After being deeply impressed by Whitney Webb's Epstein's books, I started reading more of her website, Unlimited Hangout. There, I ran across an article series by John Klyczek about Barbara Marks Hubbard that gave me pause. Two of three articles have been published so far. The first piece is titled 'Barbara Marx Hubbard: Godmother of Transhumanism and Synthetic Spirituality.' The second piece is titled 'Barbara Malthusian Hubbard: From Limits to Growth to UN Agenda 2030.'
These articles imply that Barbara Marx Hubbard was an important part of a massive global conspiracy to control everything, in part by reducing the population. They characterize Esalon and the HeartMath Institute as nefarious transhumanist plots. They throw shade on Teilhard de Chardin (pictured above). The following quote was presented as evidence against Hubbard:
During her 2017 speech, “Awakening the New Species in You,” at the Global Purpose Movement’s Purpose Summit in San Francisco, Hubbard declared that Teilhard de Chardin’s noosphere “is now the internet nervous system of the planet,” and “there’s enough of us now to wake up our planetary nervous system” through “hi-tech . . . artificial intelligence, quantum computing, robotics, genetics, all of that . . . being the powers of our mythological gods.”
Language like this is commonplace in futurism. And I've never heard anything from Hubbard that other futurists would find inappropriate in the field. Among futurists, she was one of the most reputable. But I get the sense that Klyczek doesn't know anything about the discipline of future studies.
I'm no expert, but my work has been cited in the Journal of Future Studies and I've worked with several futurists over the years. That limited experience with the field is sufficient to convince me that Klyczek is entirely mistaken about Hubbard. He does a great job of documenting connections, but his interpretation of these connections is fundamentally flawed.
The central idea of Klyczek's second article is that Hubbard was a Malthusian. There are 56 instances of the term Malthusian appearing in this piece. "Malthusianism is the bedrock of Darwinism, which is the foundation of eugenics, which is the cornerstone of transhumanism," the article explains. Malthus informed a very toxic worldview, but the evidence presented didn't convince me that Hubbard held this view. Yes, she may have written a passage about eliminating some fraction of the population in an unpublished manuscript, but that's evidence of nothing without context. People like Hubbard write all kinds of stuff for all kinds of reasons.
At the same time, Klyczek does present some interesting facts. The connection between Hubbard and Maurice Strong is notable. So is the following quote:
Laurence Rockefeller funded the development of a nexus of transhumanist technologies, including internet Big Data, biotech, and nanotech, while simultaneously propagating Hubbard’s trans-evolutionary ideology by financing her Foundation for Conscious Evolution.
The connections these articles make describe a segmented, polycentric, integrated network (SPIN). It's one thing to map out such a network, it's quite another to figure out what's actually going on within it. If I had to guess, I'd guess that Hubbard played no substantive role in advancing any kind of physical Malthusian plot, though her ideas may have served to philosophically and spiritually legitimize transhumanist ideologies within her SPIN.
Reading these articles reminded me of when conspiracy theorists began saying that a friend of mine was part of a world domination plot because he worked at SRI and contributed to Changing Images of Man. In a way, it was laughable. But on a deeper level, it was troubling.
Unlimited Hangout appears generally to be reliable. All of the research I've seen on the site seems solid. But when I see solid research presented through such a distorted lens, I worry. This is how lies become indistinguishable from the truth. It's how debacles like Flat Earth get started.
Read my novels:
See my NFTs:
