Yes. Bad guy.

However I would not say Soros is Jewish, he does not follow the religion and I don't agree with Nazi idea of Jews being a race. He is of Hungarian Background, but he was merely born there before he collaborated with Nazis to advance his position. What I mean to say is that he is neither nationalist or patriot, it was merely a place. Just like UK when he almost killed the British pound to make himself rich.

I am not sure he is Marxists though. He seems to have his own idea of the world which he tries to spread via open society foundation. As the name suggests "open society" is one world goverment, run by him and his kind with no restrictions. On top of that he is trans humanist because he want to live forever, no doubt fearing his own mortality. He does not oppose Marixsm or Nazism because he sees his ideas above them as the next stage. That being said, he does not shy away from using both the methods of Communism and or National Socialists even if he does not share ideas of nationalism. But whatever it takes to get his way, seems to be his moto.

@Krunoslav Marxism is a jewish religion. As for the "internationalist" that equals Trotsky. I will say he hid in WW2 he didn't collaborate. Giving him the benefit of the doubt as he was young.
However he is now a jewish marxist anti-western anti-family anti-Christian anti-freespeech ect.
His early life has so distorted his perception of the west that he is incapable of making any genuine contribution to modern human society. (You would not put a paranoid sufferer of PTSD and former soldier in charge of defence or nuclear weapons) He is that dangerous.

@LesMahagow "Marxism is a jewish religion"

Could not be further from the truth. But I can guess where this nonsense comes from. I've read it all. Not true. Even if you have not read anything of the origins, the theology itself is night and day, different. Makes zero sense to claim that based on any factual data, it only makes sense for people who adopt another belief. That Jews are behind everything. That idea has also took root and won't go away. Even if it has no basis in reality.

"As for the "internationalist" that equals Trotsky."

How so?

If you mean globalist, that is is not the same as internationalist. Internationalism implies existence of nations not their establishment. Soros's open society is not international its global goverment, or actually in his worldview, its above politics, because he does not expect that this goverment has any elected politicians but instead is ruled by various other "engineers and technocrats ". It is personalized version of technocracy. ink from the 1930's.

There are influences of Communist regimes and nazi regimes in it, in order to achive the goals, but it sees itself above those regimes as something more advanced. Soros, is not Lenin or Mao, or Stalin. He does not read Karl Marx as gospel, but he finds Stalin and Lenin or Mao methods of control useful.

The specialty of Soros is manipulation of financial markets, regime changes, use of NGO's to subvert culture and control media and politicians etc. In that sense some inspiration comes indeed from the methods of Frankfurt School. But I've never found Soros to be intellectual about it or physiological, he is interested in actual control with a simple idea. He calls it open society. The name should give you a clue. Absolute rule by his kind with no limits. And he despises national sovereignty, cultural identity,, rule of law , other religions etc. Its just about control and because he is at this point close to end of his life, they are more eager to push for trans humanism, fearing their own mortality.

The Evil Twins Of Transhumanism And TechnocracyPosted By: Patrick Wood July 11, 2021

The dots between Technocracy and Transhumanism are easily connected once its understood that both sit atop the pseudo-science religion of Scientism, which posits that science is god and scientists and engineers are its priesthood. This article provides the current framework to understand this nexus. ⁃ TN Editor

Technocracy is to the transformation of society as Transhumanism is to the transformation of the human condition of people who would live in that society.

Both are underpinned by a religious belief known as Scientism that says that science is a god and that scientists, engineers and technologists are the priesthood that translates findings into practice.
It is a fatal error to equate Scientism with science. True science explores the natural world using the time-tested scientific method of repeated experimentation and validation. By comparison, Scientism is a speculative, metaphysical worldview about the nature and reality of the universe and man’s relation to it.

Scientism refutes traditional religious views, morals and philosophy and instead looks to science as the source for personal and societal moral value.

The relationship between Technocracy and Transhumanism can be seen as early as 1933 when Harold Loeb wrote Life in a Technocracy: What It Might Be Like:

“Technocracy envisages another form of domestication, a form in which man may become more than man… Technocracy is designed to develop the so-called higher faculties in every man and not to make each man resigned to the lot into which he may be born… Through breeding with specific individuals for specific purposes… A technocracy, then, should in time produce a race of men superior in quality to any now known on earth…”

Thus, Loeb saw Technocracy (the society) as producing a superior quality of man by applying advanced technology to the human condition.

The Nature Of Technocracy

Formalized in 1932 by scientists and engineers at Columbia University, the movement defined itself in a 1938 edition of its magazine, The Technocrat:

“Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population… For the first time in human history it will be done as a scientific, technical, engineering problem.”
Indeed, Technocracy was an economic system based on science and social engineering. Technocrats were so certain that their scientific approach was so righteous that there would be no need for any political structures whatsoever:

“There will be no place for Politics, Politicians, Finance or Financiers, Rackets or Racketeers… Technocracy will distribute by means of a certificate of distribution available to every citizen from birth to death.”

Today, Technocracy is embodied in the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset and the various United Nations’ manifestations of Sustainable Development: Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda, New Urban Agenda, etc.

The Nature Of Transhumanism

A philosophical mainstay of modern Transhumanism, Max More, defined it in 1990 as:

“…a class of philosophies of life that seek the continuation and acceleration of the evolution of intelligent life beyond its currently human form and human limitations by means of science and technology, guided by life-promoting principles and values.”

The means to the end is ultimately genetic engineering that takes over and speeds up evolution theory to create humanity 2.0.

Since the advent of CRISPR gene-editing technology, Transhumans have saturated universities and private corporations to modify all categories of living things, including humans.

What is preached as the preservation of biodiversity by the United Nations is really the takeover of genetic material, which was noted as early as 1994, just two years after the debut of Sustainable Development and Agenda 21 at the UN Conference on Economic Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janiero, Brazil.

The 1994 book, The Earth Brokers, was written by two principal participants in the Rio process who did not blindly swallow what had just happened. They noted two things about the biodiversity convention that 156 nations of the world adopted:

“The convention implicitly equates the diversity of life – animals and plants – to the diversity of genetic codes, for which read genetic resources. By doing so, diversity becomes something modern science can manipulate… the convention promotes biotechnology as being ‘essential for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.’”

Secondly, they noted that “the main stake raised by the biodiversity convention is the issue of ownership and control over biological diversity… the major concern was protection of the pharmaceutical and emerging biological industries.”

It is little wonder today that the pharmaceutical industry is producing gene therapy shots using genetically modified RNA to transform the body’s immune system. They have been working hard since 1992 to advance the technology needed to hijack the human genome and begin the transformative pathway to Humanity 2.0.

However, it is Technocracy that has used its “science of social engineering” techniques to manipulate twenty-two percent of the world’s population into willingly accepting the transhumans’ gene altering injections.

The Great Reset Embraces Both Technocracy and Transhumanism

It has been noted in many professional journals that the World Economic Forum and its founder/spokesman Klaus Schwab, are promoting both Technocracy and Transhumanism at the same time. In light of this article, this should not be surprising.

The European Academy on Religion and Society (EARS), for instance, wrote that:

“…the highly influential members of the World Economic Forum have a plan for what should come next. It is called ‘The Great Reset’, and it envisions a truly ‘transhumanist’ future for us all… Since mid-2020, the WEF has been promoting its vision for our post-coronavirus future, which they call ‘The Great Reset’. In their view, the pandemic has exposed the weaknesses of our old system, and therefore presents a perfect opportunity to ‘reset’ our world and start anew. What is striking about this plan, which the WEF has condensed into a virus-shaped mindmap, is its implicit endorsement of a philosophy called ‘transhumanism’. (emphasis added)

As initially stated, “Technocracy is to the transformation of society as Transhumanism is to the transformation of the human condition of people who would live in that society.”
In conclusion, the evil twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism, along with their underlying religion of Scientism, need to be recognized for what they are but most importantly, they must be resisted and rejected with every fiber of our being.

[technocracy.news]

Soros, has a personalized slightly modified version of that, he calls it open society, as I've pointed out, but the rest is the where his ideas are most drawn from and people he spends time with. As for Marxism, he draws as the lefty movements do from Hegel’s Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis Model, but who and what is the problem in this, differs from Marxism.

Bottom line is, Marxism is not Jewish religion because people behind it were not followers of Judaism, they did not model it on Judaism, quite the opposite., and any elements of Judaism you might find in Frankfurt School are taken out of its original purpose and context and re-purpused for something else, as is Freud stuff, or Marxism as written by Marx.

@Krunoslav Religion :- I mean it's materialist and atheist but it's followers have a religious fervour. Discounting the disasters and piles of corpses. A cult A religion

@LesMahagow With that I agree. The followers maybe godless, but they are far from irreligious.

Which off course differentiates Marxism or Liberalism, both religions from Judaism. God is replaced with state. We might say its a form of religion of statism with varieties.

"Although there were important differences between . . . totalitarian regimes, they drew from a common well of enthusiasm, and shared such heretical goals (or rather temptations) as fashioning “new men” or establishing heaven on earth. They metabolised the religious instinct." —Michael Burleigh

Liberalism was deeply anti catholic, but favorable to socialism, especially during French revolution. American and English brand of liberalism was skeptical but less hostile to traditional religion. But it did still saw itself as the one true faith, as the enlightened most moral worldview.

Some historians argue that the French people underwent a fundamental transformation in self-identity, evidenced by the elimination of privileges and their replacement by rights as well as the growing decline in social deference that highlighted the principle of equality throughout the Revolution. The Revolution represented the most significant and dramatic challenge to political absolutism up to that point in history and spread democratic ideals throughout Europe and ultimately the world. Throughout the 19th century, the revolution was heavily analysed by economists and political scientists, who saw the class nature of the revolution as a fundamental aspect in understanding human social evolution itself. This, combined with the egalitarian values introduced by the revolution, gave rise to a classless and co-operative model for society called "socialism" which profoundly influenced future revolutions in France and around the world.

“The French Revolution was a new religion. It had “its dogma, the sacred principles of the Revolution—Liberté at sainte égalité. It had its form of worship, an adaptation of Catholic ceremonial, which was elaborated in connection with civic fêtes. It had its saints, the heroes and martyrs of liberty.” At the same time, the French Revolution was also a nationalist movement. The legislative assembly decreed in 1792 that altars should be raised everywhere bearing the inscription: “the citizen is born, lives and dies for la Patrie.” ― Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements

“The Communist Manifesto as political rhetoric has an almost biblical force. Seventy years after Marx’s death, one third of the human race lived under regimes ruled by communist parties which claimed to represent his ideas and realise his aspirations.” ― Eric Hobsbawm, How to Change the World: Marx and Marxism 1840-2011