New World Order $STATE DAO Mobilization of Anti-Transhumanist Movement

November 17 17:09 2022

The transhumanist tradition is marked by an insistence that its project is supposed to elevate the human, to take him beyond his biological limitations. Transhumanism invites us to ignore all historic and socio-political context which causes the suffering of mankind by only attempting to control the damage that has already been caused, not to address the root causes. Transhumanism is not a project for the betterment of humanity but is a silent war on it. As Max Horkheimer explains in his preface to the “Eclipse of Reason” (1947): “Advance in technical facilities for enlightenment is accompanied by a process of dehumanization. Thus progress threatens to nullify the very goal it is supposed to realize – the idea of man.” and NWO STATE DAO, henceforth carries within its moral duty, to uphold the natural rights of man and to safeguard the sovereignty of our soul and our spirit. Yet, ironic as it may seem, this is not expected of us being a cryptocurrency project, let alone that NWO STATE should call others like minded to indirect action. Our aim henceforth, in this first instance, is to illuminate the matter at hand for the unaware masses and early retail crypto investors at large. Daniel Kuhn in his article “The transhumanist case for crypto” (2021), solidifies the transhumanist obsession with Thanatopolitics (politics of death) arguing that: “But who would want to live forever? As a historical fact, it turns out, many early adopters of cryptocurrency, that’s who! How fitting!”

Indeed so it is, many early investors in crypto had, and still have, ties to the transhumanist movement and not by accident. Blockchain technology embodies an almost transcendental ephemeral view on economy. The very premise of crypto, is the potential for radical change and distribution of power away from governments and from central banks, a power and wealth transfer which according to transhumanists is just yet another enhancement of the current logic of all dynamic structures and systems. Enhancement and reset, of the current world order is for them nothing more than the dismantling of the nation state governance and corporate powers not controlled by the elites themselves, it means a logical increase in their own decision making capabilities as technocrats, and yields them the sole right as being market disruptors and social engineers. Their plan is obvious, an alienation of the regular mortal human being who’s every movement, carnal and mental need will be mapped out, digitised, and his spirit and cognitive abilities fully commodified for a final Full spectrum Dominance.

As Jean-Francois Lyotard defined when he envisioned the current conditions, which now allow for these circumstances to progress, he stated that the postmodern condition is as a state of “incredulity toward metanarratives”. Hence, as a metanarrative, the term Transhumanism was coined by Aldous Huxley’s brother, Julian, saying that “I believe in transhumanism: once there are enough people who can truly say that, the human species will be on the threshold of a new kind of existence…” It is thus no coincidence that Julian Huxley and the foundations of transhumanism were tightly entangled with the field of eugenics. Their aim is to improve the quality of human beings, one through genetic breeding wiping off the undesired traits of humanity en masse, and the other through technology doing just the same. Whilst in eugenics the ambition doesn’t go beyond selection of genetic material, in transhumanism it does. With science as their crucial tool, the transhumanists claim they’ll be able to free man from his biological limitations, an experience of humanity without any of the negative side effects: “The result will be longer life spans, greater physical and mental capabilities, and perhaps, better self-control. The promise is beguiling: Utopia without hard work, a New World under our control.” (Koch 2010)

For the unaware, it is vital to understand that the major flaw of transhumanism is that it relies on a naive understanding of the human mind and body, portrayed as being mechanical and unholistic in nature, whereas individual parts can easily be manipulated without causing imbalance to the whole system. This machine-like view is very much prevalent in evolutionary psychology where founding researchers in the field have argued that the mind functions pretty much like a machine with different modules which has evolved to perform particular information processing tasks. The transhumanist agenda therefore relies on an understanding of man as a machine with dysfunctional parts which can be replaced, thrown out, or improved without causing damage to the overall balance of vital force which sustains it, this they believe regardless of science not yet having a prudent understanding of what consciousness is, let alone of any metaphysical ramifications that any alterations to it that it may cause quantum mechanically speaking in regard to observational effects of reality.

Just like eugenics, Transhumanism also pretends not to have an ethical accountability at its base and simply hides its assumptions under the umbrella of simply being ‘scientific’. In order for a transhumanist to make the argument of human enhancement, they need to assume that they already know what traits are desirable, and what traits are undesirable in the human race. This kind of lacking ethical framework, of leaving it up to science, regarding questions of what exactly is to be considered desirable, and what is not in favour for humanity as a whole, is an ethical foundation which requires a blind belief in the kind of science that transhumanists promote which is ethically justified within the framework of “Scientism”.

Many representative figures of the transhumanist trend are popular in the mainstream, Sam Harris unsurprisingly thinks that science should be used to enhance the human through technology, but that science alone also can tell us what is morally right! This outrageous claim contradicts centuries of moral philosophy and argues that philosophy and ethics aren’t needed at all in answering ethical questions, and that the scientific method is more than enough to settle the debate. To anyone who is remotely familiar with moral philosophy and with the work of David Hume, know that it clearly states what is and ought to be, as a distinction on ethics. Hume argued that there’s a gap between reality and our ethical frameworks, a gap which means that no set of facts about reality can inform us on what is and what isn’t moral. Simply said, the ethical principle which states that “slavery is wrong “ can not be found by observing the colour of the sky or by measuring the temperature of the water. Facts and scientific descriptions exist in a whole and separate domain from moral theory. Therefore, science, no matter how advanced, can in no shape or form ever be justified as being epistemically sufficient in providing us with normative claims. Whilst science can help us to implement technology in our biology, it cannot tell us whether that’s the right thing to do or not as transhumanists like Sam Harris may claim nonetheless. Transhumanists regardless, maintain a view of science which sees it to be disconnected from its material and historical base. However, thinkers like Thomas Kuhn and Paul Feyerabend have shown, that science isn’t some morally neutral practise operating in a vacuum, but is a specific system and magnifying glass through which reality is perceived and understood, and it is by all intent and purpose liable to the formation of paradigms which push research into very specific directions of social constructs and channels of conditioned attention.

In view of our human biology being incredibly complex, NWO STATE DAO upholds the conviction that our attempts to tamper with it can be catastrophic for future generations. Predominantly it is the increasing advance of Brain Computer Interfaces (BCIs) which poses the greatest threat to freedom of thought and individual cognitive sovereignty.

Herein it is clear, that the likes of Elon Musk and his Neuralink endeavour portrays himself as a benefactor of humanity whilst removing the risks it entails long.term for the misuse of the technology by self contradicting his arguments to confuse the public saying at the MIT Aeronautics and Astronautics Department’s 2014 Centennial Symposium: “You know all those stories where there’s the guy with the pentagram and the holy water and he’s like… yeah, he’s sure he can control the demon, [but] it doesn’t work out.”

Scientific advancements into these kinds of technologies fall securely under the banner of ageing and longevity research, here we find avid proponents of the transhumanist movement in the crypto space. Indeed, even the most famous name in cryptocurrency, Vitalik Buterin, founder of the Ethereum Blockchian, is utterly obsessed with life extension. Buterin himself has said that “Ageing is an engineering problem”, thus he is towards this aim heavily involved in, a platform dedicated to open-source software which works by incentivizing developers with payments and quadratic crowdfunded funding grants which are hailed as being resources allocated to democratic public goods. It should then come as no surprise, that Buterin is in official kahoot with quadratic voting and quadratic funding technology which is continually being developed by Glen Weyl, the Microsoft Office of CTO Political Economist & Social Technologist and founder of RadicalXChange which works globally to advance these blockchain frameworks, claiming they will benefit everyone as to remove scrutiny from regulatory authorities. Gitcoin grants round 12 featured more than 20 blockchain based longevity projects like seeking funding from the public. What they all have in common is their argument that the work they do is for the betterment of mankind by providing the value of a longer and healthier lifespan, and in the out most case, also finally remove death completely from life as an analogy by replacing the Christian promise of eternal life from God as foretold in John 3:36. While Buterin and Weyl are prominent transhumanists, they are not alone in the Blockchain community to have such views. Aubrey De Grey, famous for his biomedical research states that: “I have been gratified since the beginning of blockchain, to see the enormous fanbase that I and the longevity movement have in there”. Hence, the link between crypto and transhumanism indeed stretches back to its technological genesis. Hal Finney (1956-2014), the first person to transact Bitcoin from Satoshi, was also part of the transhumanist movement evident from his participation in the Extropian online discussions of life extension, artificial intelligence and matters pertaining to the transfer of human consciousness “from biological brains to alternative high-performance substrates”. Hence it shall hereafter be publicly known, that and NWO STATE DAO reject and are pragmatically and epistemically opposed to the ideals of Transhumanism!, NWO STATE DAO and $STATE / brand, company name, websites, content, materials and information are provided by on an “as is” and “as available” basis. You expressly agree and acknowledge that your use of the websites, content, material and information is at your sole risk. shall not be liable to any incidental, indirect, special, punitive or consequential damages. will not be liable for any damages of any kind arising from the use of any websites, content, material or information. #StayHuman

For more information:

Media Contact
Company Name:
Contact Person: Ciprian Pater
Email: Send Email
City: Kristiansand
Country: Norway