Compulsory Vaccination That Genetically Alters the Human Body … No Longer a ”Human Being”?

Will the ”Gate(s)keepers” of the so-called Corona-pandemic force a vaccination upon us, without which we will not be allowed to return to normality? What is really meant by the ”new normality”?

It is these questions that are intensely debated at the moment: there are speculations, insinuations, then again denial.  Resistance is rising among the population, if anything, out of a sense of premonition. 

According to Dr. Claudia von Werlhof, sociologist and political science professor, the central issue in this entire debate has not even begun to be touched.

The current events should be viewed in a much larger context. In her analysis, she anticipates a variety of scenarios, all of which are following an already existing, much larger ”plan”– belonging to the field of ”transhumanism”, the seemingly unavoidable paradigm of the 4th Industrial Revolution. Unless….


”We are human beings and not machines!” shouted one of the speakers during the May 1st demonstration in Vienna, receiving applause from the crowd. In fact, all the measures taken against the Corona virus could be summarized under this motto:

we are asked to behave as if we were not human beings, but machines.

We are discouraged from having any empathic feelings towards one another, thinking our own thoughts, speaking our minds, or acting spontaneously. Least of all should we be singing, dancing and exercising together, or even rising up together. We should not be close to each other, definitely not touch each other and in the whole get out of each other’s ways. We should be leaving the elderly alone and indoctrinating our children with the idea that they represent a threat to grandma and grandpa, so they too may already learn what it is like to be a machine –   without any empathy.

As such machine-like human beings, the only emotion we are allowed to maintain and are even encouraged to have, is the feeling of fear. Fear of the virus because the virus could be harmful to us, as a ”pest“, and as all those who have to be considered as potential carriers of it.

In this way fear settles in; fear of not following the instructions carefully enough to protect ourselves from the ”pest“ – via the constant pushing of the hygiene message – handwashing, general cleanliness and disinfection – turning away from the body and its ”dirt”, which is now defined as a danger, for ourselves and in relations to others.

We are even a danger to ourselves by still being alive and still having a bodily being, a sensory organism, instead ofbeing a machine; in this way, we become afraid of ourselves.

We should be ”purging” ourselves of our bodily self. We should feel disgust towards ourselves and even towards our somatic, bodily being, not to mention that of others.

From a technological perspective, ”a human being” is an outdated model and in urgent need of being ”transformed”. In this process, s/he will allegedly be ”improved.” 

What are the results of this? We should really wish to be more a machine than a human being, more dead than alive, better to be in a high security prison than living in freedom where invisible and omnipresent dangers threaten us.

A real conspiracy theory from above

My proposition is that the relentless propagation of the dangers of Corona virus functions like a conspiracy theory from above.

It is intended to terrorize us to such a degree that we consent to practices we otherwise would have never accepted (1). To be precise, we are being made to fear an alleged danger from nature, which is now, with the help of massive counter measures, supposedly being circumvented in order to ”protect” us.

Furthermore, I argue, the corresponding practices are intended to turn us into beings who are better equipped against such alleged dangers from nature. In this way, we would be allowed to turn into ”better” humans, i.e. be altered increasingly in the direction of machines; so we would cease having to be only natural human beings. In this case: medical advancement makes it possible!

Surely, the script for this alteration has already been written for some time, visible in the especially deliberate course of action currently being taken (2). At this point, however, we are far from knowing everything. This Corona-mania has not been put into the world – from above – just for the fun of it, bringing life around the globe to a standstill, only to return later to ”normality” as we knew it.

The expected, so-called ”new normality” has to be concluded from what we already know today. A return to the same economy as before Corona is not intended, nor is it intended that we shall dispose of a stronger and healthier body after Corona. We shall now stay with this latter topic, that of our physical health, the somatic part of the problem, because so far this part remains completely unexplained.

Because, before a sufficiently tested vaccine is developed, there is already talk about a comprehensive compulsory vaccination program soon to be implemented for all people on this Planet, and the necessary legal regulations are currently being prepared, as well.

What we are dealing with here and now, to further my argument, is not a measure in service of our health, but a new definition of what we, as living human beings, are to be in the future, or rather, should no longer be in the future, as well as the practical implementation of such a concept. 

The transformation of ourselves as human beings 

This problem is as such not yet a part of the public discussion. The current discussion focuses mainly on money, on the profits of the pharmaceutical industry and its scandalous measures to increase them. A further focus is on the attempt to establish the utmost control over people and, in order to do so, the abolition of their rights.

However, what has not been focused on so far, is the ”technological progress” which has taken place behind closed doors and which is now being implemented. The issue at stake is the transformation of ourselves as human beings. This topic is not addressed anywhere in the public realm. It is not considered to be a matter worth of a public debate.

The ”technological progress”, I am speaking about here, is not only utilized to ”dominate“ external nature, by dissecting and re-assembling her in new ways, thus transforming her into a ”second”, supposedly ”better” nature – the machine – but this is also what paradoxically seems to be in store for us ourselves, the alleged ”pride of creation”. From the perspective of technological advancement ”a human being” is a worn-out model, in urgent need of being ”transformed”. In its course, s/he will allegedly be ”improved”. Human beings are supposed to become something like ”machines”.

The first we are hearing on this is ”inoculation”. This is precisely what is in store for us soon, after being sworn in on the fear of nature, the fear of the other and the fear of ourselves. We are supposed to become inoculated with something, even if we should not want it – any resistance being considered ”backward” or even ”ruthless” – this much heralded possibility of salvation from fear, via globally decreed mass vaccinationas the final liberation from the evil ”pest”.

In this context, it can mean only two things: it is supposed to become a gigantic multi-billion dollar business, that much is clear. Furthermore, this could be the big chance to begin the transformation of mankind into something like man-machine-chimeras, ”cyborgs” or ”transhumans”. 

The machine as an alleged improvement of nature, a nature-substitute is – in congruence with its very invention – not a democratic, but a totalitarian construct.  

The debate on machine-humans and human-machines 

This debate is now taking place in very concrete ways (3), not only as fantasy, as was the case in the past. The reason for this is obvious: technological advancement has led to the invention of the machine as the central technology of modern times. The machine is in the process of gradually taking over all areas of life. It functions in imperialistic ways, so to speak, and does not stop at any thing, i.e. it does not stop for human beings. The machine’s principle is to transform anything of nature into machine. That means, us as well, we, the ones who are living already next to, with and even within the machine. This is the machine’s– apparently so far largely unacknowledged – logic.

Generally, at first, there was an adaptation of human behavior towards that of the machine – from soldiers to factory workers. And today it is from all of us towards the computer, ”the machine of the machines”. We must follow the orders (prompts) of this machine (4) as if we were a part of it or, just like any machine, it won’t function properly.

Because the machine as an allegedly better than nature substitute is – in congruence with its invention – not a democratic but a totalitarian construct (5). The machine takes precedence over nature, and the violent act of destroying her is always required. However, since the advent of science and its violent methodology, science has defended itself by claiming that nature is ”dead matter“ anyway which is not true, of course (6).

We should not be surprised that contact with the machine has already had consequences that have changed us. There have been applied increasing external measures for a”mimetic”approximation and a convergence of the body with machine – ”aesthetics”.

The ”fitting” of artificial limbs has taken place and even substitute organs have been implanted into the human body.

Up to now, however, the transformation of the human body from within, in order to make the body machine-like or machine-compatible and even the gradual transformation of the body into a living machine or machine-life, on the whole, has not yet taken place. However, this is exactly what is now on the agenda of new technologies (7). It has already been on the agenda for a fairly long time.

The famous American sociologist Daniel Bell declared: ”People can be created anew or released, their behavior can be controlled and their consciousness can be altered” (8)He intends this as a positive statement, just as his colleagues in the field of science do. Is this naiveté? Where, otherwise, does this optimism come from that still surrounds technological progress and which, so far, has prevented most of us from systemically challenging it?

What is the relationship between the ”pandemic” and such ”progress”? 

We are now confronted with the fact that the ”pandemic” could indeed have a relationship to such a ”progress”. At the moment, it looks like there is a plan to vaccinate all of humankind in an alleged attempt to free humanity from the hostage of the virus.

After all, vaccination now offers the one-time opportunity to get directly into as many bodies as never before, and, on this favourable occasion, to place something into the body that will transform it from the inside. Furthermore, it will make the body ”available” from the outside, i.e. connect it with a larger technological system, the Mega-Machine (9). Consequently, in the meantime, questions need to be asked about what technological progress has to offer in this respect.

Bill Gates, former head of Microsoft and planner of the worldwide Corona-vaccination, effectively wants to vaccinate all possible 7.8 billion people on planet earth, including pregnant women, newborns as well as those who have already recovered from Corona (!). However, for the time being, the German government has not yet decided to implement the anticipated, so- called ”immunity identity card”.

Furthermore, and of concern in the meantime, is the ongoing surveillance of citizens via artifical intelligence, artifical intelligence systems and censorship of the internet, i.e. the abolition of freedom of speech in the internet (10). Apparently, there is an expectation that not everybody will be excited about the alleged relief a vaccination might bring, despite the related promises of freedom of travel and freedom of professional choice seeming to be tempting. Inversely, i.e. in the case of refusal of vaccination, there is the threat that those liberties will be withheld, which is nothing less than the abolition of essential civil rights!

In the treatment of the pandemic and its aftermath, our health is not the issue.

For our health is threatened by much more serious dangers, e.g. radioactivity, particulate pollution, glyphosate, food that is a health hazard and 5G, none of which is mentioned anywhere. Even the prescribed facial masks are not serving our health, quite the contrary. They are a health hazard as they can lead to self-infection and cut us off from oxygen supply. Thus, they can even cause the objected symptons of the illness, not to mention the psychological repercussions. The issue is precisely not the battle against the virus, even though this is what we are made to believe for months.

Because, according to genuine medical perspectives, the Corona-virus is not more dangerous than other influenza viruses, the virus mutates constantly and most notably, it cannot be regarded as an enemy one could eradicate with one vaccine, least of all in the long run (11).

Besides, at this point, a vaccine has not been developed since the virus itself has not yet been properly identified. Upon discovery of a vaccine, it must be tested over a period of several years before it should be allowed to be administered, not to mention the likely mutation of the virus.

It is not logical, and it is not responsible to push for a quick mass compulsary vaccination, possibly by the end of 2020, and incidentally, without anyone having the legal right to hold anyone responsible for possible noxious effects (12). Such effects often occur even with vaccines that have been tested over many years and that are regularly administered. This means, it is not about a vaccination in the medical sense. The planned vaccination can thereby only be explained in such ways that itis intended for very different purposes. 

What all this is really about 

We are currently in the midst of the so-called 4th Industrial Revolution. This means the mass introduction and massive expansion of all new technologies, i.e. genetic engineering including synthetic biology, articificial intelligence, and nanotechnology, as well as geo-engineering, coupled with increased utilization of electromagnetic technologies in the higher atmospheres of the earth and also, in our bodies (13).

At the same time, in light of the current success of companies working with such technologies, respectively, the military-industrial complex, one can recognize what the new structuring of the global economy, using its ”controlled collapse” through the ”lockdown“, is all about (14).

The now propagated economic model and form of society, connected to the new technologies is also called the ”Green New Deal”. It is supposedly about the introduction of a post-capitalistic, de-globalized and a nature-friendly society.

The now propagated economic model and form of society, connected to the new technologies is also called the ”Green New Deal”. It is supposedly about the introduction of a post-capitalistic, de-globalized and a nature-friendly society.

However, in this context – and puzzingly so – the new technologies are largely considered to be ”green”, including even nuclear energy, the new industrial revolution and the means by which it is intended to be introduced and to implement these technologies. This ”deal”, that amongst others, the EU Commission and especially also the ”green” parties are propagating, is actually the opposite of what it claims to be (16). How is this to be understood ?

Digitalization is a new project that – amazingly – receives nothing but extensive consent, so far however, digitization is an expression of the new technologies, especially in the form of ”the Internet of Things” IoT. This is a digitized Mega-Machine of artificial intelligence in and through which all related ”things” are now to be ”cybernetically” connected.

Digitization, now propagated everywhere, makes precisely this possible. Each ”thing” deposits its ”information” in the IoT. This information is the ”energy” on which the IoT runs, i.e. it is considered its ”oil” – as Chancellor Angela Merkel called it, figuratively speaking.

The IoT activities are fed into the system via sensors that need to be mounted on all equipment, buildings, the entire infrastructure, also outdoors, as well as on human beings who are supposed to interact with IoT (17).

In and via the IoT machine, all information receive ”equal treatment”, i.e. factual information as well as human information. Hence, there is no longer any differentiation between different types of information.

As a result, human beings are not considered to be different from things and their information. There is a software program regulating the treatment of these things, i.e. this information, being able to forward or to delete them. It is like working on our personal computer, which we have become used to in the last decades.

What is new, however, is the fact that it is applied to us ourselves, i.e. we are the ones being turned into a ”thing” or into ”information” in the IoT.  This means that we ourselves need to be fitted with sensors that will report all our activities. It is only in this way that we can participate, or be made to participate in the Mega-Machine. This new ”participation” is supposed to become the premise for the new norm for all citizens. The cellphone or smart phone are already its precursors.

The ”transformation of human kind”

We are now supposed to become linked to the machine also from the inside of our bodies, not only from the outside. We are intended to become a part of the Mega-Machine of the IoT, and even turn into quasi-machines ourselves.

For, soon, weare perceived of not only being like machines, and this means we should not only just aspire to such behaviors, but could rather be technically forced to become machines:

Predictable, quantifiable, reduced in our complexity, to be operationalized, obedient to practical constraints, to be regulated from the outside, identically reproducible, interchangeable, able to be controlled, made transparent and unquestionable within the closed-loop control system”, in a way, to operate without fail one hundred percent in intended ways (18).

In order to function as reliably as machines function, we need to be altered on a bodily level, i.e. in the inside of our bodies. The external adaptation to the machine, i.e. unconditional obedience, is no longer sufficient to the system, because of the ”residual risk of being human”. Part of the agenda is that we should have diverse chips implanted, a practice already established with animals since some time. We should be ”vaccinated” with sensors and other memory storage devices or mini-machines including nanobots. Provided that such devices, including their ability to self-replicate, i.e. self-reproduce, will have been developed, which is precisely foreseen to be the case during this year (19).

Through this treatment we would be ”linked”, registered and able to be reached from the outside, via electromagnetic waves and soon also via satellites in space (20). It is even possible that this procedure of an internal ‘mechanization’ could turn into a progressive one and gradually transform humans into machines. One model for tracking and identifying an individual at the moment is the ID2020-implant (21). 

…the issue at stake here is none less than to intentionally turn the entirety of human evolution into chaos 

This attempt culminates in the development of new vaccines that, with the help of genetic engineering, can genetically alter the human body. This seems to be intended (directly via our DNA and indirectly via mRNA)

This is planned to be accomplished via specific 3-way injections, making sure that cell resistance against foreign DNA is broken down, by „electroporation”, i.e. quasi inner electro shocks, forcing the cells to open their membranes for foreign DNA, or mRNA transmitters (22).

Thereby we would be transformed by force into genetically modified organisms, GMO’s and we can guess what we should then be: Chimeras? Machines without a will? Definitely we would no longer be human beings in full possession of our natural power.

The issue at stake here is none less than to intentionally bring the entirety of human evolution into chaos:the fundamental trust into the human body we could have had until now will basically become obsolete. Nobody knows how the body will react and what kind of consequences such interference will have, nor how to deal with these, if we can no longer rely on the self-healing capacities of the human organism.

Genetic messages, which nature has preserved to stay seperate since millenia…are supposed to be mingled and freak chimaera will populate the future…apprentices of molecular sorcerers are already waiting to finally beginn the genetic rearrangement of the human being…What frightens me is the irreversibility of such a process”, commented Erwin Chargaff (23), the great chemist, geneticist and genetic engineering critic on this kind of technological advancement.

It seems it has come to this point now. Jeremy Rifkin, a former critic of genetic engineering, now recommends the Green New Deal, which propagates the introduction of new technologies, pleads for a ”comprehensive transformation of human kind” and for ”a fusion of computer technology and genetics towards a powerful new technological reality”(24).

Thus, he is spot-on with Mr. Bill Gates.

What is at stake is nothing less than a ”new creation of the world” and alongside it, the new creation of humans. It is also about a:

second creation story, sourced in the halls of laboratories (and) the establishing of an artificially created nature through a bio-industry, intended to replace the original concept of nature’s evolution”(25).

A ”New World Order” with ”new humans”? 

It would indeed be a ”new world order” if such outrageous, per se damaging, irreversible, even inheritable invasions of our right to physical integrity, of our genetic heritage on into the future, would succeed in being implemented on a global scale.

Such interference would even affect the Conditio Humana itself, i.e. our reproduction as a human species. It would not be an exaggeration to call such an intervention the biggest possible crime against humanity.

However, even if we were able to escape this kind of massacre on being human, an existence outside of the Mega-Machine of the IoT is not intended in the long run. China is the first country that surged ahead, but probably only on an organisational level, so far regarding the external forms of ”mechanization“or ‘machinization’. It is not by chance that China is increasingly mentioned as a positive example of a future development. Besides the problem with political totalitarianism and the eventual technical transformation of the human being, there is, however, already a general juridical problem.

Human Rights – technically obsolete? 

Since in the IoT there is no differentiation between information and human beings, asall are treated as ”things”, we are no longer defined or treated as human beings within the Mega-Machine of the IoT. That is why our rights as human beings will effectively fall apart under such conditions, because they are technically ”obsolete”. This even applies to basic human rights, not only to civil liberties. Things, information and machines have no such rights. In an equal treatment, based on the norm of ”things”, such rights would dissolve, and with them eventually the legal effects regarding our contingent artifical genetic transformation, i.e. the Conditio Humana itself, too! With technological progress, legislation can be polished off, so to speak. Or what?

The Mega-Machine, like any other machine, is by definition totalitarian in character and it is actually a weapon. It consists of order and obedience. Whoever or whatever is not obedient is becoming harmful to him- or herself.

Civil liberties are already largely restricted or have fallen apart with the lockdown due to the Corona-pandemic.

Furthermore, it is apparently not planned to fully re-instate these liberties. Rather, on the contrary, human rights themselves, such as the right to physical integrity and human dignity could be next to go; at some point possibly even the right to life… That is the lasting logic of ‘machinization’. This means there would be no life except that of the machine which is indeed defined as such. For, the machine itself now means ”life”, even a ”better” form of life. In such a world, humans become ”obsolete”, even an ”endangered species” (26). How will this be reflected bylegislation?

In the context of new technologies, all this has already been verbalized and discussed at length. When it comes to artifical intelligence, human rights are not an issue, neither in a general nor an individual sense. This also applies to the field of genetic engineering and even to synthetic biology, a fieldactively trying to create humans in artifical ways.

Rather, in the end, it is about us as possible ”inventions”, upon which someone may, for example, claim a patent, presumably the one who has genetically altered us.

If patents on human life and not only on the lives of animals and plants, were to be recognized, we then would belong to our inventor and this person could annihilate us, could wipe us out– ”delete“ us.

Within the Mega-Machine, which belongs to artifical intelligence, this is already established. Only in the ”community” of the IoT as a machine are we something or somebody. We do not exist independently. In this way, we would no longer be considered free, souvereign and independent ”individuals”. (Strangely enough, some people call this ”socialism”).

Democracy and nature – technically obsolete? 

From this perspective we can see why democracy would no longer be necessary and can no longer exist, because the machine functions strictly hierarchically, solely according to ”practical constraints“ as part of the closed-loop control system. According to this definition no ethical or moral law can penetrate it.

Furthermore, in the Mega-Machine, sex, gender, parents, genealogy, or relatives no longer exist, since anything to be a fact of nature is no longer planned in the matrix.

The Mega-Machine itself is expression of a technology that transforms nature into machine and in thisprocess, destroys nature and afterwards allegedly ”substitutes” it (27).

So, we can see that the machine not only emerges from destruction but continues with destruction. In this way, everything becomes inverted – living matter turns into dead matter, society turns into prison, humans turn into something mechanical…

The trick is that all these new creations have to appear as something ”better” and according to Rifkin: ”must be presented and justified as continuation of natural principles and processes.” (28)

That is the reason why the machine-made, new creation is now considered to be ”green”. It is simply called green, because it aims at the ”green”, the living! In the inversion words have in many cases taken on the opposite meaning they had before. 

Mega-Machine – Weapon with ”Mind-Control”  

The Mega-Machine, like any machine is, by definition, totalitarian in character and it is actually a weapon. It consists of order and obedience. Whoever or whatever is not obedient, becomes harmful to him- or herself. S/he/ it cannot continue, ”crashes”, or, points are deducted because s/he no longer delivers information/data. It is simultaneously about ”surveillance and punishment” (Foucault); about total control of everything and about the ability to exert direct influence from the outside, possibly going as far as ”deletion”.

The chip, sensor or nanobot can be located and, via computer software, be fed with information. Such information, in the form of electromagnetic waves in various frequencies can be aimed at the brain, as a form of ”mind control” and induce certain feelings and behavior. This has been experimented with since decades (29). Furthermore, soon there will be widespread 5G, which will connect us to satellites and to an extensive, global electromagnetic-net or grid (project ”Starlink” (30)).

Then we will also be in a ”lockdown” from above and not only from below (31) and, it is unclear if and how we are going to survive this – maybe only as quasi machines.

However, what is talked about is concern for our ”health”. Even young children are intentionally burdened with a potential guilt, that is to say, of possibly being the cause of the death of their grandparents, which of course traumatizes them…

PLANdemic:  Orwell’s ”1984” and Huxley’s ”Brave New World” all in one

I am not saying that we are already at this point. But we are on a direct path towards it. For the last 40 years this path has beendiscussed in professional circles and it is in the process of being established. Hence, it is completely incomprehensible that to this day, there is no critical debate on this explosive topic. Nobody is discussing it.

This seems to be the path that will be followed on various levels during and after the pandemic, the ”PLANdemic”. To assume anything different would not only be naive, but also completely unrealistic.

The future task of medicine is to begin turning us into machine-humans or human-machines

The future task of medicine is to begin turning us into machine-humans or human machines and, according to AI-hero, Ray Kurzweil, by ”merging with the computer ”(32) thus contributing to the victory of ”transhumanism”. The ”beautiful new human”(33), who, so far exists only in the propaganda and the alchemical fantasy of the ”extropians” (those who advocate the end of ”humans”) is seen as the ”improved human” – by no longer being a human being.

It is a matter of scornful rupture from us, mammals, dinosaurs and the primordial jelly (34), of those who are still being born from a mother and who are allegedly long outdated by the ”evolution of intelligence” (35). The new god-like creators are greeting us, who, after the forceful destruction of matter and all its manifestations, believe they have arrived at the Big Bang again and hence, can re-create anything at will.

This truly is patriarchy, imagining being ”the fatherly source of life” as opposed to the common origins of life from the mother, trying to irrevocably establish itself today. (41)

Why does nobody read the works of the madmen in the AI, genetic engineering and the nano-tech scene? They have long since begun to put this into practice – because in this field, further billions of Dollarsare to be made!

The ”new evolution” – a ”eugenic civilization” with a ”synthetic human race” 

In the long run, the allegedly possible new evolution no longer counts with any human beings. Rather, it will be populated by the ”post”- human ”Homo Deus”. The god-human is supposed to be part of the ”god-machine”, the so-called ”Singularity”, which will have transcended thehuman being in the old understanding, and which is allegedly assuming leadership over the universe itself (36). Behold, Yuval Harari, the author of Homo Deus, is world-renowned and a favorite, second to none, of all those in power, from Obama to Merkel.

This is what the heros from the field of the new technologies are telling us. They openly propagate a ”eugenic civilization”, even a ”synthetic humanity” (37) and Bill Gates, following in his father’s footsteps, is determined to serve this purpose. It is not by chance that he intends to combine AI-technology with his vaccines and genetic engineering.

We know that he is interested in eugenics. He himself said so: vaccinations are and should continue to be used for the purpose of reducing the world’s popluation (38). In this eerie logic, de-population would be a topic for discussion. But even this, so far, is not the case.

Already a century ago, Rudolf Steiner cautioned us:

The soul will be eliminated via a medication. Based on a ‘reasonable perspective’ one will develop a vaccine, that will affect the organism, beginning in early youth, preferably at the moment of birth, so that this human body will not arrive at the thought: (that) there is a soul and a spirit. – The two worldviews will oppose each other in such fierce ways. One worldview will have to think about how to develop terms and concepts that will enable people to cope with the true reality of the soul and the spirit. The other one, the successors of today’s materialists, will search for the vaccine to make the body ‘healthy’, so that this body via its constitutional conditions will not speak of such foolish things as soul and spirit, but instead will speak in ‘healthy’ ways of the forces that live in machines and in chemistry, which constitute the planets and suns within the planetary nebula. This will be achieved through somatic procedures. It will be left to the materialistic physicians to eliminate the the soul from humankind.” (39)

In the course of time, the transformed ones will be considered the ”better ones.” However, the question is: how ”healthy”, in the broadest sense, these better ones might be? Either they will be lacking the orginal body and/or soul and spirit. A third category would remain made up of those who will have escaped such measures, the non-vaccinated ones – besides Mister Gates and his children, by the way. The debate about the exclusionof such disobedient ones has already begun. The ”great transformation” everybody talks about, is indeed on the way.

Farewell being human?

So, wasn´t he always ”evil”? And doesn’t that serve him right? By now, however, it is clear who the evil one is, and not only in trivial but in radical ways. The age of humankind, the Anthropocene, of which one is so proud in our times – will it be an age without human beings in the end? What would remain is ”post-humanism”, liberating us finally from this foolish ”life”…

Technological advancement is now showing its real face. It is the face of the holy ”productive forces.” But the ”Luddites“ as those who question machines were and still are taunted and ridiculed for being backward.

Today, we are paying for our obedience. It stands in the way of truly recognizing what has been and what is really going on, and what significance it bears. This failure is now coming home to us. Nobody is quite prepared for this. The debate is about nothing less than ”life” itself– not, however, the zombie-like ”life” of the machine, which saps our life force and thatof the planet.

The real issue is about our life and our living existence, that we now have to defend against the obscene new creations, against those who claim to possess the ability to improve life beyond the inherent abilities of our Planet Earth and Mother Nature.

Should we continue to believe in such claims? Now that it is first and foremost about us? Now that we have the opportunity to revoke this reversal of life into death and destruction instead of falling prey for good to the ”technotronic era”? (40)

What an embarrassment for the self-proclaimed ”resistance” if its protagonists still have not comprehended what this is all about today – beyond money and power.

At the same time, I see them everywhere, emerging from the bottom, many clear faces are appearing in the crowd and wonderful people are raising their voices. They see what needs to be done and they see the path that now needs to be taken. It is a true joy!


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This was originally published in German on, May 14th 2020. Translation from German by M.L.Oberem.

Prof. Claudia Von Werlhof, is a distinguished author, professor of political science and women’s studies, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. She is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)


1.;precisely: Werlhof, Claudia von, 2020: Wir sind Virus! Auf/ on; also in Neue Rheinische Zeitung, /April 29th


3. Bammé, Arno et al., 1983: Maschinenmenschen-Menschmaschinen, Reinbek, Rowohlt

4. Schirrmacher, Frank, 2013: EGO. Das Spiel des Lebens, München, Karl Blessing

5. Mumford, Luis, 1977: Mythos der Maschine, Frankfurt, Fischer (orig. The Myth of the Machine 1964/66); Ullrich, Otto 1990: Technik und Herrschaft, Frankfurt, Fischer

6. Merchant, Carolyn, 1987: Der Tod der Natur, München, Beck (orig. The Death of Nature)

7. Schirrmacher, Frank (Hg.) 2001: Die Darwin AG. Wie Nanotechnologie, Biotechnologie und Computer den neuen Menschen träumen, Köln, Kiepenheuer & Witsch; Moravec, Hans, 1988: Mind Children. The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence, Cambridge/London, Harvard University Press; Kurzweil, Ray, 2016: Die Intelligenz der Evolution. Wenn Mensch und Computer verschmelzen, Köln, Kiepenheuer & Witsch (orig. The Age of Spiritual Machines); Preston, Christopher, 2019: Sind wir noch zu retten? Wie wir mit neuen Technologien die Natur verändern können, Berlin, Springer (orig. The Synthetic Age, Cambridge 2018, MIT Press); Rifkin, Jeremy, 2007: Das Biotechnische Zeitalter, Frankfurt a.M./New York, Campus (orig. The Biotech Century, New York 1998, Tarcher/Putnam); Sorgner, Stefan, 2016: Transhumanismus, Freiburg, Herder

8. Bell, Daniel, 2007: Cover, in Sitter-Liver, Beat (Hg.): Utopie Heute, I, Fribourg/Stuttgart, Academic Press/Kohlhammer

9. „Mega-Machine“ is a term by Lewis Mumford from ”The Myth of the Machine”, 1964/1966.With this term he identifies the organisation of the empire of the pharaos in Ancient Egypt, which long before industrialisation and ‘machinisation’ in the modern sense, showed traits of a mechanical organisation of society, in which humans themselves were the ”machine”, similarly to armies. Today, the term Mega-Machine can be taken up again in order to describe the literal ‘machinisation’ of society and the form of integrating its members, even transformating them into machines, i.e. becoming a part of the larger machinery. The machine always stands for a strict hierachical, even totalitarian context.

10. Fikentscher, Anneliese und Neumann, Andreas, 2020:Per Androhung des Grundrechtentzugs zur Zwangsimpfung? In:Neue Rheinische Zeitung. May, 8th

11. Frazer, Ian:; Prof. Ioannidis, John:

12., accessed May 13th, 2020

13. Bertell, Rosalie, 2018: Kriegswaffe Planet Erde, Gelnhausen, J. K. Fischer (orig. Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War, London 2000, The Womens´ Press): Freeland, Elana, 2018:Under an Ionized Sky. From Chemtrails to Space Fence Lockdown, Port Townsend, Feral House; Werlhof, Claudia von (Ed.), 2020: Global Warning! Geoengineering is Wrecking Our Planet, Dublin, Talma (forthcoming)

14. Wolff, Ernst, 2020:, accessed March 13th, 2020; Wolff, Ernst. 2014:Weltmacht IWF – Chronik eines Raubzugs, Marburg, Tectum Wissenschaftsverlag

15. Rifkin, Jeremy, 2019: Der Globale Green New Deal, Frankfurt a. M., Campus (orig. The Green New Deal, 2019)

16. Werlhof, Claudia von, 2019:Schöne „grüne“ Digi-Welt? Oder: Die neue „grüne Revolution“? in: Neue Rheinische Zeitung, (724, Köln. November 6th, 2019) Morningstar against  the „Deal for Nature“, à la Greta Thunberg and the „Green New Deal“:

17. Rifkin, Jeremy, 2019, s. (15), p. 14

18. Genth, Renate, 2002: Über Maschinisierung und Mimesis, Frankfurt a.M., Peter Lang, pp. 110 ff.

19. Joy, Bill, 2001: Warum die Zukunft uns nicht braucht, in: Schirrmacher, Frank s. (7), pp. 31-71 (orig. Why the future does not need us)

20. Freeland, Elana, 2018, s. (12)

21. Koenig, Peter, 2020: The Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic: The Real Danger is Agenda ID2020, on Global Research, March 12th, a. 

22. The Children‘s Health Defense 2020:; Dr. Kaufman, Andrew, 2020: They Want to Genetically Modify Us with the COVID-19 Vaccine,, May 11th.Short version of Interview Spiro Skouras with Andrew Kaufman on May, 10th., accessed on May 13, 2020, May 11th, Interview Summary by Spiro Skouras with Andrew Kaufmann on May 10th, 2020 

23. Chargaff, Erwin, 1988:Unbegreifliches Geheimnis. Wissenschaft als Kampf für und gegen die Natur, Stuttgart, Klett-Cotta

24. Rifkin, Jeremy, 2007, s. (7), p. 34

25. Rifkin, Jeremy, 2007, s. (7), pp. 41; 33

26. Dupuy, Jean-Pierre, 2005: The Philosophical Foundations of Nanoethics, speech at the Nano-Ethics Conference, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, 2.-5.3., Ecole Polytechnique, Paris und Stanford University, pp. 19 f.

27. Werlhof, Claudia von, 2011: Die Verkehrung, Wien, Promedia; dies. 2010a: Fortschritts-Glaube am Ende? In Werlhof, C. v..: West -End, Köln, PapyRossa, pp. 88-129; Werlhof, C. v. 2010b: Gentechnik, moderne Alchemie und Faschismus, in Werlhof, C. v.: Vom Diesseits der Utopie zum Jenseits der Gewalt, Freiburg, Centaurus, pp. 171-209

28. Rifkin, Jeremy, 2007, s. (7), p. 34

29. Begich, Nick und Manning, Jeanne, 2001: Löcher im Himmel, Peiting, Michaels Verlag (orig. Angels Don´t Play this HAARP); Bearden, Tom, 2012: Skalar Technologie, Peiting, Michaels Verlag (orig. Gravitobiology);Krishnan, Armin, 2017: Military Neuroscience and the Coming Age of Neurowarfare, New York, Routledge

30. Tung, Liam, 2020: Elon Musk’s SpaceX: Now 1 million Starlink user terminals OKed for US internet service. ZDNet, March 24th.

31. Freeland, Elana, s. (13)

32. Kurzweil, Ray 2016, Subtitle

33. Sorgner, Stefan, 2018: Schöner neuer Mensch, Berlin, Nicolai publishing

34. Minsky, Marvin, 1988, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT: Interview in the Documentary „Maschinenträume“ by Peter Krieg, s. Werlhof, Claudia von, 1991: Männliche Natur und Künstliches Geschlecht, Wien, Frauenverlag, pp. 54 f.

35. Kurzweil, Ray, 2016, s. (7); Moravec, Hans, 1988, s. (7)

36. Harari, Yuval, 2017: Homo Deus, München, Beck

37. Rifkin, Jeremy, 2007 s. (7); Preston, Christopher, 2019, s. (7)

38. Kennedy, Robert jr. against Gates:, / accessed May 13th, 2020 ; s. a. Doktoren in Schwarz, Interview with Dr. Mikovits about Dr. Fauci:, accessed May 13th , 2020; Interview Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt:; Chossudovsky, Michel, 2020: After the Lockdown: A Global Coronavirus Vaccination Program, on Global Research, appr. May 5th; Engdahl. William, 2020: The Warp Speed Push for Coronavirus Vaccines, on Global Research, appr. May 10th ; Dr. Kaufman, Andrew, 2020: Sie wollen uns mit dem COVID-19-Impfstoff genetisch verändern:, accessed May,13th, 2020

39. Steiner, Rudolf, 1917:Vorträge in Dornach vom 29. September bis 28. Oktober 1917, Gesamtausgabe Band 177, pp. 97 f.

40. Brzezinski, Zbigniew, 1982: Between Two Ages: America´s Role in the Technotronic Age, New York, Viking Adult

41. For the English version a general reference to the „critical theory of patriarchy“:

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]