By Neil Foster
The Sovereign Independent
March 4, 2011

I remember being in a bar in Dublin a few years ago and sitting at a table unfortunate enough to have a picture of George Bernard Shaw on the wall. I asked the manager if he knew anything about Shaw to which he replied, being a proud misinformed Irishman, that Shaw was ‘one of the greatest playwrites Ireland had ever produced’.

I asked him if he actually knew anything about his private life and in particular his political views to which he answered ‘no’.

When pointed out to him that Shaw was a staunch supporter of Hitler and Stalin he said that couldn’t be true because it would be in the papers. Hmm how the ignorant are kept in the dark eh?

But today we’ve moved on quite a bit from framed photographs of genocidal maniacs to actually portraying them as entertainment on stage. The article below is an advert for just such a show although they openly admit its ‘eugenics’ credentials. It also says there is an interactive element.

Maybe we’ll see some interactive forced abortions and executions but some how I doubt it.

The real George Bernard Shaw was a callous and sinisterly cruel psychopath who openly suggested gassing people who could not justify their existence to the ruling elite and stated that they would be a burden to the society they, the elite, were part of, what’s now called by similar elitist psychopaths like David Cameron as THE BIG SOCIETY!#

Don’t say you weren’t warned!

The Real George Bernard Shaw – Fabian Socialist and Hitlerian Advocate of Mass Murder

Edit This Post

By Neil Foster, 8th September 2010

Scanning through the Irish papers this morning I came across this piece on George Bernard Shaw in both the Irish Times and the Irish Examiner. These are supposedly competing publication but both carry word for word this sickening tribute to an evil monster who’s been mythologised and portrayed as one of Ireland’s finest.

This disgusting creature was in his day an ardent supporter of Mussolini and Hitler and a founding member of the Fabian Society.

The Fabian Society would claim that they are a purely socialist organisation. They were co founded by Shaw’s friend Lady Astor. David Cameron, the ‘con’servative leader and Prime Minister of Britain is also a member as well as being related by marriage into the Astor family. Coincidence?

I’m not going to waste my time going through the article suffice to say that is an insult to the average person who, if they spent 5 minutes researching Shaw would find a far different personality than this sickening portrayal of a supposed genius of his day.

What I want to show you here is the depraved mind of a ‘man’ who thought and stated quite clearly what he thought of the ordinary person on the street far removed from his elitist circle of psychopaths.

The word ‘psychopath’ has been used in many articles on this site and others to describe an attribute of politicians, royalty and the wider aristocracy which they all seem to share to one degree or another. George Bernard Shaw is no different. The only difference between Shaw and many others of his sick fraternity is that he was a man of many words who had trouble containing himself when it came to his views on humanity. Here are just a few examples:


“The notion that persons should be safe from extermination as long as they do not commit willful murder, or levy war against the Crown, or kidnap, or throw vitriol, is not only to limit social responsibility unnecessarily, and to privilege the large range of intolerable misconduct that lies outside them, but to divert attention from*the essential justification for extermination, which is always incorrigible social incompatibility and nothing else.”

Source: George Bernard Shaw, “On the Rocks” (1933), Preface.


“We should find ourselves committed to killing a great many people whom we now leave living, and to leave living a great many people whom we at present kill. We should have to get rid of all ideas about capital punishment …

A part of eugenic politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal chamber. A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them.”

Source: George Bernard Shaw, Lecture to the Eugenics Education Society, Reported in*The Daily Express, March 4, 1910.


“The moment we face it frankly we are driven to the conclusion that the community has a right to put a price on the right to live in it … If people are fit to live, let them live under decent human conditions.*If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way. Is it any wonder that some of us are driven to prescribe the lethal chamber as the solution for the hard cases which are at present made the excuse for dragging all the other cases down to their level, and the only solution that will create a sense of full social responsibility in modern populations?”

Source: George Bernard Shaw,*Prefaces (London: Constable and Co., 1934), p. 296.

These are not isolated statements made at some point in his life. These statements and many others were made over decades consistently and repetitively. Here’s another:

“Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.”

George Bernard Shaw: The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928, pg. 470)

In the video below, in a clip from a highly recommended documentary called ‘The Soviet Story’ you see and hear Shaw clearly state his murderous ideology:

Another myth surrounds H.G. Wells who along with Shaw advocated mass extermination of the ‘unfit’ as he as his sick friends thought of people of a lower social group than themselves. Here are a few quotes from this maniac:


“I believe that if a canvass of the entire civilized world were put to the vote in this matter, the proposition that it is desirable that the better sort of people should intermarry and have plentiful children, and that the inferior sort of people should abstain from multiplication, would be carried by an overwhelming majority. They might disagree with Plato’s methods, but they would certainly agree to his principle. And that this is not a popular error Mr. Francis Galton has shown. He has devoted a very large amount of energy and capacity to the vivid and convincing presentation of this idea, and to its courageous propagation. … Indeed, Mr. Galton has drawn up certain definite proposals. He has suggested that “noble families” should collect “fine specimens of humanity” around them, employing these fine specimens in menial occupations of a light and comfortable sort, that will leave a sufficient portion of their energies free for the multiplication of their superior type.”

Source: H.G. Wells, Mankind in the Making, Chapter II, (1903)


“I believe that now and always the conscious selection of the best for reproduction will be impossible; that to propose it is to display a fundamental misunderstanding of what individuality implies. The way of nature has always been to slay the hindmost, and there is still no other way, unless we can prevent those who would become the hindmost being born. It is in the sterilization of failure, and not in the selection of successes for breeding, that the possibility of an improvement of the human stock lies.”

Source: H.G. Wells in American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 10 (1904), p. 11.


“The dominant men of the new time … will find in themselves – it must be remembered I am speaking of a class that has naturally segregated, and not of men as a whole – a desire, a passion almost, to create and organize, to put in order, to get the maximum result from certain possibilities. They will be artists in reality, with a passion for simplicity and directness and an impatience of confusion and inefficiency. The determining frame of their ethics … will be the elaboration of that future world state to which all things are pointing. … It is manifest that a reconstructed ethical system … will give very different values from those given by the existing system … the ethical system of these men of the New Republic, the ethical system which will dominate the world state, will be shaped primarily to favour the procreation of what is fine and efficient and beautiful in humanity – beautiful and strong bodies, clear and powerful minds, and a growing body of knowledge – and to check the procreation of base and servile types, of fear-driven and cowardly souls, of all that is mean and ugly and bestial in the souls, bodies, or habits of men. To do the latter is to do the former; the two things are inseparable.

In the new vision death is no inexplicable horror, no pointless terminal terror to the miseries of life, it is the end of all pain of life, the end of the bitterness of failure, the merciful obliteration of the weak and silly and pointless things. The new ethics will hold life to be a privilege and a responsibility … and the alternative in right conduct between living fully, beautifully, and efficiently will be to die. For a multitude of contemptible and silly creatures, fear-driven and helpless and useless, unhappy or hatefully happy in the midst of squalid dishonour, feeble, ugly, inefficient, born of unrestrained lusts, and increasing and multiplying through sheer incontinence and stupidity, the men of the New Republic will have little pity and less benevolence.

The men of the New Republic will not be squeamish, either, in facing or inflicting death, because they will have a fuller sense of the possibilities of life than we possess. They will have an ideal that will make killing worthwhile.

The pre-eminent value of sexual questions in morality lies in the fact that the lives which will constitute the future are involved. If they are not involved, if we can dissociate this relationship from this issue, then sexual questions become of no more importance than the morality of one’s deportment at chess, or the general morality of outdoor games. … The men of the New Republic … will rout out and illuminate urban rookeries and all places where the base can drift to multiply; they will contrive a land legislation that will keep the black, or yellow, or mean-white squatter on the move; … so that childbearing shall cease to be a hopeful speculation for the unemployed poor; … This thing, this euthanasia of the weak and sensual, is possible. On the principles that will probably animate the predominant classes of the new time, it will be permissible, and I have little or no doubt that in the future it will be planned and achieved.”

Source: H.G. Wells, Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress Upon Human Life and Thought, Final Chapter “The Faith of the New Republic”, (1902)

The last quote should strike terror into the hearts and minds of ordinary men and women. The ‘New Republic’ as Wells names it is now branded ‘The New World Order’.

Do we as rational thinking human beings really believe that to kill off the weak and poor is justifiable under any circumstances or do we start to question what is and always has been the dream of tyrants for millennia?

At what point do we start to question phrases such as ‘too many people’, ‘man is a cancer on the earth’ or the whole ‘greening’ agenda which is THE key ideology to bring in EUGENICS?

Even the psychopathic Charles Manson is being put forward as a ‘climate guru’ using the same slogans and phrases as used by one of the world’s premier liars Al Gore on the subject!

Until we as a species on this planet understand that there is a world agenda to drastically reduce world population, by a power cabal outside any government, by any means, whether through poisoned food and water, vaccinations, chemical spraying of the atmosphere and other environmental toxins which are absorbed by our bodies every day and finally mass murder of the ‘unfit, this agenda will steamroller ahead unabated.

When BBC 4 promotes sterilisation of the ‘unfit’ on a national radio station it should make the hairs on the back of every neck stand on end or obviously the heads on those necks are for the chopping block.

Unfortunately this link no longer plays the broadcast but the synopsis explains quite clearly the content.

Join the dots folks because failure to do so will ultimately fail the human race and life on this planet will be hellish for our children and future generations to come under the jackboot of a savage and insane global elite!