Jeffrey Epstein, The Splendor and Misery of the Scientific Elite: Abomination, Bestiality, and Dependence on Obscure Philanthropy

Jeffrey Epstein. When at the beginning of 2026, under the Epstein Transparency Act and after much pain and pressure, the DoJ (American Department of Justice) released 3 million documents related to the gray eminence, fraudster, financial muckraker, abuser and serial rapist Jeffrey Epstein, we learned a lot, and a lot is still unclear. At this moment, it is immoral not to write about the relationship between Epstein and science and scientists. Contacts of around 30 scientists and intellectuals were found in his little black book. Epstein himself invested in the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics at Harvard out of personal interests and whims. Some great scientists also received money from him for their research, including George Church from MIT. MIT itself received Epstein's money without checks, and Church later apologized that he did not know who and what Epstein was like.

Intellectual prostitution of the scientific elite with Epstein

A series of thinkers and scientists revolved around Epstein, prostituted and played spiders. Stephen Pinker, Marvin Minski, for some reason Stephen Hawking, Noam Chomsky, Lawrence Krauss, Sam Harris mentioned in the files… just to name a few. Epstein had a sick passion – he was a collector of people. Some collect books, some stamps, some works of art, and Epstein, in addition to works of art, liked to collect living people. Even the dead.

The important thing that no one asks very much is how and why? Why did scientists get so attached to a man who, even at times when his networks of people smuggling and abuse of women, mostly minors and girls, were not known about, a lot was known about the fact that he got rich mysteriously. How could anyone not be repulsed by that? When he worked without a degree as a teacher for rich children at the Dalton School in Manhattan, it was already rumored that he was eccentric and that he had situations with female students that should not happen to a professor. He was already in the story of the Ponzi scheme of fraud with investment funds as a “financial adviser” at Towers Financial Corporation, which imploded in 1993, and who knows how Epstein got away without major consequences.

A man of humble origins – his father was said to have been a very nice and normal man, a gardener as was his mother, a housewife. Working class. The American dream in which an ordinary man becomes an incredibly wealthy upstart, polished and respected. Isn't that strange? Or is that exactly what all these people in his circle admired? “He made it.” He achieved the American dream.

Not a single red light turned on for all these powerful intellectuals about everything that was known about Epstein until then.

Before he was convicted of pimping minors in 2008, Jeffrey Epstein had been present for years in elite academic circles, including Harvard, without any relevant degree, other than brandishing capital of dubious origin. He donated more than 9 million dollars to the university, of which even 6.5 million went to the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics (PED), which was led by the mathematician Martin Nowak. Even after the verdict, Epstein's access to the academic community was not interrupted: he continued to visit this program, and in 2018 alone he did so more than 40 times, while he even had his own office within the program. In addition, during the academic year 2005/2006. In 2010, he was also a Visiting Fellow at Harvard, after donating $200,000 to the Department of Psychology. Money buys everything, even an academic position for a man without a degree. That's if you thought there was nothing worse than Bosnian diplomas bought, college completed in four months and studying in Travnik. After his verdict, the network of donors that Epstein connected with Harvard scientists provided the university with an additional 9.5 million dollars. The Department of Evolutionary Dynamics at Harvard is closed in disgrace in 2021.

A similar pattern was noted at MIT. Epstein donated $525,000 to the MIT Media Lab, and an additional $225,000 to mechanical engineering and quantum computing professor Seth Lloyd. Both donations were made after Epstein's verdict in 2008, and according to the university's internal report, they were processed outside the usual institutional procedures. These cases have raised serious questions about the accountability of academic institutions, the ethics of science funding, and the boundaries that universities set — or don't set — when it comes to the origin of money and the reputation of donors.

In all of this, there are indications that Epstein, who is close to Bannon and Peter Thiel, turned the 4chan platform upside down and turned it into an alt-right headquarters that spewed Qanon, while his associate and whatever he was, Ghislaine Maxwell, fueled the LibDems from Reddit. This, if their influence really existed, stirred up a hitherto unprecedented polarization of society. And things boiled down to the situation we are looking at now – the collapse of political and social values ​​and the complete fascism of society.

Regarding science, Epstein and Maxwell, a special article should be devoted to how Ghislein's father, Robert Maxwell, contributed to the scarcity of current scientific publishing. Maxwell was among the first to show that academic knowledge can be organized as a highly profitable industry, in which publishers retain control over access to papers written and reviewed by scientists without compensation, and then sell them at a high price to universities and research institutions.

Why was this possible with gifts to prestigious scientific institutions?

The USA was fertile ground for all this. One such corrupt speculator didn't even need Mossad or Putin to turn all of America upside down.

The neoliberal crisis of science

We need to talk about the crisis of science in the USA, which has to be prostituted with philanthropic gifts and venture – risky capital for innovation (start-ups and spin-off companies of scientists who turn into entrepreneurs because this is the only way to continue research, so let's remember the patent war over CRISPR technology, and the whole circus around Church's company that “brings mammoths” back to life) because the public budget is weak and hard to come by, and only for some things. The public budget has NASA, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the CDC (Centers for Disease Control), the EPA (Environmental Agency) and a few other organizations.

This public money is redistributed through highly competitive grants, and some of it is for in-house research by these government agencies themselves. You have to be a top-notch scientist to get these grants. Young scientists can only do this if they are in the lab of already established ones, so they work so exhaustingly that in the end they either get the right to found their own lab or inherit it. Some scientists who do important things do not receive support (we remember Kariko and her research on RNA technology) because the institutions declare them unprofitable and degrade them. And primary, basic science is often unprofitable and its profitability and applicability cannot be seen for decades.

Money for basic research is often insufficient and the struggle is great. This is largely the result of neoliberal deregulation and the absence of a real system of taxation of the rich, but they are given the opportunity to donate and be exempt from taxes to causes they believe in. Let's say eugenics. Or longevity, biohacking – anything that occupies their brain at the moment and they see a personal benefit in it. Or reviving the mammoth. AI.

Eugenics at the Heart of Abomination

The aforementioned Harvard Program in Evolutionary Dynamics, a department that Harvard closed in disgrace, was just that – a center for covert eugenics.

Today, technofeudalists, including entrepreneur and venture capitalist Bryan Johnson, who I've written about before regarding his fixation on longevity, and Elon Musk, who likes to reproduce via IVF and select the traits of his offspring, like to dig into IQ, eugenics, and longevity.

And here we return to the monster Epstein. He is the originator and seed of evil of these thoughts and desires.

The man was obsessed with eugenics, Aryanism and had a fixed idea to impregnate as many women as possible and seed the human race with his genes, which are not exceptional in any way. I guess he considered himself as perfect as only a psychopath and sociopath can consider himself. These circles of the rich consider them to be libertarians and true anarchists – morals and laws do not apply to them. They believe that they are emancipated and that they can groom (raise, shape according to their needs) young girls through the processes of traumatization, rape and torture, that they are being exploited, that the girls did not even understand what was happening to them and that they were being abused. This is the team that performs live the works of the Marquis de Sade – Justine and the 120 days of Sodom. Let me remind you, Pietro Pasolini's very traumatic film Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma is a dissection of fascism. As we are now looking at the dissection of Epstein's fascism that has metastasized into the fascism of the Western cultural circle. Chaos that revealed the very moral decline and rot of society. And of the American dream.

The testimonies of traumatized victims of Epstein's abuse on Epstein's island are unlikely to be a fraction of what will be revealed if an investigation into his Zorro Ranch in New Mexico is launched. For now, we only have speculation, including a diary from one of the victims. We don't know what happened at the ranch, but things reek of eugenics experiments. I'm not in a position to comment on something for which I have no evidence or arguments, but it's simply a matter of gut feeling and some pieces of the puzzle.

The fascination with eugenics by people like Epstein — and partly by some of the tech elite (including Musk, Thiel, Karp, Yarvin, and similar circles) — is not new, nor is it accidental. It has deep roots in power, fear, control and misunderstood “scientific rationalism”. This usually adds up to one, rather dark picture. Eugenics promises to control the human future: who is born, who is “worthy”, who is a “better specimen”. According to that, Hawking would neither have been born nor contribute to society as he is.

Epstein was an extreme example: he did not see eugenics as a social policy (let's be clear, this view of eugenics is terrible and there is no place to justify eugenics), but as a private project of elite reproduction, where the rich, “smart” and powerful should leave as many genetic offspring as possible. That's not science — that's biological narcissism.

Some of the technological elites have a view of the world in which intelligence is reduced to measurable tests (IQ, forgetting emotional and social intelligence), success is interpreted as proof of “biological superiority”, and complex social problems are explained by genes, not by inequality, education or policies. It is a reductionist reading of biology — the old, but redressed face of eugenics, only with new words: optimization, upgrade, human enhancement, longevity as the holy grail of eugenics and biohacking of the super rich. Here, inequality, exploitation and colonialism are not a problem or the cause of anything. On the contrary, exploitation is encouraged – from the exploitation of women as objects of sexual excitement and entertainment for the rich, a container for growing babies to the unilateral exploitation of entire nations, through the process of grooming its political elites to agree to the very cheap sale of natural resources. That's what awaits us in this region of ours. 

Eugenics is not a fascination with a “better future”. It is the fear of people's unpredictability, wrapped in the language of science and technology. That is why it is constantly necessary to repeat that it is pseudoscience. To repeat that the intelligence, abilities and value of people are not linearly determined genetically, and that science without ethics very easily becomes a tool of power, not knowledge.

Epstein just invested in evolutionary biology, cognitive sciences, theories of intelligence and gathered public intellectuals around him who prostituted themselves there in order to get a million for a comfortable life. Epstein's likeness was not interested in knowledge for the sake of knowledge, but because he was looking for a scientific authority that would make his ideas “respectable”. When institutions accept it without serious ethical resistance — the border is erased.

In a world where the rich decide what they like to invest in, a creepy Randian utopia (as was Epstein's island and the ranch), they invest in those things in science that could bring them longevity, eternal youth or some other sick interests. Epstein described himself as a scientific philanthropist. And today, a lot of funding is based on the goodwill of philanthropists or foundations of the ultra-rich (often from the conservative side of the spectrum – Koch Institute, Heritage, Cato). If there were regulations, and if the rich were taxed, then the state, provided that it is not clientelist and corrupt, but a truly social state of honest statism, would direct funds into drug research, education and other important things for society.

It's not even that big of a problem that a person without a degree, a dropout, was so involved in academic life. There are people who can contribute to society with their qualities even without a degree. The problem is that Epstein already had a shady past and that wasn't enough of a warning to the intellectual elite and other celebrities not to hang around him.

This social elite as it has now been exposed is an abomination of bestiality and intellectual prostitution. Epstein is both its fruit and its creator. Epstein is a figure who exploited the vanity of people from the intellectual and political elite. If it weren't for them, there wouldn't be him either.