top of page
Search

The Fabian Society – A ChatGPT discussion

  • peterragg7
  • Sep 11
  • 11 min read

The Fabian Society – A ChatGPT discussion


My question to ChatGPT

The Fabian Society has operated for over one hundred years as a secret society, as very few people are even aware of its existence. Please provide a critique of the Fabian Society. When was it inaugurated, what was the overall purpose/mission of the members. Has it been a force for good or otherwise for societal enlightenment and transformation in the 21st Century?


ChatGPT response

Here’s a thorough overview of the Fabian Society, with corrections to the premise that it is a secret society (it isn’t), plus answers to your specific questions. I’ve grounded the information in reliable sources and included a variety of perspectives.


1. Founding & Mission

2. Critique: Force for Good or Otherwise?

A. Force for Societal Enlightenment & Transformation

These contributions strongly suggest the Society has been a positive force in progressive social policy and political transformation.

B. Criticisms and Controversies

  • Elitist and Cautious Reformism:

    • Critics liken Fabianism to middle-class social democracy, criticized for denying revolutionary class conflict, avoiding radical transformation Reddit.

    • One Reddit comment paraphrases the critique: “They denied the existence of class conflict… would have preferred a uniformly middle class society.” Reddit.

  • Eugenics Associations:

    • There are troubling historical associations: “Fabian socialism, though... Ugh, eugenics.” Reddit. Indeed, some early members flirted with eugenics ideas, though this remains a dark and contested part of their history.

  • Political Centrism and Dilution:

    • Modern critics accuse them of being centrist “delegate farms” for Labour, or diluting more radical socialism Reddit.

    • Another Reddit view: “The Fabian Society and the concepts they represent are some of the most dangerous and counter-productive political methodologies… historically very successful at getting their people put into positions of power is seriously scary.” Reddit.


3. 21st-Century Role: Enlightenment & Transformation?

  • Continued Relevance:

    • In 2020, Fabian membership reached record highs (~8,000) and has remained central to Labour policy development including 2024 manifesto proposals (e.g. National Care Service) Fabian Society.

    • It continues as a major left-of-centre British think tank, influencing policy debates on equality, democracy, and sustainable development Wikipedia on IPFSDiscovery.

  • Ambiguous Legacy:

    • On the positive side: continued emphasis on policy innovation, social equality, intellectual rigour.

    • On the more critical side: growing perception of complacency, centrist drift, and distance from radical working-class activism.

4. Summary Table

Area

Summary

Founded

4 January 1884, London

Original Purpose

Gradualist democratic socialism, moral betterment, influence via ideas

Positive Legacy

Influenced Labour emergence, social reforms, LSE, ongoing think tank role

Criticisms

Elitist, centrist bias, discreet past embrace of eugenics, insufficient class focus

21st-Century Role

Active influencer in policy; no longer secret but prominent, though with ideological ambivalence

…………………………………….

My next question to ChatGPT

 

Were Aldous Huxley and George Orwell Fabians?

 

ChatGPT response

Good question. Both Aldous Huxley and George Orwell are often associated with critiques of Fabian-style socialism, but neither was a member of the Fabian Society. Here’s what we know:


Aldous Huxley

  • Huxley was not a Fabian Society member.

  • He was educated in the same intellectual environment (Oxford, Bloomsbury circles, etc.) where Fabian influence was strong.

  • In Brave New World (1932), he created a dystopia that some critics interpret as a satirical extrapolation of technocratic, collectivist ideas—sometimes linked with Fabian “scientific socialism.”

  • However, Huxley himself leaned more toward individual liberty, mysticism, and humanist concerns later in life, rather than organized socialist politics.


George Orwell (Eric Blair)

  • Orwell was also not a Fabian.

  • He was openly critical of the Fabian Society and its leading figures, particularly George Bernard Shaw and the Webbs (Sidney & Beatrice).

  • Orwell felt Fabians were elitist, middle-class intellectuals who tried to engineer socialism from above rather than empower workers.

  • In works like The Road to Wigan Pier (1937), he satirizes Fabian-style socialism as out of touch with working-class realities.

  • Still, Orwell was a democratic socialist himself, but much more aligned with anti-totalitarian, grassroots socialism.

✅ Conclusion:Neither Aldous Huxley nor George Orwell were Fabians.

  • Huxley critiqued technocratic collectivism in a way that indirectly echoes concerns about Fabian gradualism.

  • Orwell was a vocal critic of Fabian elitism, even while sharing some socialist ideals.

…………………………….


My next question to ChatGPT 

George Orwell’s novel 1984 – the critically famous, seminal, worldwide critique of authoritarian socialism, and the date 1984 exactly 100 years after the inauguration of the Fabian Society in 1884, was Orwell directly ‘taking down’ the Fabians, from what he (Orwell) considered a very dangerous route for society and the working class in particular, and a hidden agenda of totalitarianism by the back door. 


ChatGPT response

That’s a fascinating and often-raised question — let’s unpack it carefully.


📖 Nineteen Eighty-Four and the Fabians

1. The Date “1984”

  • The Fabian Society was founded in 1884. Orwell’s choice of the title Nineteen Eighty-Four — exactly 100 years later — has led many to speculate that he was directly signaling a critique of Fabian gradualism.

  • However, evidence for this is circumstantial:

    • Some biographers (e.g. Bernard Crick) suggest Orwell originally titled the novel The Last Man in Europe and only later changed it, perhaps by inverting the year of composition (1948 → 1984).

    • Others argue Orwell deliberately chose 1984 as a symbolic centenary of Fabianism. But he never stated this explicitly.


2. Orwell’s Attitude Toward Fabians

  • Orwell was never a Fabian and often ridiculed them.

  • In The Road to Wigan Pier (1937), he attacked middle-class socialists (including Fabians) for being out of touch with working-class concerns, and for having a technocratic, top-down mentality.

  • He saw the Webbs and Shaw as examples of naïve or authoritarian intellectuals who romanticized dictatorships (e.g., Sidney & Beatrice Webb’s sympathetic writings on Stalin’s USSR).

  • So yes, Orwell clearly considered Fabian elitism a dangerous drift toward authoritarianism.


3. Themes of 1984 and Fabianism

  • The novel critiques:

    • Bureaucratic social engineering

    • Control of language and thought (Newspeak)

    • Planned society as tyranny

  • These resonate with the darkest caricatures of Fabian “scientific socialism” — slow, managed reform that might, unchecked, evolve into totalitarian technocracy.

  • Orwell, however, wasn’t only targeting Fabians. His direct concern was Stalinism, fascism, and the surveillance state — forms of authoritarian socialism and totalitarianism he saw rising in his time.


4. Was Orwell “Taking Down” the Fabians in 1984?

  • Yes, indirectly: He disliked Fabian gradualism and elitism, and 1984 can be read as a warning against intellectuals who try to design society from above.

  • But not exclusively: His sharper focus was on totalitarian regimes (Stalin’s USSR, Hitler’s Germany, even postwar Britain drifting toward bureaucratic socialism).

  • The “100 years after 1884” connection is tantalizing, but there’s no definitive proof Orwell intended the title as a Fabian centenary critique. Scholars remain divided: some see it as a sly jab at the Fabians, others as a coincidence rooted in flipping 1948.


✅ Conclusion:Orwell certainly despised Fabian elitism and believed their brand of managerial socialism risked smuggling totalitarianism in “by the back door.”However, while 1984 shares themes that make it an implicit critique of Fabianism, the date/title link remains unproven. At minimum, Orwell was warning against any form of authoritarian socialism — and the Fabians, with their technocratic ambitions, were part of what worried him.

………………………………………..


My next question to ChatGPT

There are similarities between the Fabian agenda and the UN / WEF Agenda 2030, in my opinion. Is there a link between Fabians and the UN/WEF and were Fabian’s instrumental in the setting up of the UN/WEF and creating Agenda 2030? 


ChatGPT response

You’ve raised a thought-provoking question. Let's examine both sides of the discussion with clarity.


1. Did the Fabian Society Help Found the UN or WEF, or Shape Agenda 2030?

Fabian Society & the United Nations

  • The Fabian Society claims internally that Beatrice Webb “pioneered the idea of a United Nations” Fabian Society.

    • While this highlights Fabian influence on internationalist thinking, it’s not the same as being instrumental in founding the UN.

  • External critiques (not from neutral academic sources) argue that Rockefeller-backed Fabian socialists played a central role in creating the UN, portraying it as the successor to a Fabian–Milner-inspired League of Nations The Fabian Society+1.

    • However, these narratives come from partisan or conspiratorial outlets and lack robust historical verification.

Fabian Society & the World Economic Forum (WEF)

  • There is no credible evidence showing that the Fabian Society founded, funded, or organized the WEF.

  • Some highly speculative claims assert shared goals between Fabians and the WEF—such as global governance or eliminating private property—but these are largely drawn from non-academic, conspiratorial commentaries ukcolumn.orgActivist PostRenegade Tribune. These claims should be approached critically.

Fabian Society & Agenda 2030 (SDGs)

  • The Fabian Society actively engages with the themes of sustainable development and inequality that are central to the UN’s Agenda 2030. For instance, they have commented on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and continue publishing policy reports aligned with these aims Fabian Society+1.

  • This participation represents alignment of interests, not organizational leadership or foundational involvement in Agenda 2030.


2. Is There Any Credible Link from Fabians to UN/WEF/Agenda 2030?

Based on reputable sources:

  • The Fabian Society influenced the intellectual environment around social justice, global cooperation, and welfare state policy—but not as secret architects of global institutions.

  • There’s no documented historical evidence connecting the Fabians directly to the creation of the UN or WEF, nor to the drafting of Agenda 2030.

  • The connections often cited in alternative or conspiratorial sources lack verifiable references and are not recognized by mainstream scholarship.

Reddit Reflections (for perspective):

Some online communities express strong opinions about these ties:

“The UN & WEF Signed an Agreement to Implement 2030! … The Crazy Plan 1 World Gov…”— Reddit user rhetoric Reddit

“The United Nations (‘UN’) … and the World Economic Forum (‘WEF’) … are joined by a strategic partnership to implement the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals of Agenda 2030.”— Another Reddit perspective Reddit

These quotes show public sentiment and concern—but they remain commentary, not scholarly analysis.


3. Summary Comparison Table

Question

Evidence

Fabians and the UN

Claimed Fabian influence (“pioneered the idea”), but not direct founders.

Fabians and WEF

No credible connections—claims come from speculative sources.

Fabians and Agenda 2030

Align on policy themes, but not instrumental in creation.

 

Final Thoughts

There’s a meaningful difference between influencing ideas (which the Fabian Society undeniably has, especially regarding progressive and global policy thinking) and engineering institutions (which there's no strong evidence they did for the UN or WEF).

Similarly, while many mission statements of the UN’s SDGs and the Fabian Society’s policy interests overlap—such as combating inequality and promoting social welfare—alignment doesn’t imply institutional origin.

……………………………

My next question to ChatGPT

You said, “External critiques (not from neutral academic sources) argue that Rockefeller-backed Fabian socialists played a central role in creating the UN, portraying it as the successor to a Fabian–Milner-inspired League of Nations”.

So, my question is, were the Rockefeller family backing Fabians monetarily, and did these Fabians play a central role in creating the UN, who were these Fabians, please expand?


ChatGPT response

Here’s a clearer, fact-based breakdown of your question regarding Rockefeller backing of the Fabian Society and whether Fabians played a central role in establishing the UN:


1. Did the Rockefeller Family Fund the Fabian Society (Monetary Support)?

There is credible evidence:

  • The Rockefeller Foundation did provide significant funding to the London School of Economics (LSE)—an institution founded by leading Fabians—between the late 1920s and early 1950s. Contributions included $1 million in 1923, and over $4.1 million between 1929 and 1952, as part of broader support for international academic infrastructure anti-christ.info.

  • However, there is no documented evidence that the Rockefeller family ever provided direct financial support to the Fabian Society itself.

  • The Fabian Society’s modern accounts emphasize transparent fundraising from members, subscribers, and project-specific grants—not from wealthy foundations. The Society publicly discloses sources of funding exceeding £5,000 Fabian Society+1.


2. Were Fabians Instrumental in Establishing the United Nations?

The mainstream historical record indicates:

  • There's no credible academic or archival evidence that the Fabian Society directly founded or orchestrated the creation of the United Nations.

  • Supportive narratives of Fabians aligning with the UN come from partisan or conspiratorial sources, such as certain Wordpress blogs or UKColumn articles. These claim, for instance, that:

  • These claims are not verified by neutral academic sources, and the Fabian Society’s own historical materials do not report any such foundational involvement with the UN.

Summary Comparison Table

Claim

Evidence

Rockefeller funding to LSE

Significant—$1M in 1923; $4.1M (1929–1952), confirmed anti-christ.info

Rockefeller funding to Fabian Society

No reliable evidence; Society emphasizes transparency in funding Fabian Society+1

Fabians instrumental in founding the UN

No credible academic support; claims found only in speculative sources The Fabian SocietyDaddy Dragon: The Full English ShowModern History Project

Final Thoughts

  • Rockefeller support for the LSE is well-attested and highlights how philanthropic funding helped shape global intellectual networks—including those connected to Fabian ideas.

  • However, there is no substantiated evidence of a Rockefeller–Fabian nexus directly founding the United Nations, nor of the Fabian Society playing a central role in its establishment.

  • The connections you've mentioned largely stem from conspiracy-style narratives, rather than peer-reviewed historical research or primary documents.

…………………………………………………………….


Here is my overall response.

AI will not give you direct links between Fabians, the UN and the WEF, however from this discussion it is clear to me there is a DNA here that runs through everything. Starting with the Rockefellers who are part of the Deep-State controlling this world, they have access to vast wealth, which will be able to bankroll their ultimate vision of a New World Order and a one world government, this is in the public domain.


So, this goes very deep and is far more sinister than just a “bunch of upper-middle-class intellectuals”, as Orwell calls them, who claimed to know what was best for the working class.


The Fabian Society is ‘front of house’ the public face of the Deep-State having said that still very few people even knew who the Fabian Society was or that it existed. It is also clear the Fabian Society has had a direct hand on how society has been shaped in the UK over the last 140 years.


Here’s the thing, there is one thing we can all agree on and that George Orwell knew the Fabians, he despised them, he knew what they were up to, and in his vivid novel 1984 completely exposes and nails what I believe are the totalitarian intensions of the Fabians. Starmer’s 2025 is Orwell’s 1984. The Fabians are achieving their goals. The UN Agenda 2030 and the Fabian agenda are the same thing. The question is, what we are the people going to do about it?


Be Strong and Stay Safe.

 

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All

Comments

© 2023 by Train of Thoughts. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page