The Lethal Legacy Of The Sanger Shrew





Alongside the controversies in July and August of 2015 around the sting operations of the Center for Medical Progress into the baby-organ trafficking by Planned Parenthood, the legacy of its founder Margaret Higgins Sanger became once again headline news. Apologists for Planned Parenthood and everything it stands for even went so far as to claim that Maggie wasn’t a bad person and not even a tad racist. They use her apparent charm and innocence as a shield to hide her real face.  Let’s take this recent PR piece as an example:

In no small measure, her success in this regard owed not just to the weight of her ideas but also to her considerable personal beauty and charm. She was an immensely attractive woman, small, lithe and trim. Her green eyes were flecked with amber, her smile always warm, her hands perpetually in motion, beckoning even to strangers.

With an uncanny feel for the power of a well-communicated idea in a democracy, Sanger through the 1920s wrote bestselling books, published a widely read journal, held conferences, circled the globe giving lectures, organized a network of clinics and built a thriving advocacy movement.

While even a casual and quick venture into Maggie’s life and works is enough to find out that the above statement is absolute ridiculous, many people won’t be persuaded easy to do their own research. I therefore have written a succinct article, where I let her speak for herself and where I highlight her most important connections with key people in the NWO-agenda. Let’s start with a major article written by Mrs. Sanger herself, which was published in the New York Times of April the 8th, 1923.[1]  In this article Maggie showed her real face. She also did in her books like The Pivot Of Civilization and others, but books like that never have had a very widespread exposure. But writing a feature article in one of the most important newspapers in the world is of course something else. Don’t be fooled because of her looks, because this cuddly cutie-pie wanted most of us to die! Let’s find out why.

The Neo-Malthusian League was the direct outcome of the celebrated trial In London in 1877 of Charles Bradlaugh and Mrs. Annie Besant, who had frankly admitted distributing among the English poor thousands upon thousands of copies of the pamphlet of a Boston physician. Dr. Knowlton, entitled “Fruits of Philosophy,” originally published in this country in 1833. The Neo-Malthusian League, sponsored by those valiant pioneers, Charles and George Drysdale and Dr. Alice Vickery, soon spread to all countries of the continent, and Its doctrines were put into practice in Holland, where fifty-three birth control clinics, approved by the Dutch Government, have been conducted with great success for forty years.

The birth control movement, which has now absorbed the earlier Neo-Malthusian movement, originated right here in New York, just a decade ago. While the Neo-Malthusians based their propaganda on the broad general basis of Malthus’s theory of population, the expression “birth control” was devised in my little paper of advance feminism, The Woman Rebel, as one of the fundamental rights of the emancipation of working women. The response to this idea of birth control was so immediate and so overwhelming that a league was formed—the first birth control league in the world.

Here on the right you can read the key MAGGIE_nyt1paragraph of the New York Times article. Just to make it completely clear, we learn here that the “whole philosophy” of our innocent Maggie could be described as “the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks—those human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization”. Here we also find one of her stock phrases back: “human weeds”. No, she never had much respect for the beautiful flower of life.





In the second clipping you see a few MAGGIE_nyt2well-known individuals mentioned. This are her intellectual peers, and her accomplices in both support and effort. We see many familiar names whom I would call ‘usual suspects’ on this website, like H.G. Wells and Bernard Shaw. Maggie met these two men through fellow-Fabian Havelock Ellis. One study tells us that

Ellis mentored Sanger. Now for the first time she had a plan. At first she had seen contraception primarily as a way to help women control the size of families. Now she was beginning to believe that if sex were disconnected from childbirth, women might be liberated in ways they had never imagined: there would be changes in marriage, in the meaning of family, and in career and educational opportunities for women. [2]

Ellis was also one of these depraved Fabian friends of humanity, who was instrumental in getting the ‘removing love out of the equation of sex-agenda’ on the road. And as a fine Progressive he also laid the foundation of the transgender psychology studies. Because that constitutes evolution, according to them.

One person Maggie doesn’t mention, is one very famous American, but one who isn’t very well-known as possibly being the originator of the population concerns issue. I mean none less that Benjamin Franklin, who published his Observations Concerning The Increase Of Mankind  in 1751. This was almost 50 years before Malthus published his Essay On The Principle Of Population  [1798]. And Franklin was in fact quite right in his prognoses about the growth of the American population. His convictions were of course far less radical than those of his successors. Franklin closed his pamphlet with the somewhat annoyed observation that

the number of purely white people in the world is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes are generally of what we call a swarthy complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English make the principal body of white people on the face of the earth. I could wish their numbers were increased.

And while we are, as I may call it, scouring our planet, by clearing America of woods, and so making this side of our globe reflect a brighter light to the eyes of inhabitants in Mars or Venus, why should we in the sight of superior beings, darken its people? Why increase the sons of Africa, by planting them in America, where we have so fair an opportunity, by excluding all blacks and tawneys, of increasing the lovely white and red? But perhaps I am partial to the complexion of my Country, for such kind of partiality is natural to Mankind. [3]

So it seems that Franklin thought that the planets Mars and Venus are populated too, albeit with “superior beings”. It’s interesting to note that these convictions were also prevalent in the early Theosophical teachings. And for instance Isaac Newton also thought that the Sun habors life, deep inside. Or do they only mean this metaphorically?  But superior beings is just what they always have been planning to become, out of their eugenical systems they have been implementing for almost two centuries now. For more on Franklin and perfection and Progress, see the FUNDAMENTAL PHRASEOLOGY.


If we then return to the New York Times article written by Maggie, we learn that she thought that

the results of the intelligence tests, the menace of indiscriminate immigration, the fertility of the unfit and the increasing burden upon the healthful and vigorous members of American society of the delinquent and dependent classes, together with the growing danger of the abnormal fecundity of the feeble-minded, all emphasize the necessity of clear-sightedness and courageously facing the problem and the possibilities of birth control as a practical and feasible weapon against national and racial decadence.

Maggie was often horny and therefore frequently banged all sorts of men she knew. Even some of her family members called her a nymphomaniac. One of them was the equally promiscuous Herbert George Wells. They were very close for many years and often met in apartments and hotels to get funky. Wells wrote the introduction to Maggie’s magnum opus, The Pivot Of Civilization  [1922]. We’ve of course already seen our Fabian friend’s true colors in THE BOREDOM OF SKEPTICISM, but in his book Anticipations  [1901] he even went a step further. In this non-fiction book he told us very much about the long-term agenda of the NWO. At the end of the book, as soon as the World State and New Republic would be complete, he asks himself some rhetorical questions:

And how will the New Republic treat the inferior races? How will it deal with the black? how will it deal with the yellow man? how will it tackle that alleged termite in the civilized woodwork, the Jew? Certainly not as races at all. It will aim to establish, and it will at last, though probably only after a second century has passed, establish a world-state with a common language and a common rule. All over the world its roads, its standards, its laws, and its apparatus of control will run.

And for the rest, those swarms of black, and brown, and dirty-white, and yellow people, who do not come into the new needs of efficiency? Well, the world is a world, not a charitable institution, and I take it they will have to go. The whole tenor and meaning of the world, as I see it, is that they have to go. So far as they fail to develop sane, vigorous, and distinctive personalities for the great world of the future, it is their portion to die out and disappear. [5]

As you can read in INDECENT ATMOSPHERE, none less than Charles Galton Darwin, the grandson of the famous Charles Darwin, agreed with Wells that as soon as some sort of world government and World State has been implemented, about 90% of the world population is rendered unnecessary or unwanted. Those stupid profane masses will not know what to do with all that free time a completely automated society automatically brings.

For the naïve people who think that Wells’ writings are just ancient ramblings of a long-forgotten fool, I want to point you to the 2008 article Discovering The Future, by an expert on Wells of the World Futurist Society. Wells is seen as the founder of Futurism, which is a field that was especially started for the advancement of the NWO-Agenda. Futurist Paul Crabtree was really scratching his head because of the unbelievable accuracy of Wells’ prophetic books. Speaking about Anticipations, yes, the one quoted above, we learn that Wells

achieved an overall predictive success rate of 60%–80%. Many of these predictions were specific and detailed enough to preclude guesswork and luck as explanations for his success. Though he had a few misses, mostly in terms of predicting social and demographic changes, his accomplishment must nonetheless be judged as an amazing achievement and one that begs for further investigation into how he managed it. [6]

Yeah, how did he manage it? How, how, how? Mr. Crabtree of course has to tread carefully with speculating about Wells’ very high success rate, because one’s just one tinfoil hat away from being called a cook, crank or even worse: a conspiracy theorist! Because as we’ve learned in DIVINITY DEFERRED: al conspiracists are paranoid. Why? Dunno. Because the scientists say so…


So we now know Wells wasn’t particularly the “benevolent social democrat” some people want you to believe. But Maggie was, you say? She had such a lovely smile!



The clipping on the right is from the Schenectady Gazette of April 7, 1923.[7] Maggie held a big meeting in New York that attracted a large audience. The article quotes her speech, so this complete text is all literally said by our sweetheart.


The remarks on H.G. Wells only become crystal clear when you just have read his closing of Anticipations, because that’s what she’s actually talking about. We now learn what exactly happened when she “circled the globe giving lectures”, as the propaganda-piece I’ve cited in the intro tells us.  Our Maggie had been travelling the wide wide world, and darn, she just had to conclude buddy Wells was right! Everywhere she went she saw them! The “unfit” who were “swarming with cramped meaningless lives”. It didn’t really matter what skin color or ethnicity they had at all, because she thought all were mere “waste of human life”.  Are they?












Now that we’ve established who Maggie Macabre really was, let’s now venture a bit into her acquaintances. How does she fit into the overall NWO-agenda? On December 8, 1920, Maggie held a speech at Hotel Commodore. She preached that

Birth Control will save the world from another and more devastating holocaust such as the great war which has left a continent in one vast stretch of want and misery. Enlightened minds every-where are seeing this, while the less awakened among the populations in all nations are speedily recognizing this great fact.

After six months study abroad of various countries from the point of view of birth control, I have returned with a stronger conviction than ever of the work we must do, of the responsibility that rests upon the shoulders of the American women engaged in furthering the ideals of humanity, of a better, stronger civilization, if we ever hope to attain that international reconstruction that will establish world peace. [8]

As I already noted in BORN FOR BATTLE and CLOSE TO PERFECTION, the occurrence of a massacre that was ‘worthy’ the name of a holocaust had to be incorporated into the World Wars, in order to complete the alchemical process. In ADAPT AND DIE you can read that even in 1905 Andrew Carnegie was already hinting at the possibility they might need another holocaust or two before world peace would finally be in their grasp. The end justifies the means, it always has.

We know sleep-over SangerMAGGIE_slee wasn’t equipped with the highest of moral standards, but when reading this clipping from the Michigan newspaper Watervliet Record from February 22, 1924, many liberal and feminist hearts will be shattered. It seems the powerwoman had been married secretly to one of those terrible Big Oil magnates, called James Noah Slee.[9] Isn’t there anything Socialist that those guys from Big Oil won’t finance? Maggie herself did start out being somewhat Socialist, as she for instance said in a speech at Fabian Hall in 1915:

Tho I was rocked in the cradle of Socialism—for my father was one of the early pioneers of Socialist thought in USA yet with my nursing experience among women—I could see the great undermining & weakening of that class both physically & mentally through ignorance of the care of their own bodies & especially the physiological functioning of the sex generative organs. [10]

But, since the grass is always greener at the other side, and because there was a lot more money to be gleaned over there, Maggie drilled herself a new oil well. One study on Sanger and her high-ranking hubby tells us that

Slee was 20 years older than Sanger and had been president of the 3-in-1 Oil Company, makers of the product that almost every American at the time kept on hand to grease typewriters, bicycle chains, and sewing machines. Sanger had been separated from her first husband 7 years when she met Slee. In 1922, she finally divorced William Sanger and married the crusty aristocratic Slee. Slee gave Sanger all the money she wanted for her cause. She and her husband now owned their own company to design and market birth control devices.

By 1925, more than 1000 doctors from around the world sought admission to Sanger’s annual birth control conference held in New York City. British economist John Maynard Keynes, as well as Norman Thomas, W.E.B. Du Bois, Upton Sinclair, and Bertrand Russell attended. The birth control movement was clearly gaining visibility in the US and spreading quickly around the world. [11]

Another biographer, Madeleine Gray, tells us about Slee that

he had worked his way up from a penniless boy to a millionaire. He was president of the Three-In-One Oil Company, and hopefully, the “rich widower” Margaret for years had dreamed would come along and solve her financial problems. Unfortunately, however, Slee wasn’t a widower, he had a wife. Worse, his wife was Mary Roosevelt West Slee, of impeccable social standing but few other charms. [12]

So Maggie only married this man for his money. Poor Slee: no honey and no money. . .

The very good British researcher Michael Barker has also noted that Maggie and her circle of acquaintances were quite overtly financed by the Capitalist establishment, as most radicals always have been, to be honest. They are not really there to help the lower classes or the oppressed, but to destroy them, in the long run. In Barker’s 2010 study Planned Parenthood For Capitalists, we read that the

Planned Parenthood Federation of America serves a critical role in contemporary society, not as a harbinger of charity and health, but instead as an integral humanitarian tool in capitalism’s war against life. This blunt description runs counter to this group’s liberal self-image as a trusted, informed, and passionate advocate for reproductive health worldwide, and most likely does not reflect the ideological proclivities of a large number of their well-meaning supporters.

Upon forming Planned Parenthood, Sanger, whose intellectual origins lay in the anarchist movement, was befriended by a soon-to-be long-time supporter of her work, Juliet Rublee, the wife of George Rublee — a powerful individual who served as a legal adviser to both the Wilson and FDR administrations. Juliet, it seems, established Sanger’s “legitimacy with a large network of powerful and wealthy individuals in New York, Washington, and Chicago”.

During the Depression however, Margaret….. “stepped up her efforts to accommodate the new circumstances [at her Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau] by replacing the volunteer women who had previously assisted her as fund-raisers with a weightier board of directors, which included the wives of some of New York’s best known and wealthiest industrialists and financiers like J. P. Morgan, William K. Vanderbilt, Thomas Lamont, and Otto Kahn.” […] “Most significantly, perhaps, Margaret carefully cultivated Arthur Packard, who was by then the senior and most influential member of the Rockefeller charitable staff and could generally be relied on for small bequests whenever asked. Packard took Margaret’s side in almost all of the disputes that arose among birth control factions in the 1930s.” [13]

Please compare this with my findings in INDECENT ATMOSPHERE to see that most of what’s nowadays euphemistically called the ‘Liberal’ movement has always been controlled by the Capitalist establishment. They just have to choose appealing front-people who say the right things on the right time; it always works. More on Otto Kahn can be found in WISE TO IGNORE.


Another well-documented NWO-researcher, Will Banyan, also made the connection between the Rockefeller Foundation and Sanger. In his essay The Invisible Man Of The New World Order: Raymond B. Fosdick he identified his main protagonist as the intermediary person between them. He tells us that according to

Collier and Horowitz, it was Fosdick who had ‘first alerted Junior to Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood movement and the importance of birth control in general’. Fosdick had apparently discussed the matter with another Rockefeller philanthropic acolyte, Beardsley Ruml, then director of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Fund, in 1925. Ruml had agreed – with what must have been Fosdick’s suggestion – they should ‘push the Birth Control Movement in all appropriate ways.’ Later, in 1931, just prior to Junior giving Sanger a $5000 grant, Fosdick had written to him calling the population problem ‘one of the great perils of the future.’ More funding for Sanger was to come from Junior and his sons, though anonymously, and from the BSH from the 1920s through to the 1940s. [14]

This information can be complemented a bit. Therefore we return to biographer Madeline Gray, who provides more detail on Maggie’s whining for money:

A few weeks later, she was asking the Watumill Foundation for more expense money for her international work She kept begging the Rockefeller Foundation to increase its twenty-five-thousand-dollar annual grant, as well as the Brush Foundation its thirteen-thousand dollar grant, and the Doris Duke Foundation its five-thousand-dollar grant.

Meanwhile she continued her own fund raising When John D Rockefeller III was In Tucson, she gave a dinner in his honor so that she could casually bring up the subject of her cause. Dorothy McNamee warned her that he was a teetotaller and might be offended if she served liquor. “I always serve liquor at my parties, and I make no exception,” she replied. She seated him at her right hand and so charmed him that before he left he wrote her a check for one hundred seventy-five thousand dollars. “That’s more like it,” she exclaimed after he had gone, waving the check about. [15]

That had to be a helluva, ehm, job to achieve that, in such a short notice! After browsing through Maggie’s Birth Control Reviews, I think it might also have been Harry Emerson Fosdick, the brother of Raymond, who influenced the Rockefellers. I’ve added a clipping below of one of his fiery speeches from 1928.[16]  He uses quite similar words as Raymond did, but he was the preacher, the orator in the family as far as I know.


And so we once again see the underlying theme of aspiring to outdo God, of becoming their own gods: Builders.  Through science, through the manipulation of genetics, and through the literal control of life and death. I presume this might just be the number 1 rule for being a god. Because without this basic skill one would never be accepted in the godly Pantheon.

In 2014 it also became known that Sanger was member of the advisory board of the Euthanasia Society of America. A scanned version of a 1952 letter was published.[17] And as the closing example of my Sanger-legacy I’ve chosen the newspaper article below. It’s from the Daily Argus of January 29, 1949.[18] At the time it was written it was not “the American Way”, but oh boy, times have changed, haven’t they?


It tells us about the connection of two seemingly harmless implementations in the healthcare system of Nazi Germany. The practice of euthanasia was introduced, which on its basic tenets of course certainly isn’t bad. If it’s only implemented on the worst cases and thoroughly discussed with all people concerned, and only after a written agreement by the dying patients, obtained when the patient was fully conscious. Then few people would object such a system, I presume. But this is in reality almost impossible to implement and abide by, because every case is so different and the possibilities for abuse are legion.

But the most important thing Dr. Jost tells us, is the fact that the vigorous implementation of “some form of compulsory sickness insurance system of medical care” was the catalyzer for the proverbial nail in the coffin of sanity and the lives of a helluva lot of people. And as the article makes quite clear; the synthesis between these two factors lead inevitably to the eradication of the “useless eaters”. And by thinking that this won’t ever happen in our highly acclaimed 21st century Western society would only really prove that we still haven’t evolved one bit since then. Are we even trying?




[1]  New York Times, April 8, 1923

[2]  William C. Roberts – ‘The Pill’ And Its Four Major Developers
[Baylor University Medical Center; 2015]

[3]  Benjamin Franklin – Observations Concerning The Increase Of Mankind
[Tarrqtown, New York; 1918. Org: 1751]

[4] —–

[5] H.G. Wells – Anticipations  [1901] / p. 316, 317

[6]  Paul Crabtree – Discovering The Future  [World Futurists Society; 2008]

[7]  Schenectady Gazette, April 7, 1923

[8]  Margaret Sanger – Hotel Commodore Speech  [December 8, 1920]

[9]  Watervliet Record, February 22, 1924.

[10]  Speech at Fabian Hall, 5 July 1915

[11]  William C. Roberts – ‘The Pill’ And Its Four Major Developers
[Baylor University Medical Center; 2015]

[12]  Madeline Gray – Margaret Sanger Biography  / p. 166

[13]  Michael Barker – Planned Parenthood For Capitalists  [Swans; March 22, 2010]

[14]  Will Banyan – The Invisible Man Of The New World Order; Raymond B. Fosdick  [2008]

[15]  Madeline Gray – Margaret Sanger Biography  / p. 429, 430

[16]  Birth Control Review, January 1928


[18]  Daily Argus, January 29, 1949