Alex Jones’ Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement
Part 1

2,703 words

How To Turn Your Conspiracy Movie Into An Unhinged Screed Against Eugenics

After starting out as an overly dramatic yet still semi-informative conspiracy exposé, Alex Jones’ 2007 movie makes an absolutely bizarre turn in the middle, transforming into a focused propaganda piece against “eugenics”, which it identifies as the telos behind the evil globalist conspiracy its first ninety minutes revolved around. This second half of the movie is venomously hostile to its subject matter and nearly every sentence and statement it makes is false or severely fact-distorting.

The big picture Alex Jones’ sweaty hands are trying to sketch in the viewer’s mind is that Eugenics is the diabolical spirit behind the state-led genocides of the past and an even more genocidal New World Order master plan seeking to reduce global human population by 80 percent, which would entail the deliberate murder of billions of people. He claims that current (in 2007) Western elites from David Rockefeller to the Queen of England are working towards outdoing the genocidal gruesomeness of 20^th century dictatorships around the world – in other words, that they are worse than Hitler, Stalin and Mao combined, many times worse, which is why opposing them is a moral imperative of the highest order and everyone who does not see things this way and fails to recognize the absolute urgency of Jones’ crusade against the New World Order belongs to the class of unawakened “sheeple”. [1]

Yet the movie still has entertainment value as a particularly risible case of “stuff people actually believe about eugenics”. Furthermore, it is precisely because no small number of conspiracy enthusiasts took Jones’ hyperbolic exclamations at face value that scrutinizing Jones sentence by sentence is a worthwhile endeavor.

The relevance of the movie for the development of modern conspiracy culture has to do with Alex Jones’ pioneering role in internet conspiracy thought in general and the movie’s release in late 2007, concurrent with the early days of the blogosphere and shortly before the subprime mortgage crisis escalated [2]. Endgame’s influence is felt today particularly in the way the conspiracy sphere tends to interpret Technocracy and Transhumanism. The movie, whose central argument can be likened to a Truther-version of “Democrats are the real racists”, gave conspiracy enthusiasts a villain that is entirely “safe” to hate and agitate against.

This article and the next will discuss the first two-thirds of the movie which introduce the New World Order conspiracy, its organization (with a focus on the Bilderberg meetings) and some of its projects and aims (with a focus on the Trans-Texas Corridor project) and thereby prepare the ground for the egregious treatment of the history of eugenics in the last third.

Parts three and four of this series will deal with the latter, in which, as mentioned above, practically every statement and claim is wrong. It shall be attempted to explain how someone managed to pack so much falsehood into so few spoken lines which is a) surprising since Jones is not what you might call a “Leftist” and b) puzzling since the first part of the same movie was not very bad by Alex Jones-standards. But we first need to take a closer look at the general worldview espoused in the first ninety minutes to understand how exactly the Alex Jones from 2006/2007 was thinking about history, identity, and global matters.

Endgame begins with an ominous phrase appearing on the otherwise still dark screen

Countless people will hate the New World Order and will die protesting against it.
-H.G. Wells The New World Order (1939)

Now that is a way to set the mood! So the very first statement of the whole two-hour-plus-epos focuses on negative emotion and forecasts mass death. We get the impression that Jones absolutely could not wait to start with the atrocity propaganda against the “New World Order”.

Alas, the quote is massaged; H.G. Wells never made that statement in the way Endgame presents it. The full quote, which is taken from the last chapter of Wells’ 1940 book, reads instead:

Countless people, from maharajas to millionaires and from pukkha sahibs to pretty ladies, will hate the new world order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it. [3]

As a standalone without context, this sentence does not make sense; or at least, it is not possible to narrow down its intended meaning sufficiently without taking into consideration the preceding paragraphs of that chapter. The context of the above quote consists mainly of what the author himself describes as “a considerable digression into psychology”, the purpose of which is to lay bare and emphasize man’s “craving for superiority and mastery” over his fellows, a trait whose detrimental effects must be repressed in any new order. As Wells puts it, “Law is essentially an adjustment of that craving to glory over other living things”. But law is precisely one of the three pillars of Wells’ “New World Order”, which, though indeed a form of worldwide socialism, is liberal, while Jones & Co are imagining a scenario that is more brutal and autocratic than Soviet communism.

So we see that the very first sentence of Endgame is already disrespecting both its sources and its viewers in the name of narrative-building and dramatic tension.

Following the above “foreshadowing” is a sequence of short clips: First, we hear a man who is later introduced as General Smedley Butler talk about “activities which might lead to an attempt to set up a fascist dictatorship [in the United States]”, then President Eisenhower appears, warning against the “rise of misplaced power”. Eisenhower is followed by President Kennedy talking about secrecy and secret societies. Lastly, we see President G.W. Bush sign something into law.

So General Smedley Butler’s 1934 testimony concerning a never implemented, possibly fictional, and frankly hare-brained plot from 1933 (the so-called “Business Plot” [4]) is mixed up with Eisenhower’s warnings concerning a “military-industrial complex” in his 1961 farewell address [5], Kennedy denouncing secrecy and secret societies as un-American later that year [6] and G.W. Bush signing an agreement in the early 21st century.

The intention on the part of the movie makers is to make it appear as if Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy were referring to fascist takeover attempts in the United States and that bills signed by President G.W. Bush in the current era were the first step of said takeover. A long Fascist “thread” is thereby embedded into 20th century American history and given the appearance of historicity by letting presidents speak.

The average, historically illiterate viewer cannot know that unrelated cherry-picked episodes of history were misinterpreted and strung together to give the appearance of continuity and connection. This is a very clear-cut case of the intentional (or utterly delusional) misleading of the uneducated, of the misuse of the trust people put in Alex Jones in particular and in films that look like historical documentaries in general.

The introduction continues in a similar manner, showering the viewer in conspiratorial claims and already including the eugenics-angle.

Another sequence starts with J.D. Rockefeller and American eugenics, after which we see Adolf Hitler blending into Joseph Stalin blending into Mao Zedong, immediately followed by barbed wire and a child in a WWII concentration camp, which seamlessly blends into vaccines being administered to a child in the present era. Particularly notable is the insane density of emotion-ladden and recognizable imagery. Aforementioned sequence, for example, only took eleven seconds! Two breaths in which American oil barons, eugenics, the three 20th century dictators with the highest generally agreed-upon body counts, the Holocaust and vaccination are all tied together into one memetic unit.

Following the introduction, the movie properly starts with a short speech by Alex Jones. This ninety-seconds-long narration shall be quoted in full, because it reveals much about how Alex Jones is thinking and about where the next over two hours of film will go:

In the near future, Earth is dominated by a powerful world government. Once-free nations are slaves to the will of a tiny elite. The dawn of a new Dark Age is upon mankind. Countries are a thing of the past. Every form of independence is under attack, with the family and even the individual itself nearing extinction. Close to 80% of the Earth’s population has been eliminated. The remnants of a once-free humanity are forced to live within highly-controlled, compact prison-like cities. Travel is highly restricted. Superhighways connect the mega-cities and keep the population from entering into unauthorized zones. No human activity is private. AI supercomputers chronicle and categorize every action. A prison-planet dominated by a ruthless gang of control-freaks whose power can never be challenged. This is the vision of the global elite. Their goal – a program of total dehumanization, where the science of tyranny is law. A world-wide control grid designed to ensure the overlords’ monopoly of power forever. Our species will be condemned to this nightmare future unless masses are awakened to the New World Order master plan and mobilized to defeat it. [7]

We immediately notice the staccato of short and very short sentences. Taken as fiction, this speech could very well form the beginning of a dystopian science fiction novel or movie, for example a sequel to John Carpenter’s legendary They Live (1988). In other words, it has all the hallmarks of good, engaging entertainment.

The perspective is that of a global Manichaean struggle between a single monolithic “world government” and a similarly monolithic mass of individuals called “humanity”. While Jones mentions the family unit and the abolition of nation-states in passing, his “humanity” has no national, racial, cultural or religious subdivisions that matter. Between the sovereign individual and “humanity” as a whole, there does not seem to be anything of value in Jones’ outlook.

After the speech, the post-introduction continues a bit with the so-called “Georgia Guidestones” (which were partially blown up in 2022) and a couple other claims, before Jones begins to narrate a short timeline of how he believes the history of the world played out the past couple centuries. Following that timeline, the first major topic of the movie, the Bilderberg meetings, is treated. This somewhat fragmented section before the Bilderberg-part begins reveals a couple of glaring weaknesses in Jones’ approach to things:

• The simple existence of a creepy, globalist monument somewhere in rural Georgia is taken as conclusive evidence that the global elite intends to reduce global human population to a fraction of its current level due to the “Guidestones” advising to “Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature”. But the mere existence of such a monument does neither logically nor commonsensically imply the kind of global relevance that Jones and fellow conspiracy theorists ascribe to it. Here we don’t find evidence for a NWO depopulation plan, just potential evidence for a NWO depopulation plan – a crucial difference that Jones & Co are forgetting. It is all too typical for the “true believers” among conspiracy theorists to confuse their preference for a particular interpretation with the provenness of said interpretation.
• Jones claims that the same group of “Elites” has “steered planetary affairs for hundreds of years”, which is the classic hardcore conspiracy mindset, in which conflicts between different elites and power blocks were never real or meaningful (at least not in recent history). This assumption is crucial, because it allows you recast evidence for competition between nations or elites (e.g. the Cold War) into evidence for your preferred monolithic world conspiracy scenario (as we will see in the concrete case of the Bilderberg meetings in part two).
• Even when Jones gets the overall story right, he manages to treat the subject very poorly and make lots of historically false statements due to a seemingly constant need for crass exaggeration and oversimplification.
• When mentioning how financiers “were slowly gaining control of” European governments, he reveals that he does not understand why financiers in particular should have become powerful; he only mentioned that they had “sophisticated intelligence-gathering networks” giving them an advantage over governments, but that is beside the point. The crucial questions of usury and of monopolizing certain financial services is completely left out. In other words, Jones likely has no clue what actually facilitated the rise of bankers and financiers in the 19th century.
• The Federal Reserve Act and Jacob Schiff’s involvement with the Bolshevik revolution are left out, and so is everything related to Freemasonry.

More important than the facts Jones gets wrong (or leaves out) is the psychological effect of the above: the sheer number of strong claims about history gradually wears down the viewer’s resistance to Endgame’s narrative. The logical part of the mind is overwhelmed as it cannot even begin to analyze what these radical claims would entail before being hit by the next one.

In the next installment, we will see Alex Jones & Co travel to the site of the 2006 Bilderberg meeting in Ottawa, Canada, to confront some of the “Elites” face-to-face. We will also discuss how Jones covered and interpreted a local Texan protest against a large infrastructure project planned in the mid-2000s. Part two will further take a look at the way Endgame transitions to its crucial, eugenics-focused last third, and conclude with overall observations and thoughts on the function and effect of the preceding two thirds of the movie.

Notes

[1] a denigrating portmanteau of “sheep” and “people”

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_financial_crisis#Timeline

We see US unemployment hit the five percent mark in December 2007, a month after Endgame’s release on November 1st, 2007.

[3] H.G. Wells, The New World Order (Secker & Warburg, 1940), via Project Gutenberg Australia: http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks04/0400671h.html#chap12

Wells’ publisher being a member of the famous Warburg banking family does indeed lend credence to the thesis that there was more behind The New World Order than one intellectual’s personal thoughts. Yet the Jewish Warburgs can hardly be accused of being supporters of Nazi eugenics.

[4] In all probability, we’re looking at a classic example of intentionally stoked paranoia against fascism:

Congressmen Samuel Dickstein (later found out to have been on the NKVD’s payroll), from Manhattan’s lower East Side, and John W. McCormack, from South Boston, picked up the fantastic story and summoned the doughty warrior from his home at Newtown Square, Pa., to a closed hearing of the Un-American Activities Committee. (“Plot Without Plotters”, Time Magazine, December 3, 1934)

A Washington correspondent asked: “What can we believe?” Apparently anything, to judge by the number of people who lend a credulous ear to the story of General BUTLER’S 500,000 Fascists in buckram marching on Washington to seize the Government. (“Credulity Unlimited”, New York Times, November 22, 1934).

The first article and the beginning of the second are available online under:

https://time.com/archive/6863220/national-affairs-plot-without-plotters/

https://web.archive.org/web/20180322082305/https://www.nytimes.com/1934/11/22/archives/credulity-unlimited.html

[5] Transcript of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Farewell Address (January 17, 1961):

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/president-dwight-d-eisenhowers-farewell-address

The context of Eisenhower’s reference to a “military-industrial complex” – which generations of conspiracy ideologues and enthusiasts have taken as iron-clad evidence that their darkest fears are based in reality – was political competition between the dominant Liberal East Coast establishment Eisenhower belonged to and “a small group of McCarthyite generals and (Texan) oil barons surrounding General Douglas MacArthur” which “constituted the main opposition to Eisenhower during his presidency by setting up various action groups that pushed for hardline policies against the Soviet Union” (van der Reijden, 2012, see: https://isgp-studies.com/american-security-council#general-douglas-macarthur-and-the-military-industrial-complex).

In other words, rather than providing crucial insider information on secret machinations against American democracy, Eisenhower was simply priming the American public against an Anticommunist faction among the American elite.

[6] “The President and the Press: Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association, April 27, 1961”:

https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/american-newspaper-publishers-association-19610427

In this speech, President Kennedy claims that “The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings”, which, though correct in one sense, is highly ironic given that the founders of the American Republic were Freemasons and conspired with one another to found said republic in the first place.

Untangling this dichotomy would take another article but a first approximation may be that American society being particularly opposed to secret societies and secret councils does not abolish the need for non-public meetings and negotiations between parts of its elites and corresponding organizational frameworks. In other words, no functional society can fully live up to the ideal President Kennedy spoke of.

[7] A full, timecoded and mostly accurate transcript of the whole movie is available online under:

https://ia801900.us.archive.org/25/items/February2013_201609/ENDGAME%20%28Alex%20Jones%20©%202007%29%20-%20script%20with%20timecodes%20for%20subtitling-99.pdf