization that is working to scan genes to measure intelligence and of which Hsu is a leading scientist. As Cummings writes:
“One such project is the BGI project (working with Robert Plomin) to identify the genes responsible for ‘general cognitive ability’ or ‘g’. BGI has the largest capacity to sequence genomes in the world and is sequencing the genomes of thousands of people with IQ scores of +3 standard deviations (1:1,000) to identify the genes responsible. One of the team is physicist Steve Hsu”
In the same essay Cummings quotes Hsu describing his eugenist dream of creating more humans who are “fully awake” or who have genius genes: “I’m doing my best to increase the number of future humans who will be ‘fully awake’.”
In the comment section underneath Cummings’s article on the 2014 SciFoo conference there is a comment by one Andrew Sabisky which calls for enforcing contraception on population and pushes for embryo selection:
“one very good way to retain human control over technology – and to think up better ways to ameliorate its negative consequences – is global embryo selection. You’ve talked it through quite well; it can and will work. One way to get around the problems of unplanned pregnancies creating a permanent underclass would be to legally enforce universal uptake of long-term contraception at the onset of puberty.”
Cummings’ association with this ideology has been recently pushed further into the light by the fact that he recently hired Sabisky to work in Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s office. After much media backlash, Sabisky resigned. Sabisky has been expressing his eugenic beliefs for years, be it in various comment sections or in person. In 2016 Sabisky did an interview in which he openly promoted eugenics:
“Eugenics are about selecting ‘for’ good things … Intelligence is largely inherited and it correlates with better outcomes: physical health, income, lower mental illness.”
Such beliefs reflect on Boris Johnson’s own worldview, since in 2013 he declared in a speech:
“Whatever you may think of the value of IQ tests it is surely relevant to a conversation about equality that as many as 16% of our species have an IQ below 85”
The fact that Cummings promotes the same ideology of Sabisky, and that Sabisky was in Johnson’s office, and that Cummings has hopes of eugenic policy being enacted through Brexit with an aspiration of Britain being a global center for “science,” and that Cummings is close friends to a major eugenist, Stephen Hsu, leads us to confidently affirm the true underlying objective of Brexit rebels like Cummings, Johnson, Sabisky, and others like them: eugenics. The online racist network that many media reports have been reporting on since 2015 are deep within the nationalist phenomena that we have been witnessing, be it in the Brexit project or in the spark of nationalism within Europe.
And what is Brexit leading to? As we have been saying since the day of the Brexit referendum in 2016, Brexit will lead to the revival of German military power. Britain was the biggest contributor to the EU’s military defense. Now that Britain is no longer in the EU, the Bloc has lost its biggest contributor to defense. Who will fill in the gap? Germany. Germany is the biggest economy in the EU Bloc and will, inevitably, become the military powerhouse of Europe. So what do we have with Brexit? The rise of German power thanks to a cabal of eugenists. If we are looking for a conspiracy to revive Nazism, we have at least discovered it at but only at its surface. The rabbit hole goes even deeper, but we only know what we can find out.