The history of the New Age movement is riddled with stories of cults that have sexually abused initiates under the pretenses of actualizing human potential, attaining spiritual enlightenment, or evolving a higher consciousness. In many cases, these alleged sex cults have been reportedly entangled with intelligence agencies, such as the United States (US) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Israeli Mossad. Consider the following three case studies: 

1. The Finders cult, which was investigated for child sex trafficking and Satanic ritual abuse, was reported to be a CIA front operation posing as a “‘futurist’ network” guided by “human potential” psychology, “New Age” spirituality, and “Eastern mysticism.”
2. Sects of Tibetan Tantric Buddhists under the auspices of the Dalai Lama, who has served as a longtime CIA asset, have been accused of sexually abusing devotees through Tantric rituals conducted at Maurice Strong’s New Age mountain retreats in Crestone, Colorado [1].
3. The NXIVM cult, which branded its “sex slaves” under the cloak of its “human potential” development programs, was supported by members of the billionaire Bronfman family,  at least one of whom was instrumental in the broader network of the child sex trafficking operations of Jeffrey Epstein, who was evidently yoked with the CIA and the Mossad [2].

Are these overlaps between New Age sex cults and intelligence agencies merely tenuous coincidences? Or do these patterns suggest the existence of underground networks of intelligence operatives who orchestrate or infiltrate New Age cults in order to experiment with Tantric sex rituals and other forms of “sex magic” as tools for psychological operations? 

To be sure, the overlaps between these three case studies are not just thematic. Consider the curious common denominators of New Age futurist, Barbara Marx Hubbard, and her Malthusian gospel of conscious transhuman evolution:

1. Hubbard appointed NXIVM cult leader Nancy Salzman as an “ally” of her Birth 2012 “shift” toward Malthusian sustainable development through conscious transhuman evolution [3]. 
2. Hubbard also preached her Malthusian gospel of conscious transhuman evolution at Strong’s New Age outpost for Tibetan Tantric gurus in the mountains of Crestone [1]. 
3. Hubbard’s efforts to advance conscious evolution through her Synergistic Convergence, or SYNCON, conferences were also aided by members of the Finders cult [4]. 

Perhaps Hubbard’s position at the juncture of these alleged sex cults is coincidental. Yet, Tantra and other forms of sexual mysticism have been deliberately intermarried with Hubbard’s Malthusian vision of conscious transhuman evolution. Today, her Rockefeller-funded Foundation for Conscious Evolution is led by Marc Gafni who, despite being accused of sexually abusing two underage girls, is advancing a new rendition of conscious evolution through Integral Evolutionary Tantra and CosmoErotic Humanism . Like Hubbard, Gafni has magnified his “cosmo-erotic” version of conscious Tantric evolution through public displays of “co-creation” with the Dalai Lama, who also rendezvoused with NXIVM. 

Meanwhile, Hubbard’s Malthusian vision of conscious transhuman evolution has been carried on through the World Future Society, which she co-founded with Edward Cornish, reportedly with the help of the Finders’ “Game Caller” [4], whose alleged sex cult was implicated as a CIA shell operating as a “‘futurist’ network” that provided “information gathering” services for the price of “finders’ fees.” In fact, Hubbard’s World Future Society is listed as a “forecasting . . . resource” alongside the CIA in a US Army Psychological Operations (PSYOP) manual authored by Lieutenant Colonel Michael Aquino [5], who was investigated for child sexual abuse involving Satanic rituals. Hubbard also cultivated “co-creation” of global consciousness with fellow evolutionary, Lieutenant Colonel Jim Channon [6], who set up the US Army’s First Earth Battalion of New Age psychic soldiers.

Whether fortuitously or strategically, Hubbard personally occupied a nexus between New Age sex cults and intelligence agencies while her Malthusian beliefs in conscious transhuman evolution have been married to Tantra and other modes of sex magic practiced by gurus and spooks alike. Tracing the threads that tie together Hubbard and her legacy with these sex cults and intelligence agencies, this final article in my “Barbara Marx Hubbard” series examines whether these threads are anchored to coordinated PSYOPs aimed at socially engineering New Age cultures to believe in futurist promises of collectivized self-actualization through technocratic globalization and sustainable transhuman evolution. To be sure, as expounded  in previous installments of this series, Hubbard’s conscious evolutionary faith has been proselytized to generate new cultural values that are commensurate with transhumanism and sustainable development, which are the crux of emerging global technocracy of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR).

From Conscious Transhuman Evolution to CosmoErotic Humanism 

Throughout this series, I have documented how Hubbard’s Foundation for Conscious Evolution, which was financed by Laurance Rockefeller, has been pushing for the “synergistic” convergence of biotech, nanotech, and supercomputing artificial intelligence (AI) in order to engineer a new transhuman species in tandem with a new “global system” that can save humankind from planetary “crises, most especially environmental” crises. Before her death, Hubbard appointed “former Orthodox rabbi,” Marc Gafni, as an “Evolutionary Scholar in Residence” at her Foundation for Conscious Evolution where he has since taken over her mantle as the current president and director. Notwithstanding multiple accusations that he sexually assaulted two underage girls, Gafni is now touting a revamped version of conscious evolution known as “CosmoErotic Humanism,” which integrates Tantric sex rites that have been implicated in numerous sexual abuse scandals involving cults immersed in Eastern mysticism, “human potential” psychology, and other “New Age” modalities that constitute “conscious evolution.”

In an apparent video response to my first article in this series, Gafni acknowledged Hubbard’s transhumanism, yet claimed that he had convinced her to repent of the errors of her transhumanist ways. Nevertheless, to this day (nearly three years later), the official website of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution continues to advance “synergistic” transhuman evolution driven by the “[t]he advent of radical evolutionary technologies such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, quantum computing, space exploration, etc. . . . [T]he tools are there to transform ourselves, our bodies and our world. We can and are actually moving beyond the creature human condition toward a new species, a universal humanity, capable of coevolving with nature.” As Gafni attempts to pivot the Foundation for Conscious Evolution away from the technocratic tenor of Hubbard’s transhumanist rhetoric, he is now propagating a “cosmo-erotic” rebranding of her evolutionary gospel. 

Gafni’s cosmo-erotic rendition of conscious evolution is a spin on Hubbard’s concept of “tel-erotic co-creation,” which was expounded at the 2015 Institute for Noetic Sciences (IONS) International Conference. According to the IONS Conference host, the word “tel-erotic” combines the Greek terms of “‘telos,’ which means purpose or goal,” and “‘Eros,’ the god of love”; but to be sure, “eros” narrowly refers to sensual pleasure and other forms of hedonic “love,” not the selfless love and charity signified by the Greek word “agápe.” Nonetheless, in Hubbard’s IONS speech, she pontificated how the tel-erotic synergizing of evolutionary “purpose” and “love” generates “suprasex,” shifting consciousness “from procreation to co-creation.” The tel-erotic “evolution of sexuality,” according to Hubbard, is predicated on the Malthusian premise that “we have hit a limit to mass procreation. We’re going to be having fewer children, and children by choice,” so “instead of joining genes,” the tel-erotic co-creation of suprasex “joins genius” in order to steer conscious evolution toward “sustainable” transhumanism.

While Hubbard’s evolutionary rite of tel-erotic suprasex stresses the conscious Malthusian decoupling of reproduction from sexuality, Gafni’s CosmoErotic Humanism channels the sensual, or erotic, energies of sexuality as esoteric initiations into supposedly higher, or more evolved, levels of spiritual consciousness. According to his personal website, Gafni’s philosophy of CosmoErotic Humanism calls for “a new sexual narrative” that exalts “Eros [a]s the deepest Reality of Cosmos, the pulse of evolution, the universal energy of emergence, intimacy, and wholeness. CosmoErotic Humanism unfolds a new evolutionary theory of Eros, a phenomenology of Eros, and re-imagines the ancient sacred mysteries of Eros.” 

Hubbard herself anointed Gafni’s theory of CosmoErotic Humanism, as she wrote the foreword to his  book, A Return to Eros, which he co-authored with Kristina Kincaid, who is the Vice Chair of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution and the Director of Gafni’s Integral Evolutionary Tantra Institute. In a promotional for A Return to Eros, Gafni’s website publicizes how he and Kincaid unveil “the radical secret tenets of relationship between the sexual, the erotic, and the holy,” elucidating how the “qualities of the erotic modeled by the sexual are actually the same core qualities of the sacred.” Gafni and Kincaid also lead the Eros Mystery School, which propagates CosmoErotic Humanism through workshops that induct initiates into “tantric practices” in order to catalyze “the evolution of love” and “achiev[e] expanded consciousness” by “open[ing] the doors to embody deeper hidden orgiastic wisdom.” 

If this emphasis on the hedonic eros of sexual love, rather than the self-sacrificing love of agápe, isn’t taboo enough, it is disturbing to note that Gafni was accused not only of sexually abusing his adult students at his “New Age-style” Bayit Chadash spiritual center, but also of sexually assaulting two underaged girls, one of which he allegedly assaulted when he was her “youth leader.” On a 2018 episode of the Dr. Phil show, Gafni was confronted about these allegations. During this interview, Dr. Phil read from a letter in which Gafni confessed to the allegations. Although Gafni admitted that he wrote and signed the letter, he redacted it by stating that the letter was a “mistake” which he “greatly regrets.” Gafni, who was quoted as saying that one of the girls was “14 going on 35,” denied any forcible assault, asserting that he was “in love” with the girls and only engaged in “heavy petting . . . above the waist.” After quibbling with Dr. Phil over the legal definition of statutory rape, Gafni conceded that even the “heavy petting” was “against the law,” yet he reasserted that he had done nothing “immoral.” Dr. Phil ended the episode by noting that, although Gafni has been formally denounced by a list of over 100 “rabbis” and “New Age” leaders, he has never been “arrested” for, “charged” with, or “convicted” of any of the alleged sex crimes.

Despite these allegations, Hubbard ordained Gafni as a tel-erotic apostle of her Foundation for Conscious Evolution. On Gafni’s personal website, it notes that Hubbard venerated:

“Marc Gafni [a]s a rising star . . . [who is] paving the way for a new psychology and spirituality for evolving humanity to fulfill our enormous potential. He has incorporated the 13.8-billion-year Evolutionary Impulse of Creation directly in the heart of humanity as our motivation to love, to grow to become our Unique Selves, the future human. It is a joy to work with Marc.  . . . He is inspiring us to change . . . to the new source code of co-creating and co-evolving with one another.”

According to Gafni, it was Hubbard, along with Kincaid and ed-tech futurist Zak Stein, who helped him coin the concept of CosmoErotic Humanism. On his personal YouTube channel, Gafni recorded a video titled “Celebrating Barbara Marx Hubbard,” which boasts that “there could be nothing that would make Barbara more ecstatic, than this book,” First Principles and First Values: Forty-Two Propositions on CosmoErotic Humanism, the Meta-Crisis, and the World to Come, which was co-authored by Gafni and Stein under the single pseudonym “David J. Temple.” 

If you think that CosmoErotic Humanism is just a fringe philosophy without reach, it should be noted that Stein, who serves on the Scientific Advisor Board of the Neurohacker Collective, has been sowing seeds of “conscious” and “cosmo-erotic” evolution through a futurist think tank known as “Game B.” Describing itself as a “community of . . . thinkers and doers, bodhisattvas and businesspeople, economists and ecologists, visionaries and pragmatists,” Game B convenes transdisciplinary “working groups” which explore “political meta-modernism” in order to “forge a new ‘social operating system’” that is “resilient” and “sustainable.” Transcending the “collective evolutionary path” of Game A, which is “the world’s current civilization,” Game B harnesses “the expansion of our consciousness” to achieve cosmic “At-One-Ment” by “fully groking the ‘other’” through “a tantric return to non-judgment.” 

The referees of Game B include key players from the “Intellectual Dark Web,” such as Jordan Peterson, Bret Weinstein, and Eric Weinstein, along with Nora Bateson, who is a member of the Club of Rome, which published the Limits to Growth “environmentalist” treatise that shaped Hubbard’s Malthusian outlook on conscious transhuman evolution as well as the sustainable development initiatives of the United Nations (UN) Agenda 2030 and the 4IR and “Great Reset” policies of the World Economic Forum (WEF). It is worth noting here that Stein is also a member of the Club of Rome and that Nora is the daughter of renowned cognitive scientist and cybernetician, Gregory Bateson, who collaborated with Hubbard’s “kindred spirit,” Jonas Salk, on a Lindisfarne Association panel titled “Conscious Evolution and the Evolution of Consciousness.” It is also worth noting here that Game B cultivates “collective intelligence” to advance the “Cognitive Revolution,” which is a concept  coined by WEF transhumanist Yuval Noah Harari. 

Gafni’s cosmo-erotic revamping of Hubbard’s Malthusian gospel of conscious transhuman evolution is also being proselytized by his Tantric evolutionary, Aubrey Marcus. A co-leader of Gafni’s Eros Mystery School, Marcus hosts a popular podcast that explores the “optimization” of “human potential” through the “conscious evolution” of “cosmo-erotic” sexuality instilled with Tantric mysticism and other forms of “sex magic.” The Aubrey Marcus Podcast, which has platformed Gafni and Kincaid along with a number of Hubbard’s colleagues, including Marianne Williamson, Bruce Lipton, and Stanislav Grof, has also platform-boosted numerous Game B players, including Jordan Peterson, Bret Weinstein, John Vervaeke, Charles Eisenstein, Alexander Bard, Jordan Hall, Guy Sengstock, Daniel Schmachtenberger, and Jamie Wheal.

In summary, Hubbard’s Malthusian gospel of conscious transhuman evolution has been tantrically titivated by Gafni’s philosophy of CosmoErotic Humanism, which is being evangelized through the Foundation for Conscious Evolution, the Integral Evolutionary Tantra Institute, the Eros Mystery School, and Game B. At the same time, Gafni’s Cosmo-Tantric rendition of conscious evolution is being popularized by Marcus’s alternative media platform and its adjacent multi-level marketing (MLM) networks that push wellness products and “self-empowerment” workshops under the pretense of optimizing human potential. While Gafni’s CosmoErotic Tantra is being propagated through alt-media and self-help MLMs, Hubbard’s vision of conscious evolution has been similarly proselytized through other Tantric sects and human potential MLMs that have been embroiled in sexual abuse scandals. 

NXIVM, the Human Potential Movement, and Hubbard’s Birth 2012 Shift to Conscious Evolution

In her Birth 2012 and Beyond: Humanity’s Great Shift to the Age of Conscious Evolution,Hubbard named Nancy Salzman as an “ally” of her Birth 2012 Campaign through the Transformational Leadership Council, which Hubbard listed as an “Affiliated Organization” of the Birth 2012 Campaign [3]. Salzman is a co-founder and the former president of the NXIVM multi-level marketing (MLM) company, which manipulated “consciousness-raising” human potential psychology to orchestrate a sex abuse cult. In fact, in Birth 2012 and Beyond, Salzman is promoted alongside the web address for the NXIVM MLM: “www.nxivm.com” [3]. In brief, both the president of the NXIVM sex cult and the MLM itself were endorsed by Hubbard as “co-creators” of her Birth 2012 “shift” into the new age of conscious transhuman evolution.

Most notorious for using a cauterizing wand to brand its sex slaves with the initials of its co-founder, Keith Raniere, the NXIVM sex cult known as “Dominus Obsequious Sororium (DOS),” which translates to “Lord of the Obedient Female Companions,” was a “secret society” within the MLM. The NXIVM MLM involved Hollywood celebrities, such as Smallville actress Allison Mack, and high-profile political figures, including Roger Stone, who has served as a political advisor to Donald Trump; Joe Bruno, who was a state senator of New York; and Emiliano Salinas, son of the former President of Mexico, Carlos Salinas. 

The NXIVM cult lured its supplicants through “consciousness-raising” seminars steeped in human potential psychology, which was developed by Hubbard’s mentor, Abraham Maslow, who advanced the Human Potential Movement (HPM) through his Eupsychian Network, where Hubbard distributed her Center Letter [7]. According to Maslow, his “third force” of “humanistic” psychology, which he coined as a stepping stone toward the “fourth force” of “transhuman” psychology, transcends the environmental stimulus-response conditioning of the “first force” of behavioral psychology and the subconscious psychoanalysis of the “second force” of Freudian psychology in order to achieve “self-actualization” through a combination of “positive psychology” and “gestalt psychology” techniques [8]. Promising self-actualization through NXIVM coursework, Raniere and his partner in crime, Salzman, manipulated a concoction of “positive thinking” and groupthink within the pyramid scheme of an MLM company in order to coerce NXIVM adherents into submitting to sexual abuse under the pretense of attaining higher levels of consciousness.

In particular, NXIVM’s “Executive Success Program (ESP)” borrowed from the HPM psychotherapies of the Landmark Forum’s Erhard Seminars Training (EST), which was developed by Werner Erhard, a friend of Hubbard’s protégé, Marc Gafni. Orchestrated by Raniere and Salzman, NXIVM’s HPM-inspired ESP workshops were structured as a hierarchy of MLM courses that certify graduates with “sashes” and “stripes” as they progress through the ranks to become NXIVM coaches and recruiters. The HPM psychology and the MLM pyramid structure of NXIVM’s ESP courses were also borrowed from the Amway MLM megacorporation. Before rising to NXIVM stardom, Raniere worked for the Amway MLM, which, like NXIVM, recruits salespeople by touting promises of human potential development resulting from successfully leveling-up through its corporate pyramid. After his stint at Amway, Ranieri created his own MLM, National Health Network, where he teamed up with his future criminal accessory, Salzman.

Currently, Raniere is serving a 120-year prison sentence after being convicted of the crimes of “forced labor conspiracy,” “wire fraud conspiracy,” “sex trafficking,” and “racketeering,” including “predicate acts” of “sexual exploitation of a child” and “production and possession of child pornography,” which he committed as the ringleader of the NXIVM sex abuse cult. Raniere’s accomplice, Salzman, was released from jail in 2023, having served less than 20 months of her 42-month prison sentence after pleading guilty to “racketeering conspiracy, including predicate acts of conspiracy to commit identity theft and conspiracy to obstruct justice” as Raniere’s coconspirator. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Assistant Director-in-Charge, Michael J. Driscoll, “as Raniere’s right hand for more than a decade, Nancy Salzman’s conduct supported NXIVM’s objectives to recruit victims, stave off critics, and alter evidence connected to a federal lawsuit.” Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent-in-Charge, Peter C. Fitzhugh, stated that “Salzman was essential to the NXIVM criminal enterprise, not merely a peripheral co-defendant.”

To be sure, there is no evidence that Hubbard’s endorsement of Salzman and NXIVM was published with Hubbard’s knowledge of NXIVM’s sex crimes or Salzman’s culpability in aiding and abetting those crimes [3]. There is also no record of Hubbard ever publicly disavowing Salzman or the NXIVM cult after the fact. Either way, NXIVM’s “consciousness-raising” human potential MLM, Hubbard’s Foundation for Conscious Evolution, and Marc Gafni’s CosmoErotic  Mystery School have all enticed their aspirants with HPM empowerment mantras that were coined by Hubbard’s mentor, Abraham Maslow [8], and refined by Gafni’s friend, Werner Erhard. NXIVM’s MLM structure is also congruous with the network of MLMs floating Gafni’s cosmo-erotic rebranding of Hubbard’s gospel of conscious evolution. Altogether, NXIVM, the Foundation for Conscious Evolution, and the Eros Mystery School have all leveraged similar HPM modalities and MLM networking tactics to “shift” populations into actualizing “tel-erotic,” “cosmo-erotic,” “Tantric,” and other vogues of “conscious” evolution, including sustainable transhuman evolution for the 4IR [3]. In addition, NXIVM, Hubbard, and Gafni all shared a common tie to the Dalai Lama, who is the religious figurehead of Tantric sects of Tibetan Buddhism that have been scandalized by accusations of ritualized sexual abuse [1]. 

Crestone and the Conscious Evolution of Tibetan Tantra 

Hubbard also preached her Malthusian gospel of conscious transhuman evolution to the “sustainable interfaith community” of Crestone, Colorado [1], which was fostered by Maurice and Hanne Strong’s Manitou Foundation. In coordination with the Strongs’ Manitou Institute and Conservancy, the Manitou Foundation manages Crestone’s “Mountain Tract properties” as an outpost for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and non-profit corporations to incubate sustainable development initiatives that leverage “consciousness studies” and ecumenical spirituality to advance the globalist objectives of the UN[1]. According to Christine A. Chandler, a former resident of Crestone’s sustainable interfaith community, the Strongs’ Manitou Mountain Tract properties are also a haven for sex abuse cults that have involved Tibetan Tantric Buddhists under the auspices of the Dalai Lama [1], who has advocated for conscious evolution in collaboration with Hubbard and her protégé, Marc Gafni.

Titled Enthralled: The Guru Cult of Tibetan Buddhism, Chandler’s memoir states that at the core of Tibetan Lamaism are secretive Tantric sects that practice the occultic sex rituals of Dzogchen, which channels the cosmic “rays” of the primordial Rigpa, or “rainbow,” energy of the universe in order to ascend to the metaphysical kingdom of Shambhala through the evolutionary enlightenment of consciousness [1]. Notwithstanding the eminent Lamas who pontificate that their Tantric sex rituals are divine rites of initiation into the higher rays of consciousness, Chandler contends that the cult of Tibetan Tantra exploits, abuses, and debases disciples through a sophisticated methodology of brainwashing that meets psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton’s eight criteria for determining a “thought control system” [1].

After several years of Tantric devotion to the Tibetan guru Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche, Chandler moved to Crestone where Maurice Strong, who served alongside Hubbard on the Global Advisory Council of the World Future Society, and his wife Hanne, who has “deep ties” to the Tibetans, issued Manitou land grants to an array of sustainable development non-profits and Tibetan Buddhist “spiritual centers” [1]. These Manitou-sponsored spiritual centers include Yeshe Khorlo and Karma Thegsum Tashi Gomang, which are administered by the Tantric Nyingma and Kagyu sects of Tibetan Buddhism, along with the Third Tsoknyi Rinpoche’s Pundarika Foundation [1]. According to Enthralled, Manitou land grants were also issued to several other Eastern mystical cults, including “Roshi Baker’s Zen group,” “the late Sai Baba group,” and “Yogi Bhajan’s Kundalini Tantric cult group,” each of which was involved or implicated in sex scandals or sexual abuse crimes before setting up Crestone retreats. It was Hubbard’s benefactor, Laurance Rockefeller, who was “the first and main donor” to the Manitou Land Grant Program [1]. It is worth noting here that Hanne Strong reportedly bragged about how “pleased” she had been when a “High Lama,” the Sixteenth Karmapa, “recognized” her son as a “tulku,” or, in other words, a “reincarnation” of a “Tibetan saint” [1].

At Crestone, Chandler served as a disciple of Tsoknyi Rinpoche, who taught Tantric Buddhism at the Lerab Ling retreat under the leadership of Sogyal Rinpoche, whom Chandler and others have accused of sexually abusing his acolytes under the pretense of Tantric initiation rites that would purportedly raise their consciousness [1]. Throughout Enthralled, Chandler also details her encounters with several other Tibetan gurus, including Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche, Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche, and Osel Tendzin, all of whom she alleges sexually abused their adherents [1]. Chandler’s accounts of these sexual crimes are corroborated by reports from several mainstream media outlets, including the British Broadcasting Corporation, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times, which have recorded accusations of sexual abuse from other victims of these Tantric gurus. Additionally, her reports of widespread sexual abuse among the Tantric orders of Tibetan Buddhists have also been corroborated by the confessions of the Tibetan guru, Kalu Rinpoche, who publicly admitted to being sexually abused by elder Lamas.

According to Chandler, the New Age communitarian hub of Crestone was also visited by Barbara Marx Hubbard, who preached her gospel of conscious transhuman evolution there [1]. In Enthralled, Chandler relays how: 

“Barbara Marx Hubbard declared all Crestonians would survive the Great Shift, the coming apocalypse she had been predicting for years, because she told them they were the more evolved race in this sacred place. The rest would be scorched as bad seeds.  . . . 

Hubbard told everyone in Crestone that they were the special ones; the ‘more evolved’; the already saved; since they are part of the great SHIFT into a spiritualized world governance that will be the result of a higher consciousness-shifting of the planet into a transcendent plane of existence, where Crestonians already dwell.” [1]

Hubbard’s rhetoric here mirrors that of her infamous unpublished manuscript, The Revelation: Alternative to Armageddon, which declares that, in order for humankind to consciously evolve into a new transhuman species, “one-fourth” of the population, who are “defective seeds,” must “be eliminated from the social body” by “the riders of the pale horse” during a “quantum shift.”

Hubbard’s evolutionary prophecy of a Malthusian apocalypse is also echoed by the Tibetan Buddhist Kalachakra Wheel of Time eschatology, which is preached by the Dalai Lama. According to Chandler, Hubbard “is a good friend and ally of the Dalai Lama, another apocalyptic believer of prophecies with his Kalachakra Wheel of Time Tantra” [1]. In the Kalachakra Tantra scriptures, it is ordained that the “End Time” of this age will commence when the King of Shambhala leads a messianic crusade to cleanse the earth of “barbarians” in a holy war that will usher in a dharmic “Golden Age” of enlightened consciousness.

Hubbard’s Malthusian prognostications about conscious transhuman evolution have also been echoed by Hanne Strong, who declared that “[y]ou cannot function in Crestone unless you evolve. This energy is so high that a lot of people come and cannot function at this level of energy. That is why the energy is here. To let people evolve” [1]. In a similar statement, Hanne professed that “a lot of people come in [to Crestone] and they cannot function at this level of energy. It disturbs them. They lose it. You cannot function in it unless you evolve. It is all about evolving. This energy is helping people evolve rapidly. That is the secret of Crestone” [1]. Notice here that, according to Hanne, there are certain types of people who are not “functionally” capable of “evolving” and will therefore “lose it” when immersed in the evolutionary “energy” of Crestone just as, according to Hubbard, there are certain “bad” or “defective” seeds who cannot consciously evolve and will therefore be “eliminated” when the “quantum shift” in evolutionary consciousness permeates the globe.

As I have documented throughout this series, Hubbard’s Malthusian outlook on conscious transhuman evolution was likewise shared by Hanne’s husband, Maurice Strong, who was the godfather of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which have been advocated by the Dalai Lama. With help from Hubbard’s “beloved patron” [6], Laurance Rockefeller, Maurice was instrumental in setting up the UN Environment Program (UNEP) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of UN Agenda 21, which laid the groundwork for the Malthusian SDGs of UN Agenda 2030. It is worth noting here that, notwithstanding the greenwashed ethos of Maurice’s pioneering role in spearheading the UN’s campaign to save the planet through sustainable environmentalism, his leadership at the UN was marred by implications that he was complicit in the UN “Oil-for-Food” money laundering scandal.

Sharing a common Malthusian outlook on the future of environmental sustainability and spiritual evolution, Maurice and Hubbard both participated in the State of the World Forum (SWF), which was orchestrated by the first and only president of the former Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, who was also a member of the Club of Rome. Bringing together New Agers, religious leaders, business magnates, heads of state, and representatives of global governance institutions such as the UNEP, the SWF fostered a “worldwide . . . spiritual renaissance” committed to “ecological sustainability” and “global governance.” Among SWF attendees were Laurance Rockefeller’s nephew, Steven Rockefeller, and a number of Hubbard’s New Age colleagues who have also reverently collaborated with the Dalai Lama. 

These liaisons between Hubbard and the Dalai Lama include the following SWF speakers:

• Deepak Chopra, who is the author of Digital Dharma: How AI Can Elevate Spiritual Intelligence and Personal Well-Being, led a group of “friends” to Dharamsala, India, where he spoke alongside the Dalai Lama. Chopra and Hubbard served together as Fellows of the World Business Academy while Chopra, who praised Hubbard as “the voice for conscious evolution of our time,” also served as an “ally” of her Birth 2012 Campaign[3].

• Jean Houston, who has ministered as an advisor to the Dalai Lama, is featured along with Hubbard in the Dalai Lama Renaissance documentary, which records their “Synthesis Group” conference with “His Holiness” in India [1]. In Birth 2012 and Beyond, Houston is recorded as an “ally” of Hubbard’s Birth 2012 Campaign [3]. Additionally, Houston and Hubbard served together as Fellows of the World Business Academy.

• Hazel Henderson has served alongside the Dalai Lama on the International Advisory Board of the Forum 2000 Foundation. In addition, she has spoken at the World E-Conference on Culture of Peace and Sustainability along with the Dalai Lama, and they also participated together in a public “dialogue” on “Business as an Instrument of Societal Change.” Henderson and Hubbard served together as Fellows of the World Business Academy while Henderson was also one of Hubbard’s  “[c]olleagues and teachers of conscious evolution,” according to The Book of Co-Creation [7].

• Lynne Twist, who participated in “Synthesis Dialogues” with the Dalai Lama, recounts how her “profound experience” with “His Holiness” inspired her to embrace “money” as an “ally of our own transformation and the transformation of the world in which we live.” Both Twist and Hubbard served together as Fellows of the World Business Academy, while Twist also “closely collaborat[ed]” with Hubbard’s Birth 2012 Campaign [3].

• Michael Murphy is a co-founder of the Esalen Institute where the Dalai Lama has participated in public dialogues that have resulted in a book of his teachings being published by Esalen, which was part of Abraham Maslow’s Eupsychian Network along with Hubbard.

As a result of the State of the World Forum, the Gorbachev Foundation convened another international forum: the Global Peace Forum, which was hosted in Moscow, Russia, where a speech was given by the Dalai Lama, whose teachings have since been frequently promoted by the World Economic Forum (WEF).

A similar global forum was propositioned to the Dalai Lama by Hubbard’s cosmo-erotic protégé and Tantric evolutionary, Marc Gafni. During a “private spirituality conference” at the “home” of “His Holiness,” Gafni proposed “meetings” or “conferences . . . of local leaders, regional leaders, and international leaders who would get together for a week, one week a year, to do spiritual practice of any kind, so that when they negotiate, they actually feel the interconnectivity of reality” and are thus able to co-create a “different world.”

In brief, Hubbard, the Dalai Lama, Gafni, and the Strongs have all collaborated in efforts to convene global meetings that would synergistically converge New Age spirituality, world governance, and sustainable development under a singular mission toward conscious evolution. At the same time, Hubbard’s Malthusian prognostications about an apocalyptic shift toward conscious transhuman evolution resonate with the Dalai Lama’s Kalachakra Wheel of Time eschatology, the Malthusian bent of Maurice Strong’s UN sustainable development initiatives, and Hanne Strong’s evolutionary spirituality, which envelopes the “sustainable interfaith community” of Crestone where Tantric Lamas preach the Kalachakra. In turn, Crestone, which is still a haven for Tibetan Buddhist spiritual centers to this day, has offered a launchpad where Tantric esotericism can be leveraged to initiate a “global citizenry” into Hubbard’s transhumanist belief in conscious evolution merged with the Strongs’ communitarian movement toward planetary sustainable development under a world government unified by an ecumenical world religion [1][9]. 

Indeed, in Chandler’s memoir, Enthralled, she maintains that “Crestone-Baca is the brainchild of the Strongs, and main headquarters where international corporatism, eastern cultism, local and county governments, and the green movement all connect and network together to create their Utopian version of how local government should be in America, under the directorate of the United Nations” [1]. More specifically, according to Chandler, Crestone’s Tantric orders of Tibetan Buddhism are: 

“part of the ‘spiritualized arm’ of the Strongs’ U.N. Agenda 21. The purpose was to facilitate and solidify the delusional dreams of a spiritualized world government merged with environmentalism, and many of these new religious movements and eastern cult groups in Crestone had even been given temporary or permanent ‘advisory and consultative status’ on the U.N. Economic and Social Council to facilitate a world citizenship movement from that esteemed perch.” [1]

To be sure, the Dalai Lama has issued public statements disavowing Lamas who have been accused of sexual abuse. Yet, Chandler claims that these denunciations are merely public relations cover-ups. She contends that, behind the scenes, the Dalai Lama actually orders his devotees to keep vows of secrecy surrounding the Tantric sexual taboos and misconducts of the Lamas [1]. If Chandler’s allegations sound far-fetched, consider that, in 2023, the Dalai Lama was recorded prompting a young boy to “suck” his “tongue” during a televised event. In response to public outcries, the Dalai Lama apologized “for the hurt his words may have caused,” yet others, including at least one “top Tibetan leader,” asserted that the lewd advance was not an act of pedophilia, but rather an “affectionate behavior” or a Tibetan cultural custom of showing a “sign of respect.” 

Nonetheless, it is worth noting that the Dalai Lama wrote the foreword to Keith Raniere’s book, The Sphinx and Thelxiepeia, and he also spoke at a 2009 World Ethical Foundations Consortium conference, which was a NXIVM satellite event where he bestowed a Tibetan scarf upon Raniere. It was Raniere’s NXIVM accomplices, Clare and Sara Bronfman, with the help of the Dalai Lama’s “gatekeeper,” Lama Tenzin Dhonden, who arranged for the Dalai Lama to attend the NXIVM satellite event after Sara and Dhonden consummated a sexual affair.  

It is also worth noting that, according to Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, it was the “Ascended Masters” of Tibet who bequeathed upon her the secret mystery wisdom of Theosophy, which is the occult source of the New Age belief in conscious evolution, which was coined by Theosophist Alice Bailey before it was revamped by Hubbard. In fact, Bailey, whose teachings are the crux of the UN World Core Curriculum, professed that her evolutionary New Age prophecies were inspired from her communion with an Ascended Master named Djwhal Khul, otherwise known as “The Tibetan.” Blavatsky’s protégé, Annie Besant, and her Theosophical counterpart, Charles W. Leadbeater, adopted a young Indian boy, Jiddu Krishnamurti, whom Leadbeater reportedly sexually abused while grooming him to become the “vehicle” for the New Age messiah, “Lord Maitreya.” According to Chandler, the Tibetan Lamas believe that Tantric evangelism has the power to ultimately usher in “The Age of Maitreya,” which is a utopian “Golden Age” prophesied in ancient Buddhist and New Age lore [1]. 

In sum, the Theosophical roots of Hubbard’s New Age gospel of conscious transhuman evolution stem from Tibetan esotericism while the New Age messianic belief in the coming Age of Maitreya is a rendition of Tibetan Buddhist eschatology. At the same time, Marc Gafni’s cosmo-erotic twist on Hubbard’s conscious evolution is spun from Tibetan Tantra while New Age Theosophy is the bedrock of the UN’s World Core Curriculum. Formulated by UN Assistant Secretary General Robert Muller, who participated in Mikhail Gorbachev’s State of the World Forum along with Hubbard, the World Core Curriculum is the UN’s global education curriculum, which spreads Bailey’s New Age teachings, including her theory of conscious evolution, as a universal pedagogy for schools throughout the member nations of the UN. Meanwhile, UN Agenda 2030 and New Age spirituality are being amalgamated at the Strongs’ sustainable interfaith community in Crestone, which has offered a launchpad where the futurist bent of Hubbard’s conscious transhuman evolution has been synergized with the mystical bent of Tibetan Lamaism’s conscious Tantric enlightenment. Altogether, the SDGs of UN Agenda 2030 and the New Age indoctrination of the UN World Core Curriculum, which have been cultivated at Crestone, are both guided by the doctrine of conscious evolution, which is rooted in a Theosophical remix of Tibetan esotericism that is steeped Tantric mysticism.

Of SYNCONs, Spy-Ops, and PSYOPs: From Finders to Mind Wars

Barbara Marx Hubbard also associated with a cult known as “The Finders,” which experimented with communal living, including communal sex and communal parenting, guided by “human potential” psychology, “New Age” spirituality, and “Eastern mysticism.” Operating communes out of Virginia and Washington DC with apparent military intelligence ties, the Finders founder, Marion D. Pettie, who was otherwise known as “The Game Caller,” inculcated his followers through a system of experimental “games” ostensibly aimed at raising the consciousness and actualizing the human potential of the “players” [4]. According to Finders member Robert “Tobe” Terrell, the Finders cult helped Hubbard set up her Synergistic Convergence conferences on multiple occasions [4]. Hubbard and the Finders were also linked through memberships with her World Future Society [4]. The Finders, who would be investigated for human trafficking and child sexual abuse involving “satanic rituals,” also endeavored to bankroll William Irwin Thompson’s Lindisfarne Association [4], which came to be stationed at the Strongs’ mountain tract outpost in Crestone where Hubbard preached her gospel of conscious transhuman evolution [1]. 

In 1987, two Finders members, Douglas E. Ammerman and Michael Houlihan, were arrested and charged with child abuse by Tallahassee police who received an anonymous phone call reporting “two ‘well-dressed men’ who were ‘supervising’ six disheveled children in a neighborhood park.” According to the Washington Post, a “police spokesman” described the children, who had been traveling in a van with the two Finders, as “hungry and . . . pretty pathetic” while “a court document” described them as “dirty, unkempt, hungry, disturbed and agitated.” United Press Internationalrecounts how the children “were covered with scratches and insect bites” while other reports relayed that the children said they were fed only as a reward and were forbidden from living indoors.

According to the New Times, the children described living at a commune with “lots of mommies and daddies” who take orders from a man they refer to as “the Game Caller.” A Tallahassee Police Department (TPD) report states that the children said they were “being ‘weaned’ from their mothers,” and “[t]he oldest child . . . did not know . . . her last name.” The children also said that “the adults had to do what the ‘Game Caller’ said, and the adults told the children what to do.” TPD spokesman Scott Hunt reported that one of the girls “showed signs of sexual abuse.” According to the New York Times, “after receiving a half-dozen phone calls threatening to the children,” the police moved the children to a “shelter” at an “undisclosed” location “protected by armed guards.”

As a result of the Tallahassee arrest, DC police raided a Finders warehouse where, according to news media, they “removed large plastic bags” that contained “wallet-sized pictures of children, . . . and some were of naked children.” TPD spokesman Hunt informed the press that “the Finders cult might have been accustomed to selling or smuggling the children of its members out of the country.”According to the Washington Post, “Customs officials” launched a probe into “whether a child pornography operation was being conducted” by the Finders while the FBI investigated whether the Finders were complicit in “the transportation of children across state lines for immoral purposes or kidnaping.” 

These investigations into the Finders would ultimately be dropped, citing a lack of evidence. But, in 2019, the FBI released its 870-page vault of files concerning the Finders investigation, which includes FBI memorandums, US Customs Service records, and TPD and DC Metro police reports. In turn, many unanswered questions have been raised by several investigative journalists, including Elizabeth Vos of Mint Press News, Derrick Broze of the Conscious Resistance Network, and John Brisson of We’ve Read the Documents, all of whom have highlighted how the initial police and Customs reports conflict with the FBI’s determination that the Finders case lacked evidence.

Prior to being investigated for child sexual abuse and human trafficking, the Finders helped Barabara Marx Hubbard orchestrate her Synergistic Convergence (SYNCON) conferences on multiple occasions [4]. On one such occasion, some of the Finders rendezvoused with former MIT Professor William Irwin Thompson, who propositioned the Finders to broker investments into his Lindisfarne Association, which was created to promote the cultivation of a “new planetary culture” [4].

According to The Gamecaller, which narrates the memoirs of Tobe Terrell’s experiences as a Finder, he and a fellow Finder, Roy Mason, took a road trip from the Finders headquarters in Washington DC to Montreal, Canada, “for the American Humanistic Psychology annual convention” where they attended a session hosted by the Tantric guru Chogyam Trungpa [4]. Reflecting on this encounter with Trungpa, Terrell recalls, “I don’t remember much of what he said, but I had no doubt as to what he was. I’d never been in a presence like his before” [4]. 

On the way back from the humanistic psychology convention, which was integral to the Human Potential Movement, Terrell and Mason stopped in Boston “to help Barbara Marx Hubbard, who’s staging a ‘Syncon,’” otherwise known as a “Synergistic Convergence” conference [4]. Terrell narrates how “[w]e’d attended the first one when it was held at the Washington Hilton and we’d stored the Syncon props afterward on the second floor of the warehouse” [4]. Terrell goes on to describe the entire SYNCON process:

“[t]he props are primarily plywood barriers, which are used to form a great circle in which the Syncon takes place.

Inside the circle are further barriers that form pie-shaped wedges, each wedge representing a category of human knowledge.  . . . [E]xperts from each field meet inside the wedges and try to arrive at a consensus on what to do about the most important problems in their field. When they think that they have done so, a wall is taken down between their field of knowledge and an adjoining field. Then the combined experts from the two fields redefine the problems and take down another barrier. The timing for their removal is determined by Barbara and her principal assistant Jerry Glenn. Gradually all of the walls come down until, at the end of the third day, everybody is sitting in one circle considering the biggest problems for the planet as a whole. As usual, the Syncon is considered a success by all who come.” [4]

After leaving Hubbard’s SYNCON, Terrell and Mason traveled “south” toward “Huntington,” New York, to the Lindisfarne Association to meet with William Irwin Thompson, whose “work” was “admire[d]” by the mastermind of the Finders: “[Marion] Pettie” [4]. Just“[a] few months later,” the Finders would “hear that Lindisfarne ha[d] lost its land and that Thompson [wa]s looking for another place,” so the Finders wrote “a letter to him . . . offer[ing] him some land in Nethers [Virginia] as a location for the new incarnation of Lindisfarne” [4].In turn, at Pettie’s behest, Terrell met personally with Thompson to negotiate the proposed deal [4]. Terrell writes, “[a]s was his usual practice, Pettie does not meet with him [Thompson], leaving that to his lieutenants,” who “report on Thompson’s visit” [4]. The Finders’ offer to grant a plot of land for a new Lindisfarne property was ultimately rejected by Thompson, who was only interested in “cash” to pay the expenses for rebuilding Lindisfarne at a different location in “Cooperstown, New York” [4]. 

Nevertheless, Thompson’s search for a Lindisfarne property would be resolved by Hubbard’s World Future Society colleague, Maurice Strong. Thompson joined forces with Strong through the “Gaia movement” that was sparked by James Lovelock’s “Gaia hypothesis,” which posits that the biosphere and ecospheres of planet Earth are super-organically co-evolved by conscious interventions from sentient lifeforms [1]. According to Christine Chandler, Thompson was “a student of Hindu Kriya yoga,” and he led “the original Gaia movement group,” which played a role in setting up his new Lindisfarne center at Crestone  [1]. In Enthralled, Chandler explains how “[t]he Gaia group relocated their ‘intentional community’ of Lindisfarne to meet in the friendliness of the natural world of Crestone . . . Apparently, this Gaia group of Thompson’s believed in the myth of Crestone being the perfect place to ‘confab’ together about the future ‘planetary communities’ that would solve the world’s problems” [1]. At Crestone, Lindisfarne received financial backing from Hubbard’s benefactor, Laurance Rockefeller. 

In brief, after failed negotiations with the Finders, Thompson moved his Lindisfarne Association to Strong’s Manitou property. There, it was funded by Rockefeller money and assimilated into the New Age collective of Crestone, where Hubbard preached her gospel of conscious transhuman evolution to communitarian acolytes of Tibetan Tantric Buddhism. Altogether, The Gamecaller reveals how one Finder’s field trip links together members of the World Future Society, human potential psychologists, the Tantric guru Chogyam Trungpa, Barbara Marx Hubbard’s SYNCONs, and William Irwin Thompson’s Lindisfarne Association, which was bankrolled by Rockefeller capital at Maurice Strong’s Crestone outpost for conscious evolution and Tibetan esotericism.

Hubbard, Strong, and the Finders were also connected through the World Future Society, which Hubbard co-founded with Edward Cornish. According to Steam Shovel Press, which interviewed Pettie, an unattributed “Investigative Leads” memo relays that Pettie “established a ‘futurist’ network, assisting Edward S. Cornish in founding the World Future Society and [sic] working through Roy Mason and John Naisbitt.” To be sure, in The Gamecaller, Terrell quotes Pettie saying he had known Cornish “for 20 years” [4]. In fact, Cornish hired Hubbard’s SYNCON aide, Roy Mason, who was a member of the Finders, to serve as the architecture editor for The Futurist, which is the flagship publication of the World Future Society [4]. According to Cornish, Mason “had lots of associates,” who were probably fellow Finders, “whom he could call on as volunteers for [World Future] Society projects.” When a Finders cabin in Virginia was searched during the investigations into the cult’s alleged sexual abuse and child trafficking crimes, it was revealed that World Future Society literature was strewn about the domicile. Incidentally, the World Future Society and the Finders cult were both headquartered in Washington DC [4]. 

It is worth noting here that, in FindFar, which is the third volume in Lieutenant Colonel Michael Aquino’s MindWar series on psychological operations, Hubbard’s World Future Society is listed as a “3D forecasting . . . resource” alongside the CIA, which was incriminated in the Finders investigations; Stratfor, which is commonly dubbed “the private CIA” and is self-described as “the world’s leading geopolitical intelligence platform”; and the Hudson Institute, which was set up by Herman Khan, who was a World Future Society member and a RAND Corporation analyst [5]. Like Aquino, who was himself embroiled in an alleged child sex abuse scandal as a US Army Psychological Operations officer, Pettie and the Finders were entangled with intelligence operations that were ostensibly linked to their cult’s alleged child abuse and trafficking crimes.

According to a NewsLine bulletin from the NameBase intelligence officer database, webmaster Daniel Brandt, who worked with a team of Finders operating under the guise of an organization called “The Information Bank,” procured a “memo of undetermined origin that summarizes Pettie’s intelligence links.” Brandt’s synopsis of the memo recounts that “Pettie began his career with assorted OSS contacts, served as a chauffeur to General Ira Eaker, became a protégé of Charles Marsh ( . . . who ran his own private intelligence network), and was trained in counterintelligence in Baltimore and Frankfurt, Germany. His wife worked for the CIA, and Pettie himself was run by Col. Leonard N. Weigner (whose . . . career was spent in air force intelligence and the CIA).” In fact, Pettie’s intelligence training and his chauffer service under General Eaker are confirmed by Tobe Terrell in an interview with Derrick Broze of the Conscious Resistance Network, and Pettie himself confirmed his wife’s CIA associations in an interview with Steam Shovel Press. 

Although Pettie denied ever contracting directly with the CIA, he confessed that he “kept open house mainly to intelligence and counterintelligence people in Washington.” He also said, “I run a private intelligence game, and I send people out undercover to find out various things.” According to the anonymous memo relayed in Brandt’s NameBase bulletin, “on [Col.] Weigner’s advice Pettie resigned from the military and surrounded himself with ‘kooks’ so that he could infiltrate the ‘beat,’ human potential, and now the New Age movements.” 

It is worth noting here that the Human Potential and New Age Movements have also been appropriated by military intelligence operations through Hubbard’s World Business Academy comrade, Lieutenant Colonel Jim Channon [6]. Channon conceived the US Army’s First Earth Battalion, which experimented with cultivating psychic superpowers that are explored in Jon Ronson’s The Men Who Stare at Goats. Channon, whose First Earth Battalion assimilated Hubbard’s concept of “supra-sex,” professed that “Barbara Marx Hubbard is a spiritual visionary and masterful planetary social inventor” [6]. In fact, Channon championed the “science of conscious evolution” as a compass for realizing the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which were the precursors to the UN SDGs. In brief, the New Age and Human Potential Movements, which are integral to Hubbard’s Malthusian gospel of conscious transhuman evolution, were penetrated by intelligence operations that were evidently coordinated by her futurist cohorts, Channon and Pettie.

To be sure, the Finders have denied all allegations that the cult is a front for intelligence operations. However, the Associated Press recounts a “Customs report” which avers that “the CIA” had “admitted to owning the Finders organization as a front for a domestic computer training operation but that it had ‘gone bad.’” In fact, a company called “Future Enterprises Inc.” was investigated by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) as a potential CIA “front company” run by the Finders. Consequently, a “CIA spokesman” told media outlets that the CIA did contract with “Future Enterprises Inc. for computer training in the 1980s,” but that it was unaware of “any connections between the company and the Finders.” Nonetheless, Finders member Tobe Terrell was indeed employed by Future Enterprises. Succinctly, at least one member of the Finders worked for Future Enterprises, which contracted with the CIA, while other members of the Finders were evidently involved in setting up a “‘futurist’ network” through Hubbard’s World Future Society [4], which is endorsed in military PSYOP literature as an intelligence “forecasting . . . resource” [5]. It is also worth noting here that Finders member Kristin Knauth founded Foresight Alliance, where she still works as a Senior Futurist and Foresight Analyst who has provided future forecasting and scenario planning services for the Rockefeller Foundation.

Adding to these suspicions of intelligence links, computerized telecommunications equipment, which was highly sophisticated for the pre-internet era of the 1980s, was discovered on several Finders properties during investigations. The Washington Postrelayed that, upon searching the Finders’ van, “[a]uthorities in Florida . . . found 20 floppy computer discs and a device . . . [that] could be used to hook into a computer in another location by telephone.” A TPD report states that the Finders children told police how “the Game Caller . . . would tell them what to do” by “using the computer in the van (a TRS-80).” While searching a Finders DC property, US Customs Special Agent Ramon J. Martinez inspected a proto-email system known as “MCI,” which the Finders used to transmit “telex messages,” including one that “expressed an interest in ‘bank secrecy’ situations” and one that “specifically ordered the purchase of two children in Hong Kong to be arranged through a contact in the Chinese Embassy.” 

Notwithstanding the Finders’ denial of CIA involvement, Martinez determined that “the investigation into the activity of the FINDERS had become a CIA internal matter” and that the CIA was blocking him from pursuing his own investigation. In turn, Martinez dispatched his Customs reports to former CIA officer Skip Clements, who operated Technology Strategic Planning, which was a private intelligence firm. Clements forwarded Martinez’s documents to US Congressman Tom Lewis, who prompted the DOJ to investigate the CIA’s alleged obstruction of justice, stating that “all the evidence points to” the likelihood that “our own government ha[d] something to do with this Finders organization and turned their backs on these children.” Nevertheless, the DOJ ultimately exonerated the CIA of interfering in the Finders case.

It is worth noting here that the Finders are not the only cult to be entrenched with intelligence agencies, New Age spirituality, and sexual abuse accusations. During the 1950s and 1960s, the Dalai Lama, who is the religious figurehead of Crestone’s Tibetan Tantra cults [1], served as an asset for the CIA, which paid his administration a yearly stipend of $1.7 million, including  an annual subsidy of $180,000 earmarked for the Dalai Lama himself. Today, one of the Dalai Lama’s most prominent disciples and financial benefactors is eBay Founder, Pierre Omidyar, a billionaire technocrat who has yoked up with several ostensive “CIA cutouts.” According to The Grayzone, Omidyar’s CIA “regime-change” cooperators include the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and Frontier Design Group along with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which awarded its Democracy Service Medal to the Dalai Lama, who has also joined forces with the NED. Omidyar, who operates an impact investment firm that collaborates with the WEF to “Evolv[e] Humanity” by “Evolving Technology” for “the digital revolution,” is also an acolyte of the Dalai Lama’s “gatekeeper,” Lama Tenzin Dhonden, who had an affair with Sara Bronfman while serving as the liaison between the Dalai Lama and the NXIVM human potential cult.

Sara’s father, Edgar Bronfman Sr., who lauded Nancy Salzman as “one of the most influential females in my life” before publicly denouncing NXIVM as “a cult,” played a notable role in facilitating the rise of transhumanist child sex trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein.  After facilitating Epstein’s 2008 non-prosecution agreement,  US Attorney Alexander Acosta imparted that he “was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone” [2]. In One Nation Under Blackmail, investigative journalist Whitney Webb documents myriad connections between the “Epstein Network,” the CIA, and the Mossad [2]. 

It is also worth noting here that Epstein’s “shadowy” non-profit corporation, Gratitude America Ltd., bankrolled the Chopra Foundation, which is committed to “expanding consciousness” under the headship of Hubbard’s evolutionary “ally,” Deepak Chopra [3], who has also fellowshipped with the Dalai Lama. Epstein also financed the Edge Foundation, which strives to “evolve” a “Third Culture” with the help of Eric and Bret Weinstein, both of whom are Game B players along with Zak Stein, who “co-created” CosmoErotic Humanism with Hubbard and Marc Gafni. Another Epstein-funded non-profit, the Santa Fe Institute, which is a “global research network” that “search[es] for order” in the “evolutionary processes” of “complex systems dynamics,” including “biological, social, and technological systems,” was chaired by Jim Rutt, who also set up Game B. Additionally noteworthy, Gafni’s book, Soul Prints, is endorsed by the Director of the Bronfman Center for Jewish Life.

Altogether, these interconnections between intelligence agencies, sexual abuse allegations, and the cults of NXIVM, Tantra, and the Finders reveal that Hubbard occupied a nexus between multiple intelligence operations entangled with an array of sex cults that have inculcated supplicants through human potential psychology, Buddhist mysticism, and other New Age esoterica which are integral to her Neo-Theosophical gospel of conscious transhuman evolution.

Before closing, this analysis would be remiss to omit the accusations of Satanic ritual abuse levied against the Finders. Not to be sensational, the relevance here is that Hubbard expressed sympathies for the Devil on several occasions [10], which perhaps betray a common Luciferian spirituality that was not only shared by Hubbard and the Finders, but was also the crux of her Neo-Theosophical belief in conscious transhuman evolution. 

According to the Washington Post, “D.C. police sources” reported that a “warehouse linked to the [Finders] group” contained “pictures of children engaged in what appeared to be ‘cult rituals’” while “[o]fficials of the U.S. Customs Service” described one such picture as a “photograph of a child in chains.” US Customs Special Agent Martinez itemized “a series of photos of adults and children dressed in white sheets participating in a blood ritual.  . . . The photos showed the execution, disembowelment, skinning, and dismemberment of two goats at the hands of the children.” At another Finders property in DC, a “police detective” observed that a circle of “several round stones had been gathered” amidst other evidence of practices “sometimes used in satanic rituals.” In a separate Finders investigation prior to the Tallahassee arrest, a “confidential” source told DC police that the Finders were “a cult” involved in “brainwashing” and the use of children for “rituals.” This confidential source, according to the Washington Post, also “told of being recruited by the Finders with promises of ‘financial reward and sexual gratification’ and of being invited by one member to ‘explore’ satanism with them.” 

To be sure, these claims about the Finders’ Satanic rituals were ultimately dismissed as symptoms of “Satanic panic,” and Tobe Terrell has maintained that the Finders were never involved in any Satanic activities. However, Terrell’s memoir notes that Marion Pettie was an “admire[r]” of William Irwin Thompson [4], who co-authored Reimagination of the World with Luciferian, David Spangler, who professed that “Lucifer . . .  is the angel of man’s evolution” and that “the Luciferic initiation . . . is an initiation into the New Age.” 

Similarly, Hubbard’s New Age gospel of conscious transhuman evolution was inspired by Lucifer, whom she credited for kindling the evolution of human consciousness by offering Eve the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. In The Revelation: Alternative to Armageddon, Hubbard proclaimed that “[t]wo evolved Sons of God, Lucifer and Christ, were actual beings sent to nurture godly beings on Earth. Lucifer attracted Eve to do what she naturally would have done — become self-conscious.” In The Hunger of Eve, Hubbard confessed, “[w]hen I first read Genesis in my youth, I was on Eve’s side. I thought she was right to eat the apple of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil — I would have! It was worth the suffering to struggle out of animal innocence to become human” [10]. Like Lucifer, who told Eve she would become god-like upon eating the Fruit of Knowledge, Hubbard evangelized New Agers by preaching that scientific knowledge will generate transhuman technologies which will enable humans to consciously evolve into “godlings.” 

Likewise, the coiner of conscious evolution, Theosophist Alice Bailey, avowed “Lucifer” as the “Ruler” of “Humanity” and “Self-consciousness” in two of her occult tomes: The Externalization of the Hierarchy and The Destiny of Nations. Bailey also founded the Lucifer Publishing Company, which she revamped into the Lucis Trust, which holds “Consultative Status” with the UN and “play[s] an active role in the United Nations, particularly in spreading information about the UN and fostering support for UN programs,” including “sustainable development” initiatives that are integral to the transhumanist 4IR.

It is worth noting here that the PSYOP architect of “MindWar,” Michael Aquino, who endorsed Hubbard’s World Future Society [5], was a disciple of Satanist Anton LaVey and the founder of the Temple of Set, which is an offshoot of LaVey’s Church of Satan. Like the Finders, Aquino was implicated in a child sexual abuse scandal that allegedly involved Satanic rituals. It is also worth noting here that the “sex magic” rites of Satanic occultist, Aleister Crowley, whose exegesis of the “Enochian Keys” influenced LaVey’s Satanic Bible and Aquino’s Satanic Bible: 50^th Anniversary ReVision, are based on Tantra. According to Secret Agent 666by Richard B. Spence, who is a professor of history at the University of Idaho, Crowley was a British intelligence asset.

In sum, whether or not there is any veracity to the allegations of Satanic ritual abuse levied against Aquino and the Finders, Luciferianism dovetails with the “Lefthand Path” of Tantric sex magic, which is practiced by Hubbard’s cosmo-erotic protégé, Marc Gafni, along with Tibetan gurus who have collaborated with the Manitou Foundation and the NXIVM human potential cult. Luciferianism is also the spiritual ethos of Hubbard’s Neo-Theosophical gospel of conscious evolution, which she propagated through collaborations with Gafni, NXIVM’s Nancy Salzman, and the New Age community of Crestone. Moreover, the Luciferian mythos of humanity becoming godlike through the Tree of Knowledge is congruent with 4IR axiology, which is bent on technologically evolving humankind into a new transhuman species that Hubbard and other eminent futurists, such as WEF mouthpiece Yuval Noah Harari, conceive as god-like. 

The Fog of Psych-War

To be clear, my account of Hubbard’s connections with the Finders, Crestone, NXIVM, and Gafni is not intended to implicate that she was complicit in the sexual abuse allegations or convictions of these individuals and organizations. Rather, the connections documented herein are highlighted to illuminate how Hubbard’s Neo-Theosophical gospel of conscious transhuman evolution is enmeshed with a tapestry of New Age spirituality, human potential psychology, and Tantric sexuality that has been systematically exploited by cults that have been entangled with PSYOPs and intelligence operations. 

It is difficult to quantify the degree to which Tantric, Satanic, or other forms of sex magic are baked into Hubbard’s gospel of conscious transhuman evolution. It is likewise difficult to determine whether Hubbard volunteered her conscious evolutionary mission to be used for psychological operations conducted by intelligence contractors, or whether such contractors co-opted it for their own agendas. Either way, Hubbard and the CIA, along with other intel agencies and PSYOP special forces, share a mutual history of propagating New Age futurism with the common effect of socially engineering cultures to believe in utopic promises of human potential actualization through various modes of conscious evolution, including sustainable transhuman evolution through 4IR technocracy. Whether a circuitous stratagem or the spontaneous convergence of imbricating ideologies and organizations, the synergistic legacy of Hubbard’s Tantric, Satanic, and intel-PSYOP associations is reified in the encroaching 4IR machinations of globalist technocrats whose transhumanist reimagining of the future emerges from an arcane sacralization of conscious Luciferian evolution instilled with sexual mysticism.

References

[1]  Christine A. Chandler, Enthralled: The Guru Cult of Tibetan Buddhism (North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2017)

[2]  Whitney Webb, One Nation Under Blackmail: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Organized Crime That Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein (Walterville, OR: TrineDay, 2021). 

[3]  Barbara Marx Hubbard and The Welcoming Committee, Birth 2012 and Beyond: Humanity’s Great Shift to the Age of Conscious Evolution (USA: Shift Books, 2012).

[4]  Tobe Terrell, The Gamecaller (Gainesville, FL: Old Rag Publishing, 2009).

[5]  Michael A. Aquino, FindFar (San Francisco: CreateSpace, 2017).

[6]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, Conscious Evolution: Awakening the Power of Our Social Potential (Novato, CA: New World Library, 1998).

[7]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Revelation: Our Crisis Is a Birth (The Book of Co-Creation) (Sonoma, CA: Foundation for Conscious Evolution, 1993).

[8] Abraham Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, 2^nd ed. (New York, NY: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1968).

[9]  Rosa Koire, Behind the Green Mask: U.N. Agenda 21 (Santa Rosa, CA: Post Sustainability Institute Press, 2011).

[10] Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Hunger of Eve: One Woman’s Odyssey Toward the Future (Eastsound, WA: Island Pacific NW, 1989). 

The Legacy of Barbara Marx Hubbard and the Conscious Evolution of Psychological Operations.

President Donald Trump has publicly stated, “I know nothing about Project 2025,” and “I have nothing to do with Project 2025.  . . . I haven’t read it. I don’t want to read it purposely. I’m not going to read it.” Trump has also averred, “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying, and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” Obviously, these statements are contradictory, for if Trump is truly oblivious to the machinations of Project 2025, then how can he honestly disavow its policies, especially if he didn’t actually read the official “Playbook,” Mandate for Leadership: Project 2025? 

While contemplating the answer to this question, consider that Project 2025 contributor Russell Vought was recorded with a hidden camera which caught him saying that Trump’s public distancing from Project 2025 is merely a feint intended to deflect and placate his opponents in media and politics. Meanwhile, at least 29 Project 2025 contributors, including Project 2025 Director Paul Dans, have served under Trump in official positions across various levels during his first presidential administration. 

Moving forward into Trump’s second term, many of his picks for high-level officials in his executive branch are Project 2025 contributors. These include Cabinet appointments, such as John Ratcliffe, who is the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and Russell Vought, who is the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Other appointments include Tom Homan, who is Trump’s Border Czar, and Brendan Carr, who is the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Altogether, this constellation of Project 2025 contributors orbiting Trump indicates that his administration will be adopting at least some of the Project 2025 directives, such as the mass deportation operation already being carried out by Homan.

Concerning education policy, Trump has nominated Linda McMahon to serve as the Secretary of Education. While McMahon did not contribute to Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, which oversaw the publication of Project 2025, has been funded by America First Works Inc. where McMahon serves as a “Board Member” and a “Senior Advisor.” McMahon, like Trump’s previous Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, has led several non-profit corporations, such as America First Works Inc. and the America First Policy Institute, which advocate for public-private “school choice” partnerships that are also championed in Project 2025. 

In anticipation of her secretarial confirmation, McMahon has already met with multiple members of Congress, including Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), Senator Dave McCormick (R-PA), and Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), to get the ball rolling for corporatist school choice overhauls that align with Project 2025. Given McMahon’s pedigree, her nomination as Secretary of Education signals that the Trump administration will be going forward with Project 2025 plans for dismantling the Department of Education (ED) and expanding school choice corporatization.  

Far from abolishing government control of schools, the Project 2025 plan to disband the ED would only restructure the bureaucracies involved in administering federal education entitlements. In the meantime, Project 2025’s school choice reforms, which include federal “Education Savings Accounts” (ESAs), will likely expand government control over private schools, including religious schools, and home schooling, while also publicly subsidizing ed-tech corporations. At the same time, Project 2025’s school choice tax credits are primed to expand the corporatization of education through public-private partnerships that leverage ed-tech to data-mine how “Pay for Success” (PFS) impact scholarships streamline student outcomes for the social credit economy of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR). 

To be sure, as I have documented extensively in a litany of articles and my book, School World Order: The Technocratic Globalization of Corporatized Education, “school choice” is nothing more than a euphemism for an array of public-private partnerships that corporatize government education by funneling tax subsidies into private schools, charter school companies, and ed-tech businesses. Rather than foster curricular freedom independent of federal control, Project 2025’s menu of “school choices” is primed to restrict options to government-regulated private schools, charter edu-companies, and ed-tech corporations, or corporate-managed PFS scholarships, which data-mine students’ learning analytics for social credit commodification in the digital economy of the 4IR. In fact, key architects of Project 2025 are entrenched in the State Policy Network (SPN): an old swamp of neo-conservative and beltway-libertarian think tanks that has long been bankrolled by Koch Brothers philanthropy to push public-private “school choice” corporatization and social impact finance, which are integral to the planned stakeholder economy of the 4IR.

The Dpt. of Education Reorganization Act: Shuffling the Chalkboards on the Titanic

Mandate for Leadership: Project 2025 recommends that the Trump administration dissolve the ED by passing a “Department of Education Reorganization Act.” Trump himself has essentially concurred as he has pledged, “[o]ne other thing I’ll be doing very early in the administration is closing up the Department of Education in Washington D.C., and sending all education and education work and needs back to the states.” Keeping his promise, Trump is preparing to sign an executive order that “would shut down all functions of the department [of ED] that are not written explicitly into statute, or move certain functions to other departments,” according to Newsweek. In the meantime, the Department of Government Efficiency has cut nearly $1 billion worth of ED contracts and grants. Republican Congressmen have also introduced HR 369 and HR 899, which are bills to “[a]bolish” or “eliminat[e]” the ED.

While Trump may align with Project 2025’s plan to sunset the ED, whether he knows it or not, doing so by itself would not return “all education . . . back to the states.” Rather than terminate the government’s control of education, axing the ED by itself would only reshuffle the bureaucracies in charge of schools as the federal entitlements provided under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the Higher Education Act (HEA), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) would still remain. Unless the Trump administration were to also pass bills to repeal the ESEA, the HEA, IDEA, and WIOA, the mandates for administering federal education entitlements would merely be shifted to other government departments. In fact, such a reallocation of federal education entitlements through a “reorganization” of government bureaucracies is precisely what is laid out in Project 2025.

According to the Project 2025 Playbook, the proposed “Department of Education Reorganization Act” would transfer the bulk of federal education entitlements to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Labor (DOL) while transferring other entitlements to the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Commerce (DOC), and the Department of State (DOS). 

For examples:

• The Office of Post-Secondary Education, which administers HEA entitlements, would be transferred to HHS.
• The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, which administers IDEA entitlements, would be transferred to HHS.
• The Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, which administers WIOA entitlements, would be transferred to the DOL.
• The Office for Civil Rights, which enforces Title IX of the ESEA and HEA Amendments of 1972, would be transferred to the DOJ.
• The Institute of Education Sciences, which oversees the Regional Educational Laboratories provided under Title IV of the ESEA, would be transferred to the Census Bureau of the DOC.
• Programs that are “important to national security” would be transferred to the DOS.

In these ways, Project 2025’s “Department of Education Reorganization Act” would actually expand, rather than diminish, government reaches into education as five different federal agencies, rather than a single department, would be permitted authority over school systems. Meanwhile, the ED “employees whose positions are determined to be essential to the mission would move with their constituent programs” to the newly appointed departments, so much of the bureaucratic personnel will remain the same. 

At the same time, by yoking education to HHS and the DOL, Project 2025’s restructuring of the ED would basically revert the federal bureaucracy into a system that hearkens back the days of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW), which implemented centralized “Planning, Programming, and Budgeting Systems (PPBS)” as the precursor to the ED and HHS. Whereas the 1979 “Department of Education Organization Act” broke up HEW and upgraded its Office of Education into the ED while upgrading its Offices of Health and Welfare into HHS, Project 2025’s “Department of Education Reorganization Act” would merely shift the Offices of the ED back to HHS and other departments, such as the DOL, which administers “Welfare-to-Work” grants. In brief, Project 2025’s disassembling of the ED would bundle together federal health and education bureaucracies under the same department of HHS, like they were bundled together under the same department of HEW, while other departments, such as the DOL, would administer school-to-work along with welfare-to-work programs.

In sum, the Project 2025 plan to dismantle the ED is just another contrivance to refurbish the labyrinth of federal bureaucracies which has always systematically reduced school learning outcomes to an aggregate of mental health and workforce competencies that determine student placement in the “human capital” supply chain of America’s planned economy. By scattering federal education entitlements to HHS and the DOL, data-tracking of students’ mental health and career pathways outcomes would be streamlined by HHS and the DOL respectively, thus magnifying the medicalization and corporatization of government schooling. In this redistributed bureaucracy, HHS and the DOL would also track student health and career outcomes linked with PFS scholarships subsidized by the school choice tax credits proposed in Project 2025.

School Choice, Social Impact Investing, and Government Control of Private, Religious, and Home Schools

There should be no doubt that Trump will greenlight the school choice reforms laid out in Project 2025. From his prior appointment of Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education, to his current nominations of Linda McMahon and Penny Schwinn for Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Ed respectively, Trump has consistently staffed the ED with champions of school choice. Picking up where his first term left off, President Trump has proclaimed that “universal school choice,” which is advocated in Project 2025, will be a cornerstone of his “Agenda 47” policy platform. Making good on his promise, Trump has signed Executive Order 14191 (“Expanding Educational Freedom and Opportunity for Families”), which directs the Secretaries of Education and Labor to formulate “discretionary grant programs to expand education freedom” while directing the Secretary of HHS to formulate “block grants . . . to expand educational choice . . . , including private and faith-based options.”

The universal school choice reforms of Agenda 47 and Project 2025 will crest on the wave of Republican-led school choice bills that were legislated throughout 2023, which was dubbed the “Year of Educational Choice” after twenty states added or expanded school choice subsidies. Three more states joined the trend during the following election year of 2024. Preparing for the federal legislative sessions of 2025, Republican Governors, such as Tennessee Governor Bill Lee and Texas Governor Greg Abbott, paved the way for the passage of universal school choice bills by ousting 2024 Congressional candidates, whether incumbents or challengers, who would not pledge to go along with school choice reforms. 

Now, with a Trump victory and a Republican mandate, there is an open lane for the Project 2025 expansion of school choice privatization through the deregulation of charter school corporations; the authorization of ESAs for dispersing ESEA Title I funds; and the subsidization of “Scholarship Granting Organizations” (SGOs) with federal tax credits provided under the “Educational Choice for Children Act” (ECCA). Taking the open lane, Trump has already gotten the Project 2025 ball rolling by convening a National School Choice Week Roundtable where he hosted Republican governors, including Lee and Abbott’s Lieutenant Governor Daniel Patrick, advising them on how they can capitalize on the school choice grants pending from his new EO 14191.

While the Project 2025 Playbook calls for “lessen[ing] the federal restrictions on charter schools,” the Playbook places a more ambitious emphasis on instituting ESAs and tax credits that funnel government subsidies not only into charter school companies, but also private schools, including religious schools, and home schools as well. To be sure, while both the ESA and tax-credit proposals of Project 2025 would siphon public tax dollars into private corporations, each entails different implications for expanding either the corporatization of public education or the federal regulation of private, religious, and homeschools. In particular, ESAs could expand the regulatory reaches of the federal government while the tax credits proposed by Project 2025 are primed to streamline “Pay for Success” (PFS) impact investments that turn profits based on whether student health and career outcomes conform to benchmarks standardized by ESG and other social credit indexes.

Concerning the prospects of ESAs, Project 2025 calls for a portion of each student’s ESEA Title I funding to be allocated for “education savings accounts . . . that parents can use to pay for personal tutors, education therapists, books and curricular materials, private school tuition, transportation and more.” Based on these stipulations, such ESA stipends could be used to subsidize not only “private school[s],” but also Big Tech corporations through the purchase of ed-tech products which are integral to the ubiquitous data-mining and omnipresent AI that are imperative in driving the social credit economy of the 4IR. For examples:

• ESA funds for “curricular materials” could be used to buy Skinnerian adaptive-learning courseware, such as Clever and Knewton, which have been financed by Peter Thiel, along with Dreambox and Brightspace LeaP, all of which data-mine students’ cognitive-behavioral psychometrics.

• ESA dollars for “education therapies” could be used to pay for assistive biofeedback wearables, such as HeartMath EKG monitors for managing test anxiety and BrainCo EEG headbands for managing ADHD, both of which data-mine students’ socio-emotional biometrics. 

• ESA money for “personal tutors” could be spent on GPT AI tutors, which data-mine students’ cognitive-behavioral and socio-emotional algorithms.

At the same time, ESA stipends for “private school tuition” could come with strings attached to federal regulations that subordinate private and home schools to government control. Consider the Alabama State “Creating Hope and Opportunity for Our Students’ Education (CHOOSE) Act,” which issues $7,000 ESAs for attending “an accredited private school, including church, parochial, or religious school” along with $2,000 ESAs for costs associated with attending “homeschool.” The CHOOSE Act stipulates that payouts from these ESAs are subject to the following provisions:

• “[P]articipating school[s]” that receive ESA dollars must “[a]gree to comply with all applicable health and safety laws or codes” and “require all participating students receiving program funds to take a standardized assessment.” Furthermore,  “participating school[s]” must “[p]rovide the department [of Revenue] with school-level test results for participating students.” Failure to comply “shall constitute grounds for the department, in its discretion, to suspend or disqualify the . . . participating school from receiving program funds.” 
• “[P]arent[s],” including “homeschool” parents, who receive ESA funds must “[a]gree to comply with rules adopted by the department for the administration of the program” and “[s]ubmit to the department any information required by the department for implementation of the program.” Failure to comply “shall constitute grounds for the department, in its discretion, to revoke, recover, suspend, or deny the [ESA] credit otherwise made available pursuant to this act.” 

To be sure, similar restrictions could be imposed through federal ESAs as Project 2025 indicates that the Alabama CHOOSE Act is one of the ten state ESA laws on which its proposal for federal ESAs is based. As a result, such Title I ESAs would federalize private schooling as much as corporatize public education, simultaneously expanding the reaches of Big Government and maximizing the profits of Big Business.

On the other end of Project 2025’s school choice platform, there is a proposal to pass the “Educational Choice for Children Act (ECCA),” which would award federal tax credits to corporations that donate to “Scholarship Granting Organizations” (SGOs) designated to dole out “scholarships” to students to cover the costs of “qualified elementary or secondary education expense[s].” According to the ECCA, such qualified expenses include “tutoring expenses” and “expenses at private or religious elementary and secondary education institutions.” 

Unlike the CHOOSE Act, the ECCA stipulates that “[n]othing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to permit, allow, encourage, or authorize any Federal, State, or local government entity, or officer or employee thereof, to mandate, direct, or control any aspect of any private or religious elementary or secondary education institution.” However, the ECCA also stipulates that “[n]othing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to permit, allow, encourage, or authorize any Federal, State, or local government entity, or officer or employee thereof, to mandate, direct, or control any aspect of any scholarship granting organization.” In other words, while the ECCA prevents private and religious schools from being federally regulated as a result of accepting government-subsidized SGO scholarships, it does not prevent SGO corporations from controlling the terms and conditions, including PFS social impact provisions, of the scholarships.

To be sure, “Pay for Success” impact contracts are provided for in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which reauthorizes and amends the ESEA. In accordance with ESSA, “Pay for Success” contracts can stipulate that an SGO put corporate money upfront for scholarships and then receive that money back from the government, along with a potential profit, depending on whether student outcomes meet or exceed projected “social impacts” that align with ESG and other social credit metrics. In fact, many SGOs facilitate their scholarships through social impact contracts. 

Consider the Sagamore Institute, which is “an action-oriented think tank” that facilitates “social impact” investments through “sustainable initiatives,” such as its “Scholarships for Education Choice program.” Registered as a “Certified Participating SGO” under the Indiana State Department of Education’s “School Scholarship Tax Credit Program,” the Sagamore Institute grants “Education Choice” scholarships in “partner[ship] with large and small schools, traditional and classical schools, secular and faith-based schools, and schools that serve special needs populations.” The Sagamore Institute has also pushed “Impact Investing” aimed at “‘Supply Side’ Welfare Reform” that redistributes “Private Capital for [the] Public Good” of remedying socioeconomic disparities across racial demographics. 

Similarly, the Point Foundation, which is “the nation’s largest scholarship-granting organization for LGBTQ students,” doles out “impact” scholarships aimed at “mitigat[ing] generations of racism and an education system born from discriminatory policies by providing financial support, community resources, and professional development to LGBTQ students who identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color [BIPOC].” Point Foundation scholarships, which are sponsored by World Economic Forum (WEF) partners, such as Amazon and Morgan Stanley, are bankrolled by donations stipulated for “advanc[ing] social justice, diversity, inclusion, and equality” along with “equity.” In other words, the Point Foundation’s impact scholarships are issued to advance social justice outcomes for LGBTQ-BIPOC stakeholders in accordance with the ESG social credit economy championed by the WEF.

If you think that such “DEI” impact scholarships have now been banned due to Trump’s recent executive orders (EOs), think again. EO 14151 (“Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing”)and EO 14173 (“Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity”) only repeal DEI provisions stipulated in prior executive orders, including EO 11246, EO 11478, EO 12898, EO 13583, EO 13672, and EO 13985. Although EO 14190 (“Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling”) expunges “Federal funding sources and streams, including grants or contracts, that directly or indirectly support or subsidize the instruction, advancement, or promotion of gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology,” it does so only “to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law.” Since none of Trump’s executive orders repeal diversity, equity, inclusion, or PFS provisions codified in the ESSA law, none of his EOs prohibit ESSA PFS contracts that subsidize SGO impact scholarships which target DEI or ESG outcomes; nor do any of his EOs prohibit federal tax credits from subsidizing corporate donations to such SGOs.

To be sure, PFS impact investments are pushed not only by “left-wing” DEI organizations, but also by “right-wing” conservative think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) where Max Eden, who is a co-author of Project 2025’s “Department of Education” chapter, has served as a Research Fellow, a Senior Fellow, and an Education Policy Program Manager. In fact, in a “Research Paper” drafted for a 2014 AEI Research Conference titled School Choice: Encouraging New and Better Schools, Eden advocates for “social impact bonds” financed by “private school choice venture capital firms.”

Although the AEI does not endorse impact investments that target sociocultural DEI outcomes, the AEI does call for PFS investments that target socioeconomic outcomes, including workforce, health, and safety outcomes. In either equation, SGOs are primed to peddle PFS scholarships designed for advancing social impacts, whether sociocultural impacts or socioeconomic impacts, in order to socially engineer “human capital” markets in which students are commodified to streamline social credit supply chains for the 4IR stakeholder economy.

In sum, PFS scholarships fueled by ECCA tax credits will facilitate public-private education partnerships in which corporations steer the funding streams for both public and private schools while federal and state governments subsidize those companies’ investments in social credit and human capital markets. At the same time, Title I ESAs will expand government control over private schools, including religious and home schools, while federally subsidizing corporate ed-tech products geared to digitally track and trace PFS impacts on students’ social credit outcomes. Altogether, Project 2025’s school choice reforms will expand Big Government control of private, religious, and home schools while expanding Big Business management of both public and private education through impact scholarships which advance ESG and other social credit outcomes streamlined by Big Tech corporations that helm the planned stakeholder economy of the 4IR.

SPN Doctors: Meet the New School Choice, Same as the Old School Choice

The Project 2025 school choice agenda is nothing more than a revamping of a longtime Koch-SPN (State Policy Network) stratagem to cartelize corporate-government control of education through public-private partnerships that funnel public tax subsidies into ed-tech companies and private schools, including religious schools, home schools, and virtual-online charter schools. For over 30 years, Koch-SPN partners, including the Heritage Foundation, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the Cato Institute, the AEI, and EdChoice, have been advocating school choice subsidies for private schools and ed-tech companies that provide the digital infrastructure for data-mining PFS impacts on students’ learning algorithms and social credit analytics. In fact, a survey of the authors and Advisory Board of Project 2025 reveals that the school choice ESAs and tax credits proposed in Mandate for Leadership were put forward by affiliates of these Koch-SPN partners many of which have also been advancing PFS and other impact investment schemes.

The Project 2025 Advisory Board includes the Heritage Foundation and ALEC, the latter of which is a consortium of lawyers, legislators, lobbyists, and other “stakeholders” who draft boilerplate bills that are adopted by lawmakers to advance privatization schemes. For examples:

• ALEC has drafted the “Education Savings Account Act,” which codifies generic provisions for “ESA” subsidies that allocate government payments for “private school[s],” “charter school[s],” and “non-public online learning program[s],” including “[p]ayment for purchase of curriculum [and] any supplemental materials,” such as ed-tech courseware. 

• ALEC has also drafted the “Student-Centered Funding Act,” which offers guidelines for issuing government “voucher[s]” and “tax-credit scholarship[s]” for “private school[s]” and “charter schools” through “a student-centered finance model based on a weighted student formula in which money ‘follows’ a child to his or her school” by “tying funding to performance.” 

• ALEC has also spearheaded online school choice privatization by propagating the “Virtual Public Schools Act,” which has been used to legalize the public funding of virtual-online charter school corporations in alignment with the “10 Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning” standardized by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush’s Digital Learning Council. 

Throughout Trump’s first presidential term, a roster of ALEC associates filled at least 19 of his White House and Cabinet appointments, including his Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, who staffed her ED with veterans of Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education (ExcelinEd). At ALEC headquarters, DeVos pledged her secretarial commitment to “get the federal government out of the way” so that ALEC could further its progress in legislating corporate school choice reforms, including “ESA,” “voucher,” and “Tax Credit Scholarship” reforms. Prior to her appointment as Secretary of Ed, DeVos bankrolled and/or chaired numerous school choice nonprofits, including EdChoice, the Alliance for School Choice, and the American Federation for Children, which sponsored several ALEC Annual Meetings, including the 2011 Annual Meeting where Bush’s “Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning” were adopted by ALEC’s “Education Task Force.”

Under Secretary DeVos, Robert S. Eitel and Jim Blew, who are both co-authors of Project 2025’s “Department of Education” chapter, served as “Senior Counselor” and “Assistant Secretary of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development” respectively. Eitel also served as the “national director” of the Alliance for School Choice where DeVos has served as chair. A longtime financial supporter of the Heritage Foundation, DeVos has announced that “the second Trump term agenda is very, very consistent with what we started. It’s a continuation of the first term.” In fact, DeVos advised that, during his second term, President Trump “needs to . . . get the federal tax credit passed and to de-power the Department of Education” in accordance with Project 2025’s school choice reforms. 

DeVos is not the only Secretary of Education to team up with ALEC to push technocratic school choice corporatization. Indeed, ALEC bestowed its Thomas Jefferson Award to Secretary of Education William Bennett, who took over the mantle of Project BEST (Basic Education Skills through Technology), which launched public-private partnerships between government schools and Big Tech corporations that laid the groundwork for ed-tech data-mining in the social credit economy of the 4IR. ALEC’s “Education Task Force” has included representatives from virtual-online charter school corporations, such as K12 Inc., which was set up by Bennett and financed by DeVos. 

It is worth noting here that K12 Inc. was also bankrolled by billionaire technocrat Larry Ellison, whom Trump recently tapped to deploy Oracle, a CIA-linked artificial intelligence corporation that collaborates with the WEF, for the Stargate AI infrastructure project. It is also worth noting that Trump’s “shadow president,” Peter Thiel, was a private consultant to Secretary DeVos and a speechwriter for Secretary Bennett.

Like DeVos, Bennett is a longtime ally of not only ALEC, but also the Heritage Foundation, which is the “arch-conservative” think tank that has driven Republican policies, including Project 2025, for more than a half century. In particular, Bennett has served as a Distinguished Fellow in Cultural Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation where Lindsey M. Burke, who is the main author of Project 2025’s “Department of Education” chapter, is the Director of the Center for Education Policy. One of Burke’s Project 2025 co-authors, Jonathan Butcher, is a Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Center for Education Policy. 

Burke has also served as a “Fellow” at EdChoice, formerly known as the Milton and Rose Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, which pioneered the push for public-private voucher systems that dole out government stipends for corporate school choice. EdChoice, the Heritage Foundation, ALEC, ExcelinEd, and the AEI are all partners with the State Policy Network (SPN), which is a Koch-backed consortium of think tanks that funnels “dark money” into neo-conservative and beltway-libertarian initiatives aimed at advancing corporatist political-economics. 

At the Charles Koch Foundation, another one of Burke’s Project 2025 co-authors, Erin Valdez, has served as a “Program Manager” for “Educational Partnerships.” Yet another of Burke’s co-authors, Andrew Gillen, has served as a “program officer” for the Charles G. Koch Foundation. He is also a “Policy Scholar” at the Koch-founded Cato Institute where he serves as a “research fellow” at Cato’s Center for Educational Freedom. It is worth noting here that the roster of Koch-backed SPN partners includes the America First Policy Institute, where Linda McMahon serves as the “Chair of the Board.” 

It is also worth noting here that many of these Koch-SPN cronies have advocated PFS and other impact investment ploys. For examples:

• In a report titled “Pay-for-Outcomes: Transforming Federal Social Programs to Expand Individual Well-Being,” the Heritage Foundation weighed the cost-benefit pros and cons of “pay-for-success” contracts and “[s]ocial impact bonds (SIBs)” in favor of “pay-for-outcomes” financing that “combine[s] the best features of these [PFS and SIB] reforms.”
• In a whitepaper titled “Pursuing Innovation: How Can Educational Choice Transform K12 Education in the US?,” EdChoice called for “new social financial models that have emerged from partnerships between the public, non-profit, and private sectors. These include social impact bonds, innovation funds, and impact investing” along with “pay-for-success (PFS) contracts.”
• At the 2015 ExcelinEd National Summit, a “Strategy Session” discussing “school choice and Pay for Success” innovations was moderated by Chester Finn Jr., who was Bennett’s Assistant Secretary of Education. This Strategy Session convened a panel that included Kevin Chavous, who has served as a president of Bennett’s K12 Inc.; an Executive Team member of Bush’s Digital Learning Council; a board member of DeVos’s American Federation for Children; and an advisor to Barack Obama’s re-election campaign.
• The Charles Koch Foundation has collaborated with Google and Social Finance, which is a premier social impact investment corporation, in partnership with Per Scholas, to advance “diversity, equity, and inclusion” through “Zero Percent Loans” for “career pathways” training that fosters “sustainable tech talent pipeline[s]” for the “tech workforce.”

In sum, the Koch-SPN network encircling Project 2025 reveals that the Mandate for Leadership’s school choice reforms are nothing more than a renewal of a longtime stratagem to corporatize government education through ESAs and tax credits which subsidize the ed-tech infrastructure needed to data-mine students’ social credit analytics. Indeed, the history of the Koch-SPN syndicate behind Project 2025 illustrates that public-private school choice partnerships have always been geared for streamlining the digital ecosystem necessary to reduce student learning to human capital, which can be monetized and socially engineered through impact finance in the stakeholder economy of the 4IR. 

Pick Your Poison

Don’t get swept away in the disruptive whirlwind of Trumpian overhauls or the surrounding hype about how Trump is “winning” and the “Deep State” is “losing.” To be sure, it might seem like dismantling the ED, in conjunction with school choice reforms, will end federal government control of education. Yet the Project 2025 gameplan for dissolving the ED will only restructure bureaucratic control of education while ESAs will likely expand federal control of schools as ESAs conventionally come with government strings attached. At the same time, federal tax credits for SGO scholarships are primed to be leveraged through PFS impact contracts, which come with corporate strings attached to social credit outcomes. 

In the final equation, the terms and conditions of Project 2025’s school choice options will not be chosen by students, parents, or even schools, but will instead be chosen by Big Government, Big Business, and Big Tech stakeholders. Even the generic menu of charter schools and ed-tech vendors, which comprise much of the consolation choices afforded to students and parents, were prechosen by Koch-SPN corporatists long before the popularity of Trump or affiliated MAGA branding. Unfortunately, Trump’s planned school choice agenda is nothing more than a rebranding of a very old Koch-SPN blueprint for public-private ed-technocracy in the planned stakeholder economy of the 4IR.

TrumpED 2025: School Choice Corporatization, Social Impact Finance, and the Dismantling of the Department of Education.

For some time, there have been efforts to facelift the Malthusian-transhumanist bent of the Fourth Industrial Revolution with a patina of New Age spirituality through a belief in “conscious evolution,” such as that propagated by futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard. Yet, notwithstanding Hubbard’s lofty invocation of “Christ consciousness,” her faith in conscious evolution holds that, in order to mitigate overpopulation crises, natural resources must be rationed through “sustainable development” economics while human resources must be neo-eugenically culled and biotechnologically engineered into a new transhuman species. In fact, with the blessings of Rockefeller philanthropy, Hubbard, who promoted sustainable development at the United Nations (UN) and collaborated with known Malthusians from groups like the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Club of Rome, was one of the most radical advocates of population reduction in the name of spiritual evolution.

Across the internet, there has been wide circulation of an excerpt from an unpublished manuscript in which Hubbard declared that “one-fourth” of humanity will need to be culled in order to usher in a utopian New Age Order:

“[o]ut of the full spectrum of human personality, one-fourth is elected to transcend . . . One-fourth is destructive.  . . . They are defective seeds. In the past they were permitted to die a ‘natural death.’  . . .

Now, as we approach the quantum shift from the creature-human to the co-creative human—the human who is an inheritor of god-like powers—the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from the social body.  . . . 

Fortunately, you are not responsible for this act. We are. We are in charge of God’s selection process for planet Earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death.” 

In my previous article in this series on Barbara Marx Hubbard, I had been unable to trace the provenance of the unpublished manuscript. Since then, I conducted some further sleuthing, and I was able to track down a copy of the manuscript in the possession of attorney Constance Cumbey, who is the acclaimed author of the The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow: The New Age Movement and Our Coming Age of Barbarism. Cumbey purchased several copies of the manuscript on multiple occasions, including once from Hubbard personally and once from Rama Vernon, who orchestrated a series of Soviet-American Citizens Summits that Hubbard attended along with Doug Coe, who was the figurehead of the Christian Fellowship Foundation, and Paul Temple, who funded the Fellowship and founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences where Hubbard preached her Malthusian gospel of “conscious” transhuman evolution. For the full backstory on Cumbey’s exposé of Hubbard’s manuscript, watch the interview Courtenay Turner and I conducted at Cumbey’s estate.

Now that Hubbard’s infamous manuscript has been verified, it deserves an explication in this series. Henceforth, this article will examine how the manuscript, which is titled “The Revelation: Alternative to Armageddon (From the Book of Co-Creation: An Evolutionary Interpretation of the New Testament),” reveals further evidence of Hubbard’s Malthusian-transhumanist vision of the future. Moreover, this article will explicate how Hubbard’s “Alternative to Armageddon” preaches a gospel of Malthusian “crisis” evolution that was inspired by her spiritual idol, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin; shared by her kindred evolutionary, Jonas Salk; and bankrolled by her beloved benefactor, Laurance Rockefeller. Furthermore, this article will show how Hubbard’s gospel of crisis evolution is being resounded by the WEF to push Malthusian policies under the banner of “sustainable development” to further the transhumanist Fourth Industrial Revolution. Additionally, this article will document how the legacies of Salk and Rockefeller continue to propel Malthusian “sustainable development” and transhuman evolution through the Salk Institute, Venrock, the UN, and the World Wildlife Fund. 

In the next and final article in this series, I will reveal how Hubbard’s affiliations with the World Future Society, the Human Potential Movement, and the Foundation for Conscious Evolution were connected to networks of alleged pedophiles and sexual abuse cults.

Baptism by Teilhard de Chardin’s Malthusian-Eugenic Crisis of Noetic Birth

In “Barbara Marx Hubbard: Godmother of Transhumanism and Synthetic Spirituality,” which was the first article in this series, I historicized how Hubbard’s vision of “conscious” transhuman evolution was inspired by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. A Malthusian-eugenicist and Jesuit priest, Teilhard de Chardin pontificated that overpopulation is fomenting an ecological tipping point culminating in a “crisis of birth,” which will bring about the noetic evolution of human consciousness. According to Teilhard de Chardin, the “noosphere,” or noetic “mind sphere,” of the universe is a cosmic “intelligence,” or “consciousness,” that evolves through human consciousness and, by extension, technology, which is spurred by Malthusian crises.

Not only was Hubbard’s transhumanism rooted in Teilhard de Chardin’s gospel of cosmic “crisis” evolution through the noetic “mind sphere” of the universe. But Hubbard’s Malthusian outlook on population growth and sustainable development, which has influenced UN Agenda 2030 and the WEF’s Great Reset, was likewise inspired by Teilhard de Chardin, who believed human overpopulation should be eugenically culled in order to save the Earth from ecological “crises” that threaten the “birth” of evolutionary progress.

In a 1936 letter that was published in Letters to Léontine Zanta, Teilhard de Chardin asserted that, “at one and the same time there should be official recognition of: 1. The priority/primacy of the earth; 2. The inequality of peoples and races” (298). Similarly, in a posthumously published book titled Toward the Future, he pontificated that the “evolution” of the “noosphere” is predicated upon (1) the global “maintenance . . . of the natural resources available in the continents, which feed man’s individual and social body”; and (2)the “effective control, both in quantity and quality, of reproduction in order to avoid over-population of the earth or its invasion by a less satisfactory ethnic group” (299). In brief, in both his private letters and public writings, Teilhard de Chardin advocated the Malthusian-eugenic control of the world’s natural and human resources through the eugenic control of population quality and the Neo-Malthusian control of population quantity in tandem with Malthusian conservation of limited environmental resources.

In another book titled The Future of Man,Teilhard de Chardin posited that, in order to avert “famine” and other ecological catastrophes from overpopulation, the human species would need to cull its own population down to a “maximum” size while eugenically engineering the appropriate ratios and proportions of a “racial hygienic” caste hierarchy ranked according to “different ethnic types.” In a chapter titled “The Directions and Conditions of the Future,” which resounded the alarm of “Mr. [Henry] Fairfield Osborn [Jr.’s]” Malthusian treatise, Our Plundered Planet,Teilhard de Chardin postulated how: 

“earth’s population began to shoot up in an alarming fashion.  . . . Now we suddenly see the saturation point ahead of us, and approaching at a dizzying speed. How are we to prevent this compression of Mankind on the closed surface of the planet . . . from passing that critical point beyond which any increase in numbers will mean famine and suffocation? Above all, how are we to assure that the maximum population, when it is reached, shall be composed only of elements harmonious in themselves and blended as harmoniously as possible together? Individual eugenics (breeding and education designed to produce only the best individual types) and racial eugenics (the grouping or intermixing of different ethnic types being not left to chance but effected as a controlled process in the proportions most beneficial to humanity as a whole) both, as I well know, come up against apparently insuperable difficulties, from the point of view of technical organisation and from that of psychological resistance. But this does not alter the fact that the problem of building a healthy Mankind already stares us in the face and is growing more acute every day” (295).

To put it another way, for Teilhard de Chardin, the collective noetic evolution of the planetary ecosystem and the human species requires that the Earth’s limited resources be stewarded by a eugenically engineered elite who must enforce Malthusian birth control policies aimed at culling “unprogressive ethnical groups” from the human population so that those “unfit” races do not squander the planet’s natural resources. 

In yet another book titled Human Energy, Teilhard de Chardin professed, “[n]ow eugenics does not confine itself to a simple control of births. All sorts of related questions . . . are attached to it. What fundamental attitude, for example, should the advancing wing of humanity take to fixed or definitely unprogressive ethnical groups? The earth is a closed and limited surface. To what extent should it tolerate, racially or nationally, areas of lesser activity?” These rhetorical questions insinuate that “unprogressive,” or “lesser,” races should be the primary targets of population control in order to prevent such “unfit” races from consuming the eugenic elite’s share of the Earth’s limited natural resources. In The Future of Man, Teilhard de Chardin indicated that the “unprogressive” hominids, who are essentially synonymous with the “unfit,” are those who balk at the “super-humanisation” and “planetisation of Mankind” which is necessary to consciously plan the collective noetic evolution of the human species and planet Earth.

To be sure, Hubbard did not overtly avow “race hygiene” eugenics. Nevertheless, echoing Teilhard de Chardin, Hubbard did envision that human population would need to be culled, and that the expendable populations would inevitably be those who are not spiritually “fit” to “progress,” or “evolve,” their consciousnesses toward noetic transhumanization and collective sustainable development. In “The Revelation: Alternative to Armageddon,” Hubbard referred to “one-fourth of humanity” who are “defective seeds” and therefore “must be eliminated from the social body.” Hubbard declared that “[i]t is a case of the destruction of the whole planet, or the elimination of the ego-driven, godless one-fourth who, at this time of planetary birth, can, if allowed to live on to reproduce their defective disconnection, destroy forever the opportunity of Homo sapiens to become Homo universalis, heirs of God.” In brief, although Hubbard did not explicitly espouse old school “race hygiene” eugenics, she did believe in the cosmic necessity of a “spiritual,” or “conscious,” Malthusian-eugenics that decrees the culling of a quarter of the population in order to save the planet and harness the noetic transhuman evolution of homo universalis.  

In the official publication of The Revelation: Our Crisis Is a Birth,Hubbard, like Teilhard de Chardin, postulated the Malthusian crisis of the “limits to growth” crisis and the “population crisis” as a “crisis of our planetary birth” [1]. Similarly, in Human Energy, Teilhard de Chardin declared, 

“[t]oo much iron, too much wheat, too many automobiles . . . and even too many children.  . . . [W]e must ask what this excess production means. Is the world condemned, as it grows, to automatic death by stifling beneath its own excessive weight? Not at all, we would answer. It is in course of gathering to itself a new higher body. At this crisis of birth, everything depends on the prompt emergence of a soul which by merely appearing will come to organize, lighten, and vitalize this mass of stagnant and confused matter.  . . . The resources at our disposal today, the powers that we have released, could not possibly be absorbed by the narrow system of individual or national units which the architects of the human earth have hitherto used.  . . . The age of nations has passed. Now, unless we wish to perish we must shake off our old prejudices and build the earth.“

In short, Teilhard de Chardin believed that the overpopulation of the human species and the over-commoditization of the Earth’s natural resources are triggering a Malthusian “crisis” that will spark the “birth” of a newly evolved system of global governance over all the environmental resources across “the human earth.” 

Mirroring Teilhard de Chardin in her 1998 Conscious Evolution: Awakening the Power of Our Social Potential, Hubbard warned that there is an urgent “crisis” which can only be averted by the “birth” of a “planetary system” designed to control human population growth, natural resource consumption, and environmental pollution [2]. In a chapter titled “Our Crisis Is a Birth,” which is also the subtitle to the official publication of The Revelation [1], Hubbard asserted that: 

“[w]e must shift to renewable, nonpolluting sources of energy. We feel the pangs of hunger increasing as population escalates and more and more of us are hungry. All around us our old life-support systems are breaking down. What worked before has become destructive. We do not have much time to change.  . . . 

Yet, despite our fear and ignorance, we are learning to manage a planetary system.  . . .

Our crisis is a birth. We are one living system and we have come to the limit of one phase of natural growth on a finite planet.  . . .

[W]e may see ourselves as planetary midwives helping to deliver ourselves as a planetary system toward our next stage of life.” [2]

Similarly, in her 2012 book, Birth 2012 and Beyond, Hubbard professed that Malthusian ecological calamities resulting from overpopulation, overconsumption, and pollution are catalyzing a global “birthing crisis”: “[i]f you look at planet Earth as a whole system, it’s obvious that we’re overpopulating, [sic] we’re polluting, and we’re running out of resources. Like an infant that is reaching the ‘due date’ of its birth, we’re overgrowing ‘the womb’ of the Earth. Our ‘birthing’ crisis is inflicting pain and suffering for millions, as well as the possible destruction of our life support system” [3]. 

According to Hubbard, this “crisis” will “birth” the collective-conscious evolution of a new transhuman: species in tandem with a new world order: 

“The urgency of our global crisis is causing people to wake up all over the planet.  . . . What is now being born is transforming the old situation with the prospect of new solutions; and . . . it is helping to create a new world . . . 

And so, I believe . . . our crisis is potentially the birth of a more co-evolving, cocreative [sic] humanity.  . . .

[A] new type of human is emerging in the face of our shared global crisis. I call these pioneers ‘universal humans’ . . . This new person is moving toward cosmic consciousness and an ever-deepening spirituality.” [3]

In “Alternative to Armageddon,” alluding to the Club of Rome’s Malthusian treatise, Limits to Growth, Hubbard described this global “crisis of birth” as a Malthusian “meta-crisis of limits” that is midwifing the human species through a noetic “birth canal,” which will beget a “born again” transhuman species that can circumvent the “limits to growth” through evolutionary technologies, including “cybernetics,” “robotics,” and genetic engineering:

“[w]e entered the ‘birth canal.’ The meta-crisis of limits began. Resource shortage, over-population, pollution, alienation, confusion, malaise about the future, disconnection with the past. Experts with a womb-perspective advocated a ‘return’ to the simpler past, an adaptation to limits, a program of maximum conservation, and no growth. Futurists wrote of a paradigm shift from self-centered to whole-centered. Evolutionaries evangelized the extended gospel of Christ-capacities for all. Simultaneously these capacities turned on. These were the ‘post-natal’ technologies, developed within the womb of Earth for use after birth in the universal environment beyond the biospheric womb of Earth: astronautics, genetics, longevity, cybernetics, robotics.”

It is keen to note here that, in “Alternative to Armageddon,” Hubbard professed that the “universal woman,” or homo universalis, “gives birth to the first natural Christ,” and that “[t]his first natural Christ is transhuman, supra-human.” In other words, according to Hubbard, “Christ-capacities,” which are “turned on” through “‘post-natal’ technologies,” are “transhuman” capacities that are noetically “birthed” through the “meta-crisis of limits” to population growth and resource consumption.

To sum up, Hubbard carried the torch for Teilhard de Chardin’s Malthusian-eugenic “crisis” gospel as she prophesied that Malthusian “crises” would give “birth” to a noetic “Christ consciousness” which would technocratically engineer the sustainable evolution of a new transhuman species. Today, the WEF has adopted a “crisis of birth” ethos to drive the Great Reset by exploiting the COVID-19 “crisis” as an opportunity to accelerate the “birth” of a sustainable transhumanist Fourth Industrial Revolution. In a WEF “Sustainable Development” article published in 2020 and titled, “Now Is the Time for a ‘Great Reset,'” WEF Founder and Chairman, Klaus Schwab, proclaimed that “[t]he COVID-19 crisis is affecting every facet of people’s lives in every corner of the world.  . . . [T]he pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future” by “Harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution.”

Hubbard and Salk: Kindred Consciousnesses, Malthusian Evolutionaries

Hubbard’s Malthusian-eugenic crisis cosmogeny was also shared by her “kindred spirit,” Jonas Salk [1], who was also influenced by Teilhard de Chardin. Best known as the acclaimed virologist who developed the first widely administered polio vaccine, Salk, who was hired by the UN to compile a report on overpopulation, advocated for Malthusian population control as a necessary condition of conscious evolution. Salk’s legacy continues on through the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, which was formed with the help of Hubbard. Today, the Salk Institute, which has ties to the WEF, is promoting aspects of the “sustainable development” agenda, while also advancing conscious transhuman evolution through research and development projects specializing in genetic engineering and artificial intelligence (AI) for “computational neurobiology.” 

In 1964, Hubbard met Jacob Bronowski, who informed her that he was working with Jonas Salk to establish the Salk Institute for Biological Studies. According to Hubbard’s autobiography, she became excited about the prospects of the Salk Institute, and Bronowski put her in touch with the publisher of the Scientific American, Gerry Piel, who “was forming a society for the [Salk] institute” [4]. In turn, Hubbard proposed to Piel that the Salk Institute establish a “‘Theatre for Humanity’ to dramatize emerging values based on our knowledge of the evolution of life” [4]. These “emerging values” would serve as a cultural medium that could steer the evolution of human consciousness toward compatibility with the technological evolution of human biology and human civilization.

Piel prompted her to write up her proposal, which she drafted into a letter that she sent to the Salk Institute where Jonas himself read it. In the Book of Co-Creation: Our Crisis Is a Birth, Hubbard recalls how Salk telephoned her back to say, “You have expressed my dream . . . You have stated my vision far more clearly than I could . . . [W]e must be two peas in the same pod! May I take you out to lunch?” Immediately thereafter, according to Hubbard’s autobiography, she and Salk referred to each other as “kindred spirits” [1].

Accompanied by Warren Weaver, who was the Chairman of the Board of the Salk Institute, Jonas rendezvoused with Hubbard. In The Hunger of Eve: One Woman’s Odyssey Toward the Future, Hubbard compared this experience to “Eve stepping out of the garden” and “eating of the Tree of Life. It meant learning how to become a conscious participant in the designing process of life, discovering the laws of the universe, . . . and learning to cooperate with ‘the gods’—or the process of evolution” [4]. During this encounter, Hubbard asked, “Jonas, so you believe Teilhard was right about humankind uniting into one body, a new organism progressing toward an unknown future?” [4]. Salk responded, “Yes, of course, that’s natural” [4].

Later that same day, Hubbard professed, “Jonas, I want to help bring forth in the arts a new image of humanity commensurate with our capacity to shape the future” [4]. Salk replied: 

“Barbara, . . . You and I are scooped out of the same genetic material.  . . . We’re psychological mutants . . . Every now and then evolution produces precisely the right type of person for the needs of the time. You’re such a person: a bearer of evolution. It’s all in you. You’ve got the script inside, the attraction for the future, the desire to be responsible for the whole, your willingness to learn, to connect separate disciplines and people. You’re a bi-valent bonding mechanism. You’ve got hooks at both ends!” [4].

In Conscious Evolution, Hubbard narrates how she asked Salk “what was ‘wrong’ with me — my love of the future and my desire to connect with everything. He smiled and said, ‘Barbara, these are not faults, [sic] these are exactly the characteristics needed by evolution. You are a mutant’” [2].

According to Hubbard’s biography, she would later meet up at the Salk Institute with Jonas, “Jerry Hardy, the publisher of LIFE,” and “another ‘scoop’ of the same genetic material, Al Rosenfeld, science editor of LIFE magazine” [4]. Hubbard relays that “Jonas wanted to bring the finest molecular biologists from the world to the institute to do research into the basic knowledge of life; then the humanists and the artists were to follow. But he had not finished the buildings, and already I was designing the first play on the stage of the Theatre of Humanity. I was ahead of what could be done” [4].

This impasse would end Hubbard’s involvement with the Salk Institute, but she and Salk would continue to share common commitments to spreading the “emerging values” of conscious evolution. In three books, Man Unfolding, Survival of the Wisest, and Population and Human Values, Salk, like Hubbard, propagated Malthusian praxis as a cultural primer for conscious evolution.

In his 1972 book, Man Unfolding, Salk advocated that humankind must “unlearn” its traditional “philosophies” while “consciously” evolving “new” systems of “values” and “rules” that will “bring about a measure of control over growth both of population and of greed in man, excesses of each of which might be thought of as cancers of man.” In a chapter titled “Health as Wholeness,” Salk posited that, in order to avert ecological “damage that may be irreparable,” the cancers of overpopulation and overconsumption must be excised by pushing the human species to “move consciously to form an organism of mankind as part of an eco-system related to a purpose.  . . . [T]he kind of exclusiveness and competitiveness that have pre-vailed, which tend to exhaust rather than conserve resources, . . . will, in time and of necessity, have to be abated.” Stated differently, Salk postulated that Malthusian ecological catastrophes can be prevented through the superorganic evolution of collective-conscious “values” and “rules” for controlling overpopulation and sustaining “limited resources.”

To consciously evolve a Malthusian culture of population control and proto-sustainable development, according to Salk, the “genetic-somatic” evolution of human biology must be augmented by the “culture-induced evolution” of human consciousness. Salk hypothesized that human evolution is driven by the dialectical “mechanisms” of ecology, biology, and consciousness, including the dialectics “of organism and environment, of genes and soma, and of intuition and intellect,” respectively. In turn, Salk resolved that the “new man,” whom Hubbard referred to as “homo universalis,” or the “universal human,” must harness conscious evolution to steer the ecological dialectic between the human organism and the natural environment by applying his “intellect” and “intuition” to progressively invent new technological and cultural methods of stewarding natural and human resources. As a result, the “new man,” according to Salk, will consciously “bring about consonance between his outer environment and his inner self.” 

In “Alternative to Armageddon,” Hubbard mirrors Salk’s call for Malthusian population control as an essential element of collective-conscious evolution:

“[t]hey had reached a limit to growth: pollution, stagnation, over-population.  . . . 

In the late period of the biosphere, human beings have reached a point where they can no longer continue to reproduce themselves. You have reached a limit to growth on planet Earth. To reproduce yourselves you are transcending yourselves. You have discovered the pattern of synergistic self-organization. Synergizing humans working to overcome limits become the pattern in which the co-creative human emerges.”

Hubbard added that “[t]he advance through nature means the conscious evolution of yourselves as a god-like species, stewarding this Earth and all life on it.” Stated differently, Hubbard, like Salk, believed that Malthusian limits to population growth would catalyze the conscious evolution of a new “co-creative human,” which would synergistically steward the planet’s natural and human resources.

In his 1973 Survival of the Wisest,Salk expanded on his theory of how Malthusian overpopulation crises instigate the genesis of evolutionary epochs during which consciousness and genetics coevolve. Borrowing from Lamarckean epigenetics and Maslow’s psychology of being, Salk postulated that conscious evolution, which steers biological evolution, is driven by the dialectic between “BEING” and “EGO,” while biological evolution is fueled by the dialectic between genetics and somatics. 

According to Salk, as the bioevolutionary drive of genetic reproduction culminates in overpopulation, ecological crises threaten the survival of BEING, which is the teleological kernel with which consciousness is endowed by the “Cosmos.” Consequently, these ecological crises spark a revolution in consciousness that redirects EGO, which functions as the cognitive intermediary between the consciousness of BEING and the natural environment, toward collectively regulating population growth and resource consumption by scientifically and technologically reorganizing sociocultural and political-economic systems. It is worth noting here that Salk’s notion of BEING as consciousness is an invocation of Abraham Maslow’s transhumanist “psychology of being” [5]. Maslow, who was Hubbard’s mentor, set up the Eupsychian Network where Hubbard collaborated with figureheads of the Esalen Institute and the Human Potential Movement along with other conscious “transhumanistic” evolutionaries dedicated to pastoring “all societies and all peoples . . . toward becoming one world and one species” [5].

To illustrate Salk’s Malthusian theory of conscious evolution, Survival of the Wisest examined charts that quantify the overpopulation predictions of Paul Ehrlich, who wrote the Population Bomband Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, both of which consider sterilization, abortion, and food rationing policies as bulwarks against ecological catastrophes caused by overpopulation. In Survival of the Wisest, Salk compared the Malthusian forecasts projected by Ehrlich with population data calculated by eugenicist Raymond Pearl. Funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, Pearl, who was a participant in the League of Nations World Population Conference, charted fruit fly population growth, which was graphed as sigmoid curve data. Salk analyzed Pearl’s fruit fly population curve in contrast with lemming and human population curves in order to estimate whether the population growth curve of the human species, which is hitting its Malthusian inflection point, will prove to mirror the fruit fly sigmoid curve, which levels out, or the lemming curve, which cycles through “periodic catastrophe . . . with enormous loss of life.” In brief, Salk posed the question: will humanity consciously stop itself from bringing about overpopulation catastrophes, or will the dire predictions of Ehrlich’s Population Bomb come true? The answer to this question, according to Salk, depends on whether human consciousness can “metabiologically” evolve new “values” that cultivate Malthusian control of population growth and resource consumption.

Although Salk speculated that the “future population growth in Man will tend to stabilize at an optimal level described by an S-shaped curve,” he nonetheless warned that “[a] major threat to the species is attributed to the increasing size of the human population” and that the “diagrams” explicated in Survival of the Wisest “also show that former attitudes in respect to growth in population can no longer continue. Now self-imposed restrictions of freedom in this respect will be necessary not only to preserve other freedoms but to keep the quality of life from falling to a level that would soon become intolerable.” To be sure, Salk postulated that “the sigmoid curve of population growth . . . reveals that survival depends upon the development of means for the adjustment of the behavior of individuals appropriate to protection from autodestruction.” In order to “protect” the human species from “autodestruction,” Salk posited that imperative “self-imposed restrictions” must include “controlling births.”

According to Salk, as the human population growth curve hits its potential sigmoid “inflection point,” there is a shift from “Epoch A” to “Epoch B.” During Epoch B, the human species will either be decimated as a result of ecological catastrophes, or humankind will consciously evolve new cultural “attitudes and values” into a new “set of principles of metabiology” that will “guide the development of the BEING and EGO of Man” through Malthusian policies, including population control and resource conservation, which will “bring Man’s agenda and Nature’s agenda into closer harmony.” Similarly, in “Alternative to Armageddon,” Hubbard forecasted that humankind must consciously evolve “along with planetary shifts which are occurring at a metasystem level” in order to harness “co-creative technologies” that can save “a closed-system Earth” from the ecological “breakdown” of “growing population” and “pollution.” 

Eight years after the publication of Survival of the Wisest, the sigmoid curve data and the “epochal change” theory in that book were rehashed in another book, Population and Human Values: A New Reality, which was co-authored in 1981 by Salk and his son, who were commissioned by the UN Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) to compose the book as “a report” analyzing UN “projections of population growth.” In compiling Population and Human Values,the Salks collaborated with the UN Chief of the Estimates and Projections Division, Shunichi Inoue. The Salks also consulted with “Rafael Salas, Tarzie Vittachi, and T. N. Krishnan of the UNFPA” along with Carl Haub of the Malthusian-eugenic Population Reference Bureau. It is worth noting here that Hubbard also collaborated with the UN where she gave a speech promoting the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which affirm the Neo-Malthusian population policies of the UN International Conference on Population and Development. 

In Population and Human Values, the Salks analyzed “demographic data [that] provide a basis on which to discuss the relationship between changes in population growth patterns and changes in human attitudes, values, and behavior.” Based on the data, the Salks estimated that “we can expect the human population growth curve to follow a sigmoid pattern. The level of the plateau [of the sigmoid curve] is still uncertain, however, and is subject to human influence. In the years to come, we face the challenge of understanding and facilitating a slowing of human population growth and, ultimately, of adapting to the conditions associated with a relatively constant population size.” Nevertheless, the Salks asserted that, “[a]lthough we have turned a corner and the rate of world population growth is presently decreasing, world population size is still rapidly increasing and will continue to do so for many decades to come. The further slowing of growth will require expansion of family planning programs and a general increase in availability of social, health, and educational services.” Failing to institute such population control policies, according to the Salks, could lead to “a total collapse of the human population.” 

Echoing the Salks’ “epochal change” theory of conscious Malthusian evolution, Hubbard envisioned “a time of quantum transformation” when overpopulation and resource depletion would be offset by family planning and euthanasia policies while, at the same time, “advanced medical technologies” would be harnessed to “extend life” and “build new bodies” for the new “universal life” of a transhuman homo universalis. In a passage from “The Revelation: Alternative to Armageddon,” which is reprinted almost verbatim in The Revelation: Our Crisis Is a Birth [1], Hubbard wrote: 

“at a time of quantum transformation, . . . ‘[b]e fruitful and multiply’ goes too far and becomes over-population. ‘Preserve all life’ goes too far and results in undesirable technological prolongation of animal/human existence. ‘Give food and shelter to the people’ becomes the over-industrialization, pollution, inflation, and resource depletion by the developed world.  . . .

The feedback from the environment is rapidly informing you to stop doing in the future what was necessary in the past.

‘Be fruitful and multiply’ becomes ‘consciously conceive chosen children who will be given the opportunity of optimum development.’ 

‘Preserve all life’ becomes ‘the opportunity for chosen death, and chosen extended life.’ Thanatology and gerontology enter the scene. Death can be chosen by those who have finished their work on Earth. The purpose of advanced medical technologies is not to maintain animal/human bodies in a semi-vegetative state. It is to be used by the minds motivated to do new work in the new environments of outer space, to extend life, change bodies, and eventually build new bodies accustomed to the new conditions of universal life.”

Today, Hubbard’s futurist prescriptions for Malthusian population control and conscious transhuman evolution are being advanced by the Salk Institute. Even though Hubbard parted ways with the Salk Institute during its incubation period, her Malthusian vision of conscious transhuman evolution, which was shared by Salk, is reflected in the research and development projects of the Salk Institute, which has been contributing to sustainable development while engineering the building blocks for the new transhuman bodies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. 

In fact, the Salk Institute, which experimented with “RNA-targeting CRISPR-Cas technology to destroy the SARS-CoV-2 virus’ RNA” in 2020, has conducted extensive research advancing “genetic engineering,” including “CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing,” “gene editing-based stem cell therapies,” and “a new Salk tool, called CasRx,” which can “target . . . RNA.” At the same time, members of the Salk Institute’s Computational Neurobiology Laboratory and the Salk Institute’s Systems Neurobiology Laboratory, with the help of the United States Office of Naval Research and the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), have been enhancing transhuman AI consciousness by “teaching artificial intelligence to . . . ‘think’ like humans” through “computational model[s]” that “simulate . . . how the brain’s prefrontal cortex . . .  control[s] the flow of information between different areas of neurons.” It is worth noting here that Nicola Allen, who is an Associate Professor of Molecular Neurobiology at the Salk Institute, is a member of the WEF, which is one of the key groups at the helm of pushing transhumanism and Malthusian sustainable development as the cornerstones of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Great Reset.

Hubbard and the Sustainable-Malthusian Globalism of the Rockefeller Dynasty

Hubbard’s Malthusian outlook toward conscious evolution was shared not only by Salk, but also by her “beloved patron,” Laurance S. Rockefeller [2], who bankrolled her Foundation for Conscious Evolution, which calls for “radical evolutionary technologies” to be bolstered as remedies for “a complex series of crises, most especially environmental . . . crises, [which] are acting as evolutionary drivers pressuring us to innovate and transform.” Rockefeller, whose Venrock venture capital firm has bankrolled transhumanist science and technologies, including biotech, nanotech, and AI, is praised by Hubbard in five of her books over a span of 22 years between 1993 and 2015 [1] [2] [6] [7] [8]. Not only did the transhumanist interests of Rockefeller and Hubbard converge, but they also shared the common belief that Malthusian ecological crises must be met with global “sustainable development” policies entailing human population control and environmental conservation.  

According to a biography titled Laurance S. Rockefeller: Catalyst for Conservation, Laurance championed the Malthusian ecological philosophy of “his brother JDR [John D. Rockefeller] 3rd, whose interest in population control he shared.” The Malthusian philanthropies of Laurance and John D. III, the latter of whom was the chairman of the US Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, were inspired by their father, John D. Rockefeller Jr., who funded Nazi eugenics programs through the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics. The Malthusianism of Laurance and John D. III was also inspired by John D. Jr.’s crony, Henry Fairfield Osborn Jr. The son of Henry Fairfield Osborn Sr., who was a co-founder of the American Eugenics Society (AES), Osborn Jr. was also the cousin of Frederick Osborn, who was both a director of the AES and a co-founder of John D. III’s Population Council. It was Frederick Osborn who professed that eugenic goals could be more effectively attained through “crypto-eugenics” under the guise of “family planning” and Malthusian ecology, the latter of which is a pillar of Hubbard’s transhumanist schema for “conscious evolution.” 

In Laurance S. Rockefeller: Catalyst for Conservation, Laurance’s biographer records how “the young LSR [Laurance S. Rockefeller] learned from him [Henry Fairfield Osborn Jr.] quite early about the world’s growing problem with overpopulation — an interest shared with JDR 3rd . . . Above all, LSR recalled, Osborn helped him to understand ‘participating in doing,’ not simply . . . in passive philanthropy, but in playing an active role within his philanthropic interests.” Laurance was so inspired by Osborn Jr. that he beamed about how he “felt they shared an ‘interrelated energy field’; years after they met, Osborn recognized the younger man’s similar curiosity, sending him a portrait inscribed, ‘from one rogue to another.’” Not only was Osborn Jr. a muse for Laurance’s Malthusian ecological philanthropy, but “[o]ver the years Osborn and LSR worked together on many projects, from the goals of Save-the-Redwoods to the development of the Bronx Zoo into a Wildlife Conservation Society.” In 1972, honoring the legacy of his deceased Malthusian mentor, Laurance wrote a Reader’s Digest article on “The Most Unforgettable Person I Ever Met,” which lauded “Osborn’s dynamism, . . . his writings on the post-war population explosion, and his sense of global responsibility.'”

About a decade after Laurance’s death, he was similarly eulogized by Hubbard in the dedication to her 2015 Evolutionary Testament of Co-Creation [7]. As I document in “Barbara Malthusian Hubbard: From Limits to Growth to Agenda 2030,” out of the five books in which Hubbard lauds Rockefeller, four of them advance Hubbard’s calls for population control and sustainable development in order to avert Malthusian crises [1] [2] [6] [8]. In addition to spreading Hubbard’s Malthusian crisis gospel by bankrolling her books, Laurance also financed a Rockefeller Brothers Fund “Environmental Program” that “conduct[ed] scientific anticipatory analysis” of “the way in which population, resources, food, capital, pollution, and values interact.”

On top of funding Malthusian crisis propaganda and Malthusian environmental programs, Hubbard’s Rockefeller benefactor founded the Conservation Foundation, which was later merged with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). The WWF had been set up by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands; Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh; and Julian Huxley:

• A former Nazi storm trooper, Prince Bernhard, who was also a founder of the Bilderberg Group, was the “honorary sponsor” of the Third Annual Meeting of the WEF. At this 1973 Annual Meeting, Club of Rome co-founder, Aurelio Peccei, who met personally with Hubbard in 1972, preached the Malthusian gospel of Limits to Growth, which would lay the groundwork for the sustainable development initiatives of UN Agenda 2030 and the WEF’s Great Reset. The Limits to Growth thesis was resounded by Hubbard in several of her books, including Conscious Evolution[2]; Birth 2012 and Beyond[3]; Emergence: The Shift from Ego to Essence[8],and the published and unpublished versions of the “Book of Co-Creation” [1] [6].

• Prince Philip, who was kin to Prince Bernhard and several other members of Hitler’s Nazi Party, was the father of the current King of the United Kingdom, Charles III, who launched the WEF’s Great Reset and the Terra Carta mandate of the Sustainable Markets Initiative. In an anthology titled If I Were an Animal, which donated sales royalties to the WWF, Prince Philip confessed that he was “tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus” to cull the “population explosion” of the “human species” and, in turn, protect “endangered species.”

• The president of the British Eugenics Society and the first Director-General of the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Julian Huxley coined the term “transhumanism” in his 1957 book, New Bottles for New Wine. In UNESCO’s 1946 mission statement, UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy, Huxleycalled for a global eugenics program and a global population control policy:

“[t]he recognition of the idea of an optimum population-size [sic] (of course relative to technological and social conditions) is an indispensable first step towards that planned control of populations which is necessary if man’s blind reproductive urges are not to wreck his ideals and his plans for material and spiritual betterment. The recognition of the fact that the wild life [sic] of the world is irreplaceable, but that it is being rapidly destroyed, is necessary if we are to realise in time that areas must be set aside where, in the ultimate interests of mankind as a whole, the spread of man must take second place to the conservation of other species.”

Not only was the World Wildlife Fund set up by these prominent Malthusians with the help of Russell E. Train, who was a Rockefeller Brothers Fund trustee. But the WWF, which advances UN Agenda 2030 through the UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, has explicitly advocated for Malthusian family planning programs. In brief, for the WWF, wildlife conservation and human population control are interlinked elements of sustainable Malthusian development. It is worth noting here that, in a 2020 WWF video, Sir David Attenborough, who is a WEF member, called for “stabilis[ing] the human population as low as we fairly can.” It is also worth noting that numerous other WEF members are also WWF officials, including Shi Wang, David Dao, Andreas Follér, Jim Sano, David Miller, Emilio Tenuta, Yuan Jiakai, Julia Novy, Carter Roberts, Mei Dewen, William Smith Stubbs, Rasmus Helveg Petersen, David Hoyle, Victoria Fuentes, Oscar Soria, Razan Al Mubarak, Jayesh Ranjan, Frances Seymour, Erin Simon, and Bubba Cook.

Wildlife conservation and population control are similarly hitched together by Hubbard in “Alternative to Armageddon,” which asserts that, in order to save “animals” from “killers,” a planetary “tribulation” must ensue so that “[t]he killers must not survive to become universal humans”:

“[h]uman history has been a difficult and as yet incomplete effort to overcome the mammalian defect programmed in our genes—killing animals and each other. We are heading toward the birth canal with this defect uncorrected . . . [H]undreds of millions are still killing animals and each other. 

This is why tribulations must be so severe on your planet. The killers must not survive to become universal humans.”

Ironically, Hubbard’s remedy for the killing of wildlife is the selective culling of human beings. It can be inferred that the “killers” who “must not survive” belong to the “one-fourth” of the “defective seeds” who must be “destroyed” in order to midwife humankind through its cosmic Malthusian birth crisis into a new transhuman species. Notice here that this passage reinvokes Hubbard’s “birth crisis” eschatology through the imagery of “heading toward the birth canal.” Notice also that this passage echoes Huxley’s decree that “man must take second place to the conservation of other species.” 

Hubbard also collaborated with WWF trustee Maurice Strong, who served alongside her on the Global Advisory Board of the World Future Society. According to Laurance S. Rockefeller: Catalyst for Conservation, Laurance had “conversations with and high regard for such individuals as Maurice Strong from the United Nations.” In fact, Laurance was a member of the US delegation to the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment, which was led by Strong, who later set up the 1992 UN Earth Summit Conference where the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of UN Agenda 21 were established as the precursors to the SDGs of UN Agenda 2030. Meanwhile, Laurance financed a battery of “sustainable development” projects as trustee of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. It is keen to note here that SDG 5.6 affirms the Neo-Malthusian “family planning” tenets of the Program of Action of the UN’s 1994 International Conference on Population and Development. 

The godfather of the SDGs, Strong was a WEF Foundation Board member who also crossed paths with Hubbard at the State of the World Forum (SWF), which was orchestrated by the first and only president of the Soviet Union: Mikhail Gorbachev, who was also a member of the Malthusian Club of Rome. The SWF also brought together an array of Hubbard’s New Age “allies” along with key WWF officials, including the WWF Senior Program Officer, Jaime Cavelier, and the WWF Chair, Ruud Lubbers, who was also the Prime Minister of the Netherlands. At the same time, the SWF also included several members of the WEF and the Club of Rome along with Laurance’s nephew, Steven C. Rockefeller, who was the Chair of the International Drafting Committee of Earth Charter, which Gorbachev co-created with Strong as a UN Agenda 21 proxy through a merger of Gorbachev’s Green Cross International and Strong’s Earth Council. According to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund website, Steven Rockefeller “became an RBF trustee in 1977 and joined Laurance and several like-minded cousins in embracing spiritually grounded approaches to a new ecological ethos.”

It is worth noting here that the Rockefeller dynasty not only purchased and donated the land upon which the UN headquarters were built. But the house of Rockefeller also financed some of the UN World and International Population Conferences that paved the way for the Neo-Malthusian population policies that are embedded into the SDGs of UN Agenda 2030, which Hubbard endorsed during her 2016 address to the UN High-Level Forum on the Culture of Peace. It is also worth noting that Laurance’s Rockefeller Brothers Fund and his venture capital firm, Venrock, have financed “sustainable development” technologies since 1980, and they continue to invest in “sustainability” enterprises today.

In sum, Laurance Rockefeller and Barbara Marx Hubbard shared a common Malthusian vision of conscious transhuman evolution. Through collaborations with the UN, both Laurance and Barbara advanced the Malthusian population policies that undergird the SDGs of Agenda 2030, which was spawned by their mutual comrade, Maurice Strong. By proxy, Gorbachev’s SWF brought together Strong, Hubbard, and Laurance’s nephew along with top officials from the UN, the WEF, the Club of Rome, and the WWF, all of which are pivotal institutions driving the Malthusian SDG initiatives of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. In short, Hubbard’s liaison with Laurance Rockefeller intersected through momentous positions at the Malthusian nexus of world governance institutions, such as the UN; globalist Round Table NGOs, such as the WEF, the SWF, and the Club of Rome; and non-profit environmentalist foundations, such as the WWF.

Crisis, Reaction, Solution

Altogether, Hubbard’s gospel of Malthusian-transhumanist crisis evolution was inspired by her noetic muse, Tielhard de Chardin, shared by her “kindred spirit,” Jonas Salk [1], and bankrolled by her “beloved patron,” Laurance Rockefeller [2]. While Salk compiled Malthusian population reports for the UN, Rockefeller helped shape the formation of the WWF and participated in Maurice Strong’s UN Conference on the Human Environment, which laid the groundwork for Agenda 2030 and the Neo-Malthusian SDGs that Hubbard endorsed at the UN High-Level Forum on the Culture of Peace. Today, Jonas’s Salk Institute and Laurance’s Venrock, along with his Rockefeller Brothers Fund, are advancing “sustainable development” initiatives and transhumanist biotechnologies that align with their previously stated views. Meanwhile, as the Great Reset is barreling forward, Hubbard’s crisis collectivism has been assimilated by the WEF, which has been stoking fears of environmental crises and public health crises in an effort to goad populations into submitting to the biotech mandates and “sustainable development” overhauls of the transhumanist Fourth Industrial Revolution. 

Ostensibly, these alarms of global crises could be tabulated as evidence validating Hubbard’s evolutionary crisis prophecy. Nonetheless, these crises could be contrived, exaggerated, or intentionally mismanaged in order to foment the ostensive emergencies necessary to coerce people into capitulating to the “sustainable” transhumanist technocracy of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. At a 1975 Lindisfarne Fellows conference titled “Conscious Evolution and the Evolution of Consciousness,” Salk gave a presentation that was contextualized within the prospects of a technocratic elite manipulating Malthusian crises in order to impose draconian systems of totalitarian control under the pretense of “crisis management.” William Irwin Thompson, the founder of the Lindisfarne Association, which was funded by Laurance Rockefeller, prefaced Salk’s lecture with the premise that “we are living in one of the greatest historical crises” which could pose “absolutely no other future ahead of us but a kind of authoritarian convergence of the military-industrial complex and the multinational corporations creating a form of crisis management by which a kind of new elite, possibly a computer scientist elite, will use the crises to gain new controls and manage society to take over.”  

Whether organic or astroturfed, environmental crises and public health crises are being leveraged by the technocratic globalist elites of the WEF and the UN in order to accelerate the sustainable transhumanist development overhauls of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. It is perhaps moot to quibble over whether the global elite sincerely intend to save the planet and evolve the human species, or whether they surreptitiously intend to “take over” the world. In either case, it remains incumbent upon conscientious free thinkers to balk when globalist elite technocrats, such as Klaus Schwab, or New Age gurus, such as Barbara Marx Hubbard, offer Malthusian-transhumanist “solutions” that are arguably worse than the crises themselves.

In the next and final article in this series, I finally will unveil how Hubbard’s affiliations with the World Future Society, the Human Potential Movement, and the Foundation for Conscious Evolution were connected to networks of alleged pedophiles and sexual abuse cults.

References:

[1]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Revelation: Our Crisis Is a Birth (The Book of Co-Creation) (Sonoma, CA: Foundation for Conscious Evolution, 1993).

[2]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, Conscious Evolution: Awakening the Power of Our Social Potential, (Novato, CA: New World Library, 1998).

[3]  Barbara Marx Hubbard and The Welcoming Committee, Birth 2012 and Beyond: Humanity’s Great Shift to the Age of Conscious Evolution (USA: Shift Books, 2012).

[4]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Hunger of Eve: One Woman’s Odyssey Toward the Future (Eastsound, WA: Island Pacific NW, 1989).

[5]  Abraham Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, 2^nd ed. (New York, NY: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1968).

[6]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Revelation: A Message of Hope for the New Millennium (Mill Valley, CA: Nataraj Publishing, 1995).

[7]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Evolutionary Testament of Co-Creation: The Promise Will Be Kept (Los Angeles, CA: Muse Harbor, 2015).

[8]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, Emergence: The Shift from Ego to Essence (10 Steps to the Universal Human) (Charlottesville, VA: Walsch Books, 2001).

Barbara Marx Hubbard and the Malthusian-Transhumanist Riders of the Pale Horse.