The idea of one group of people separating themselves from the rest of humanity and treating everybody else like unterermenschen was not originally a Nazi idea. It started here:

Deuteronomy, chapter 7 -

When HASHEM, your God, will bring you to the Land to which you come to possess it, and many nations will be thrust away from before you - the Hittite, the Girganshite, the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Perizzite, the Hivvite, and the Jebusite - seven nations greater and mightier than you, and HASHEM, your God, will deliver them before you, and you will smite them - you shall utterly destroy them; you shall not make a treaty with them nor shall you show them mercy. You shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughter to his son, and you shall not take his daughter for your son, for he will cause your child to turn away from after Me and they will worship the gods of others; then HASHEM's wrath will burn against you, and He will destroy you quickly. Rather, so shall you do to them: Their altars shall you break apart; their pillars shall you smash; their sacred trees shall you cut down; and their carved images shall you burn in fire.

For you are a holy people to HASHEM, your God; HASHEM, your God, has chosen you to be for Him a treasured people above all the peoples that are on the face of the earth.

chapter 28 -

It shall be that if you hearken to the voice of HASHEM, your God, to observe, to perform all of His commandments that I command you this day, then HASHEM, your God, will make you supreme over all the nations of the earth...

HASHEM shall open for you His storehouse of goodness, the heavens, to provide rain for your Land in its time, and to bless all your handiwork; you shall lend to many nations, but you shall not borrow. HASHEM shall place you as a head and not as a tail; you shall be only above and you shall not be below...

Here is Ezra, chapter 9:

After these things had been done, the leaders came to me and said, "The people of Israel, including the priests and the Levites, have not kept themselves separate from the neighboring peoples with their destestable practices... They have taken some of their daughters as wives for themselves and their sons, and have mingled the holy race with the peoples around them.

Such statements may come as a shock to people who have never studied the Hebrew Bible, i.e. the Old Testament, but that's what it says. Yes, that's what it says, and that's what it's about - and if you have not read it, then you just don't know what is going on in the world.

I will return to Judaism later.  First I want to discuss Nazism as it relates to transhumanism.  Last year I read a review of Forward to the USSR-2 by Maksim Kalashnikov. The review says

The next step, Kalashnikov argues, is an "ethnopsychological" miracle.
He writes that the new state cannot be created with the current mentality of the Russian people, who he says are "ignorant not only of national ideals, but even of their own self-interests ... Therefore, it is necessary to create a new nation from the remnants of the Russian people, a new race that possesses the novel psychological quality of seeing itself as a nation of super-creators and geniuses,"  Kalashnikov writes, echoing classic Nazi-style rhetoric.

Apparently a lot of people think this kind of talk echoes classic Nazi-style rhetoric. If it did, the connection with transhumanism would be self-evident. As usual, however, the clichés we hear about Nazism are pretty far from the historical reality. It is hard to find such rhetoric in Hitler's writings and speeches.

I have read Mein Kampf,  My New Order  (a collection of Hitler's speeches), and Hitler's Table Talk  (transcripts of private conversations in the early 1940's). The expression "blond beast" does not occur anywhere in these books. Nor do the words "Übermensch" and "Üntermensch." That's not what Hitler talked about or wrote about. Nor do I recall seeing anything about creating a nation of super-creators and geniuses.

The closest thing to "classic Nazi-style rhetoric" that I found in Mein Kampf was this passage in Chapter 4 of Volume Two:

If we admit the significance of blood, that is to say, if we recognize the race as the fundamental element on which all life is based, we shall have to apply to the individual the logical consequences of this principle. In general I must estimate the worth of nations differently, on the basis of the different races from which they spring, and I must also differentiate in estimating the worth of the individual within his own race. The principle, that one people is not the same as another, applies also to the individual members of a national community. No one brain, for instance, is equal to another; because the constituent elements belonging to the same blood vary in a thousand subtle details, though they are fundamentally of the same quality.

The first consequence of this fact is comparatively simple. It demands that those elements within the folk-community which show the best racial qualities ought to be encouraged more than the others and especially they should be encouraged to increase and multiply...

All the material inventions which we see around us have been produced by the creative powers and capabilities of individuals. And all these inventions help man to raise himself higher and higher above the animal world and to separate himself from that world in an absolutely definite way. Hence they serve to elevate the human species and continually to promote its progress. And what the most primitive artifice once did for man in his struggle for existence, as he went hunting through the primeval forest, that same sort of assistance is rendered him today in the form of marvelous scientific inventions which help him in the present day struggle for life and to forge weapons for future struggles. In their final consequences all human thought and invention help man in his life-struggle on this planet, even though the so-called practical utility of an invention, a discovery or a profound scientific theory, may not be evident at first sight. Everything contributes to raise man higher and higher above the level of all the other creatures that surround him, thereby strengthening and consolidating his position; so that he develops more and more in every direction as the ruling being on this earth.

Hence all inventions are the result of the creative faculty of the individual. And all such individuals, whether they have willed it or not, are the benefactors of mankind, both great and small. Through their work millions and indeed billions of human beings have been provided with means and resources which facilitate their struggle for existence.

Thus at the origin of the material civilization which flourishes today we always see individual persons. They supplement one another and one of them bases his work on that of the other. The same is true in regard to the practical application of those inventions and discoveries. For all the various methods of production are in their turn inventions also and consequently dependent on the creative faculty of the individual. Even the purely theoretical work, which cannot be measured by a definite rule and is preliminary to all subsequent technical discoveries, is exclusively the product of the individual brain. The broad masses do not invent, nor does the majority organize or think; but always and in every case the individual man, the person.

Accordingly a human community is well organized only when it facilitates to the highest possible degree individual creative forces and utilizes their work for the benefit of the community. The most valuable factor of an invention, whether it be in the world of material realities or in the world of abstract ideas, is the personality of the inventor himself.

The first and supreme duty of an organized folk community is to place the inventor in a position where he can be of the greatest benefit to all. Indeed the very purpose of the organization is to put this principle into practice. Only by so doing can it ward off the curse of mechanization and remain a living thing. In itself it must personify the effort to place men of brains above the multitude and to make the latter obey the former.

Therefore not only does the organization possess no right to prevent men of brains from rising above the multitude but, on the contrary, it must use its organizing powers to enable and promote that ascension as far as it possibly can. It must start out from the principle that the blessings of mankind never came from the masses but from the creative brains of individuals, who are therefore the real benefactors of humanity.

It is true that Hitler believed in eugenics. For emphasis I will repeat the second paragraph from the quotation above:

...those elements within the folk-community which show the best racial qualities ought to be encouraged more than the others and especially they should be encouraged to increase and multiply.

That's the connection between Nazism and transhumanism. Transhumanism is a kind of do-it-yourself eugenics. Hitler wasn't the only political thinker who said that eugenics is a good thing. In those days it wasn't controversial. In the first half of the 20th century, eugenics was an accepted idea not only in Germany but also in Britain and the U.S. There were even rabbis who advocated eugenics. Now, of course, this is an embarrassment to most Jews, as it is to everybody else - except Nazis and transhumanists.  Nazis and transhumanists agree on the general point that there is something wrong with humanity as it presently exists. Instead of accepting our present condition, we should aspire to something better.

We agree on that much, but there are also profound differences. It is necessary to distinguish between positive eugenics (evolving to a higher level) and negative eugenics (eliminating the "unfit"). The former is a transhumanist idea, the latter is not, as far as I am concerned. I have never understood busybodies who think it is up to them to decide who can live on this planet. If some people are "unfit," they will not survive, and if the world is "overpopulated," that problem, if it is a problem, will solve itself in due course, without any help from me.

I don't care how many people there are, nor do I care whether they are fit or unfit, as long as they leave me alone.

In an earlier version of this page, I wrote

The Third Reich is the only model we have of a Transhumanist state (unless you count the Soviet Union, with Trotsky's concept of the New Communist Man).

The Third Reich and the Soviet Union were secular states. The Nazis were concerned with life in this world, not transcendental visions. They didn't want people venturing too far out of the box. At the end of his Nazi-Sozi booklet, Goebbels said "We want to achieve more by means of this freedom than just a new system. We want to achieve the new man who, within the conditions of the better world view that we will have attained, can progress into the future." But his new man was going to be a man, not a superman. The Nazis wanted people to be bright and inventive, but only within the normal range of human ability. They didn't have much use for super-geniuses. Both Albert Einstein (Jewish) and Kurt Gödel (not Jewish) had to emigrate, along with many other scientists.

Continuing, in the earlier version of this page I also wrote

If the Third Reich still existed, cloning wouldn't even be an issue. Scientists would be proceeding with all kinds of stem cell research, full speed ahead, with the full support of the government and the entire society.

I don't believe this anymore. The Nazi government had only a superficial effect on German consciousness. It would have had less and less effect as time passed (just like the Communist Party had less and less effect on China). If the Third Reich still existed, after three generations it would probably be very similar in many ways to Europe as it presently exists. There would be profound skepticism about all kinds of genetic engineering. Europeans are no more receptive than Americans to radical new ideas about biology. Maybe less. So if the Third Reich had survived, stem cell research would not have the full support of the entire society. Far from it.

On the other hand, if Nazism had survived intact - if it had not become diluted after three generations - then genetic engineering would have the full support of the government. Nazis have no patience with the idea that there is something "unethical" about modifying God-given life forms. If Hitler had thought his ideas through and developed them into a complete philosophy, and if his successors had continued to develop that philosophy in the second half of the 20th century, then transhumanism would have been part of it. The idea was there, if only in embryonic form.

In any case, we don't need a transhumanist state. We only need a situation in which scientists and inventors can pursue their research without interference from the state, and that's exactly the situation we are in, as long as we don't wave a red flag in the government's face. Democracy and transcendence may be mutually exclusive concepts, but that is significant only on a theoretical level, not on a practical level. The technology of the 1980's and 90's emerged too suddenly to be controlled, and that will be even more true in the future.

Our present system of semi-anarchic international capitalism is an almost ideal environment for science. That's not to say I'm enthusiastic about it. Sometimes I despise it as much as anyone. However, for my purposes, it works. In any case, like it or not, we are stuck with it. An essential part of National Socialism was the attempt to establish Germany as an autarkic economy, independent of international capitalism. This attempt failed, and probably had to fail. The international financial system doesn't permit anyone to secede from it. As the spirit said to Johann Suter (see Ministry of Illusion for the context),

Why do you keep trying to fight the gold?
You can't stop the wheels of the world.

The transhuman metamorphosis is not going to occur in an "organized folk community," or any kind of idealistic community. It's too late for that. The Third Reich was humanity's last chance for a first-world future. The metamorphosis will happen in the same society we live in now, a society in which the wheels of the world grind inexorably toward a dystopian future too bleak to contemplate.

In the 1990's I used to think of transhumanism as a group project, but I no longer think it's possible to do it that way. It will be done by individuals working independently, each pursuing his own vision. We will devise a sequence of steps leading to the metamorphosis, and figure out how to make each step pay for itself. At least that's how I'm approaching it. I don't know if anybody else is thinking along those lines.

In a discussion of transhumanism, National Socialism per se, i.e. the economic program, is irrelevant. Nazism becomes relevant only when you consider the question "Which way are we going?"  Many transhumanists, probably most, don't want to evolve in an Aryan direction at all.  White guilt and the suicidal mentality that goes with it are as prevalent among transhumanists as anywhere else.  I am unabashedly white. I take Bach and Edison as role models, and despise multiculturalism. Not many transhumanists agree. At least that was true in the mid-1990's, when I used to go to Extropian meetings. I have not kept up with what transhumanists have been doing in the last few years. Maybe society is changing, and transhumanists will change along with everybody else. Time will tell.

I not only want to evolve in the direction of Bach and Edison, I also want to do it in a society in which there is organized resistance to the thought police.  It remains to be seen whether such resistance is possible. I am only going to spend so much time on this. I have said what I have to say on various pages of this site, such as the gas chamber page and the agendas page. That's all I can do. I hope other people will speak up in other ways.

I started rewriting this page in March of 2005. It's a long way from finished. I still want to discuss Judaism, but that is a much larger subject, and it will have to wait for another time. For the moment let me just say this. In some ways, up to a point, I identify with the Jews. What they are doing is almost isomorphic to what I am doing. They are trying to do something that cannot be done in any traditional society. They have to undermine all traditional societies at the most fundamental level, and meanwhile they have to hide. I understand that. I am also a stranger in a strange land, just like them. A marrano.

In the psychic subculture, they make a distinction between "open-eye psychics" and "closed-eye psychics." The closed-eye psychics are naive. They really believe that they are telling fortunes, helping people with their problems, etc. They are in denial. The open-eye psychics know perfectly well that what they are doing is a scam. They are taking advantage of ignorant people. They are ripping people off. They acknowledge this (among themselves).

The same distinction can be made in Judaism. A couple of years ago I saw a movie, "The Holy Land." One of the characters calls himself The Exterminator (not referring to bugs). He carries a machine gun with him wherever he goes. At one point he says "There is no peace process. That's just a scam for the born-again Christians, to get their money." He is an open-eye Jew, in a movie made by and for open-eye Jews. What they are counting on of course is that very few outsiders ever see such movies, just like very few outsiders read Jewish papers and books intended for internal consumption.

So, if I see them as fellow marranos, why not join them? I've thought about it. There are many reasons why I would hesitate to do it. In any case I don't think that's a realistic option for me. The open-eye concept can only be carried so far. When a Jew - David Cole, for example - goes too far, they disown him. They certainly wouldn't have room for somebody like me.

However, I am a man of many hats. There are times when I put on my Ludwig Wittgenstein hat, or my Vladimir Arnold hat, or my Robert Alter hat, or my Aryeh Kaplan hat (among many others) and tap into their way of thinking. I am not going to join them, but I am not going to ignore them, either. It's very, very stupid to refuse to learn from "Jewish physics."

Transhumanism - the project of transforming ourselves into a higher form of life - was not part of the Jewish tradition. There is no such concept in the Old Testament, nor, as far as I know, in the Talmud.

Judaism has significance for transhumanism for two reasons.

First, the transformation will take place in a society controlled by Jews. They have their own agenda for the end times. Instead of looking at what outsiders say about them, it's better to let them speak for themselves:

1. The Messianic Era - Note particularly item 19 in table II.B-1.

2. "It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not -- they will be killed" - Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg. This statement was originally published in Ma'ariv, an Israeli paper, and has been widely quoted, for example here and here.

That's not the future I want. They have their agenda and I have mine. But the thing is, in the last ten years I have wasted an enormous amount of time on this subject. Meanwhile, I keep seeing news reports to the effect that ideas I had in the late 1980's and early 1990's are being developed in other people's labs. For example, programmable cells and cellular microscopes, just to name two. I need to get back to my real work. The transformation from human to transhuman is basically a technical problem. I know how to do it. I'm just going to go ahead with my work, and accept the fact that society is the way it is - not in the long run, but for the time being. My first goal is to cross the transhuman threshold. After that there will be plenty of time to take care of unfinished business.

The second reason Judaism has significance is that the Singularity involves the continuing evolution of language. As I said, this is a large subject that will have to wait for another time.

back to the Geniebusters home page