The collectivist, evolutionary religion of the UN

As a teenager, Arthur C. Clarke was one of my favorite science fiction writers. Among his novels, Childhood’s End is one of the most acclaimed.

The story climaxes with the harvesting of the minds of evolutionarily advanced human children into a galactic “Overmind,” a mass-mind entity that transcends material existence.

Up to that point, I found the story very gripping and enjoyable, but the ending was something of a letdown: The evolutionary future of my species would be nothing more than absorption into an undifferentiated, sentient cosmic soup.

However, the UN now promotes something similar to that in its own religious vision. That vision is spelled out in a very well-made 16-minute propaganda video titled “A Radical Guide to Reality,” which is available on a web page for the “SDG Thought Leaders Circle.” These “thought leaders” are aligned with the UN’s sustainable development goals and are part of an entity called the “The Unitive Cluster” of NGOs formally recognized by the UN.

Not content with controlling our bodies with the WHO and our energy use with the IPCC, the UN also aims at controlling our beliefs through this cult-like religion. I recommend viewing this very revealing video in its entirety, but I will summarize its contents here.

It begins by declaring that “the whole Universe breathes.” It elaborates that “the Big Bang” should really be called “the Big Breath.” The universe was born to evolve into something with “greater levels of diversity and self-awareness.” It evolves as a “wholly unified entity,” which “emerges from the non-physical realm of cosmic intelligence expressing itself.”

The video refers to the earth as Gaia, a living, god-like being (the name is taken from the earth-goddess of Greco-Roman pagan mythology). As for human beings, “we don’t have mind and consciousness, we and the whole world are mind and consciousness.” As a result, the universe “not only meaningfully exists but purposefully evolves.”

The video lays great emphasis on “the collaborative relationships of organisms.” Therefore, we humans “can’t go on behaving as we have been” but must take charge of “our own conscious evolution.” At the end, a child declares, “This is who we can evolve to become.”

Though the message sounds a lot like religious scripture, some attempt is made to undergird its declarations with scientific facts. The video mentions the “fine-tuning” of the laws of physics and the cosmos to make biological life possible, and it also mentions the complex, software-like information contained in DNA, a fact difficult to account for by random processes.

Interestingly, advocates of Intelligent Design appeal to the same phenomena to establish the existence of a personal creator. So they are clearly compatible with contrary religious (and perhaps non-religious) explanations. The video-makers chose to use them to underpin pantheism.

Though the concept of evolution is invoked, this is certainly not Darwinian or neo-Darwinian evolution, which operates by the unguided mechanisms of natural selection and random mutation. Darwin rejected the idea that evolution was being consciously directed by some non-material entity. On top of that, Darwinian evolution is not fundamentally a cooperative process but a competitive one. However, the UN needs a revamped, collectivist concept of evolution to justify its stance that individualism is selfish.

But is collectivism more evolved? During the Covid panic, individualistic thinking showed itself to be generally superior. In the main, it was the non-conformists who were skeptical of the WHO/government/media Covid narrative and the destructive, unhealthy measures forced on many. Such people were probably more likely to survive.

One disturbing aspect of “guided evolution” is that it harks back to the eugenics movement of the 20th century. That movement led to the forced sterilization of the “unfit” and to racism toward supposedly less-evolved human peoples, culminating in the well-known, horrific Nazi practices to exterminate “inferior” people.nd sand

As far as religion goes, the ideas articulated in the “Radical Guide” are not really new or innovative. They were mostly expressed at least 28 years earlier by a former assistant UN Undersecretary named Robert Muller. Muller discoursed at great length about “Gaia” and “cosmic consciousness” in the course of his verbose “Two Thousand Ideas for a Better World.” A lecture by James Lindsay at New Discourses examines Muller’s utopian creed in detail.

Lindsay appropriately titled his talk “The Occult Theosophy of the UN,” which points to the older roots of the UN religion in the Theosophy movement in the 19th century, the parent of the current New Age movement. Even older roots for these ideas can be found in ancient occultism and Gnosticism. All subscribe to the concept of monism—“all is one.”

This religious outlook posits that the real essence of the universe is not objective, concrete physical matter but something else higher and greater (“Cosmic Consciousness,” etc.). Through mystical experience or esoteric knowledge, enlightened people perceive this hidden reality and help to bring about its actualization in their experience and history. This worldview, often called “New Thought,” has also infiltrated Christian circles, Christian Science (the denomination) being one example.

According to the UN and others, a group of enlightened “evolutionary leaders” exist to help guide this collective evolution of humankind and the cosmos. The highly popular American TV personality Oprah Winfrey has frequently given such leaders a platform to expound their vision for humanity’s future. In a video Lisa Logan shows clips of Oprah and her guests preaching this religion. She remarks that if such people have their way, we will lose our freedom to choose our own religious beliefs.

Thus the UN’s attempts to produce a worldwide mass-mind go far beyond plans to impose the same global health policies and environmental directives. As Logan demonstrates, the UN has already successfully introduced its ideological agenda into American public schools.

For countries like the US, which separate the religious and political spheres, an internationally imposed religious ideology certainly conflicts with their national sovereignty, not to mention personal freedom. The UN’s religious scheme warrants strong resistance from individuals and nations that want to retain control over their own lives and beliefs.