by Iain Davis
Public outcry following the Nazi's atrocities compelled the parasite class to continually rebrand eugenics, often by obscuring it within other causes. In climate change, as with COVID 19, they found an opportunity to remodel the world as they wished. Always searching for an existential threat with which to terrorise the population into acceptance of their global governance, human induced global warming suited their purposes perfectly.
In 1991 the Club of Rome published the First Global Revolution [35]. In it they revealed how they resolved the eugenicists sales pitch problem:
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap....namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
A global threat, defined by the science they selectively funded and controlled, one requiring not only global governance but literal population control through behaviour change, was a parasite class eugenicist's dream come true. Unfortunately for the rest of us, not only were their beliefs about population potentially lethal they were completely wrong. The last thing any of us need to solve the alleged climate crisis is centralised global governance and GPPP stakeholder capitalism.
We undoubtedly face "global issues" requiring "global solutions," but rather than working together, each of us acting in our own best interests, utilising the vast span of human knowledge, experience and expertise to address our problems, we are instead allowing a tiny clique of unimaginably wealthy individuals to dictate those solutions to us.
The population control eugenicists in the Club of Rome, and their salesmen like Paul Ehrlich, were and are talking nonsense. Not only does eugenics fail scientifically, the planet is neither overpopulated nor facing a population crisis. At least not the one described by the GPPP.
We should have figured this out, but propaganda and dezinformatsiya are powerful weapons. Ehrlich predicted that the 1980’s would see 4 Billion people starve to death and that England wouldn’t exist by 2000. These are just a couple of examples of the doom laden soothsaying he, and all the other eugenicists, consistently engage in. In terms of being almost perfectly incorrect he is one of the few "scientists" who can rival Neil Ferguson.
Suspecting that they might be talking out of their hats, the experimental psychologist, business economist and statistician Julian Simon [36] thought he would do something the world's MSM, the scientific orthodoxy and political class were incapable of. He checked the data to see if there was any basis for the Ehrlich's, and other population bomb mythologists, claims.
He discovered that there was no evidence. In The Ultimate Resource Simon used extensive economic and statistical analysis to clearly demonstrate that human ingenuity and scarcity in a free market (supply and demand) combined to make population growth the driver of resource utilisation. The Ehrlich’s view of human beings, as little more than a drain on precious natural resources, entirely overlooked an inconvenient truth (from a eugenicist's perspective.)
Human ingenuity is the fountain of all scientific, technological and social advancement [37]. The more people there are, the greater the talent pool. The more scientists, engineers, philosophers, teachers, doctors, academics, farmers, nurses and labourers that exist, the higher the productivity and greater the efficiency.
Population growth, far from being the harbinger of doom, has consistently been the catalyst for economic development and technological advancement. It is also a self-regulating mechanism and nothing to be in the least bit concerned about. The problem is not the number of people, it is their deliberately restricted access to resources.
For example [38], since 1970 the population of India has grown from 550 million to around 1.2 billion today. Yet, until the pseudopandemic [39], famine had reduced, millions had been lifted out of poverty, the middle class expanded significantly and life expectancy increased from 49 to 65 in the same period.
This trend has been reflected globally. Between 1960 and 2016 the global population more than doubled. Yet we saw less hunger, less disease, less poverty, improved access to education, higher standards of public health, immense technological innovation and an expanding global economy. The pseudopandemic was designed to end this trend.
It is worth revisiting the wise words of George Carlin [40]:
"They want obedient workers. Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shitty jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits."
The parasite class stakeholder capitalists do not want a well-educated, invigorated population demanding social and political change. They particularly do not want them to have unfettered access to the global commons they consider to be rightfully theirs.
However, from humanity's standpoint it is antithetical to the concept of social progress to deliberately limit available human and other resources. In her 1965 work The Conditions of Agricultural Growth [41] Danish economist Ester Boserup demonstrated, quite literally, that necessity drove technological innovation and efficiency.
Like Malthus, Boserup's focus was upon agriculture and she presented the data which showed that as the Earth's population grew it produced more food through better utilisation of land and improved farming techniques. Boserup demonstrated that, contrary to the population control lie, the human population was not a resource cost.
Boserup and Simon were right, the Ehrlichs and Malthus were wrong. When Malthus formulated his hypothesis the global population was approximately 800 million. Today it stands at 7.9 billion. Overpopulated by more than 5 billion people, according to the Ehrlichs. However, food production has continually outstripped population growth.
According to the World Bank [42] in 2015 food loss and waste (FLW) was estimated to be around 30% of the global food supply, equating to 1.3 billion metric tonnes per year. Yet by 2019 the UN’s annual Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) review [43] estimated that an additional 60 million people had suffered food scarcity since 2014, with more than 690 million people undernourished.
You would imagine that it would be patently obvious that the problem was not food production but rather distribution. We aren't incapable of producing the food the global population needs but rather have allowed stakeholder capitalist to protect a rigged commodity market to garner profit from tax payer subsidy and waste.
Having identified the FLW problem, people dying from starvation and malnutrition was not the first problem that sprang into the minds of the World Bank:
"FLW is a widespread issue, posing a challenge to food security, food safety, the economy, and environmental sustainability......It strongly contributes to climate change because greenhouse gases are emitted during food production and distribution activities, and methane is released during the decay of wasted food."
The World Bank did not see FLW as a missed opportunity to feed those in need. They saw is as a carbon cost which threatened sustainable development.
For the World Bank to consider FLW an issue of economic concern is expected, but for them to view it primarily a problem of security, sustainability and global warming suggests an ideological commitment to these concepts rather than any practical prioritisation of need. There is further reason to suspect this is the case.
The 2015 high level plenary on Millennium Goals led to the U.N General Assembly Agenda 2030 resolution called "Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [44]. The U.N Stated:
"We are determined to protect the planet from degradation, including through sustainable consumption and production, sustainably managing i
ts natural resources...The scale and ambition of the new Agenda requires a revitalized Global Partnership to ensure its implementation. We fully commit to this. This Partnership will work in a spirit of global solidarity.....bringing together Governments, the private sector, civil society, the United Nations system and other actors and mobilizing all available resources....The task team will initially be composed of the entities that currently integrate the informal working group on technology facilitation, namely....the United Nations Environment Programme, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.....the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Bank."
There are many who believe the climate presents a threat to our existence. However, the alarming projection of the climate scientists, such as the 2000 claim by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia that UK snowfall was a thing of the past [45], or UNEP's claim that there would be 50 million "climate refugees" [46] by 2010, have not materialised.
Regardless of whether or not to you accept anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, the fact is the GPPP (including the World Bank) are leading the development of the new global, carbon neutral, net zero economy. It is manifestly naive not to at least consider the possibility that saving the Earth may not be their entire motivation.
Sources:
[1] - https://www.britannica.com/science/eugenics-genetics/Popular-support-for-eugenics
[2] - https://www.britannica.com/biography/Francis-Galton
[3] - https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-Darwinism
[4] - https://galton.org/essays/1860-1869/galton-1865-her-tal-1-upgrade.pdf
[5] - https://galton.org/books/hereditary-genius/text/pdf/galton-1869-genius-v3.pdf
[6] - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627310001376
[7] - https://www.encyclopedie-environnement.org/en/health/epigenetics-how-the-environment-influences-our-genes/
[8] - https://web.archive.org/web/20200716171821/https://www.thoughtco.com/forced-sterilization-in-united-states-721308
[9] - https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/274/200/
[10] - https://www.corbettreport.com/bigoil/
[11] - https://web.archive.org/web/20200624162404/https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2014/06/25/frederick-osborn-and-planned-parenthood/
[12] - https://www.plannedparenthood.org/
[13] - https://www.bartleby.com/1013/5.html
[14] - https://www.fflnwo.org/donors-to-planned-parenthood.html
[15] - https://web.archive.org/web/20201124184550/https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
[16] - https://www.popcouncil.org/about/timeline
[17] - https://web.archive.org/web/20190619192523/https://kritisches-netzwerk.de/sites/default/files/julian_huxley_-_unesco_-_its_purpose_and_its_philosophy_-_1946_-_60_pages.pdf
[18] - https://www.ippf.org/about-us
[19] - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2973534/pdf/eugenrev00055-0053.pdf
[20] - https://archive.org/details/radiantmotherhoo00stopuoft/page/222/mode/2up
[21] - https://cmfblog.org.uk/2019/05/07/marie-stopes-history-erases-ugly-facts-to-create-a-mythical-feminist-hero/
[22] - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Reichsgesetzblatt_25_Juli_1933.jpg
[23] - https://www.t4-denkmal.de/Aktion-T4
[24] - https://web.archive.org/web/20180727121836/http://www.uvm.edu/~eugenics/primarydocs/orfofhh000068.xml
[25] - https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hsbi20/current
[26] - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19485565.1973.9988017
[27] - https://www.galtoninstitute.org.uk/
[28] - http://www.donellameadows.org/wp-content/userfiles/Limits-to-Growth-digital-scan-version.pdf
[29] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich
[30] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_control
[31] - https://web.archive.org/web/20200824075858/https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PCAAB500.pdf
[32] - https://web.archive.org/web/20210128141240/http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/
[33] - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Brundtland_Report
[34] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gro_Harlem_Brundtland
[35] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_First_Global_Revolution
[36] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Simon
[37] - https://web.archive.org/web/20210321094152/https://www.cato.org/economic-development-bulletin/julian-simon-was-right-half-century-population-growth-increasing
[38] - https://www.thegwpf.com/brendan-oneill-paul-ehrlich-wrong/
[39] - https://web.archive.org/web/20210515135536/https://en.gaonconnection.com/rising-hunger-in-rural-india-food-shortage-security-villages-covid19-coronavirus-ration-lockdown-health-poverty-second-wave/
[40] - https://archive.is/gIWUh
[41] - http://web.mnstate.edu/robertsb/307/Conditions%20of%20Agricultural%20Growth.pdf
[42] - https://web.archive.org/web/20200220190717/https://datatopics.worldbank.org/what-a-waste/global_food_loss_and_waste.html
[43] - https://web.archive.org/web/20200729220651/https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/global-hunger-rising-food-agriculture-organization-report/
[44] - https://undocs.org/A/RES/70/1
[45] - https://web.archive.org/web/20100113183137/https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
[46] - https://web.archive.org/web/20080501091406/http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/fifty-million-climate-refugees-by-2010
Chapter 15 - Sustainable Eugenics
Another unquestioned scientific consensus is that man made global warming (anthropogenic climate change - AGW) is leading us all towards global disaster. Like the pseudopandemic, this is based upon predictive computer models, not the scientific observation of measurable events. Overpopulation is a climate alarm threat, but only according to the models.
If the people promoting global sustainable development have a proven historical commitment to eugenics and population control, perhaps we should question this claimed scientific consensus. If, in addition, sustainable development goals also strengthen their authority and enable those same people to achieve other stated aims we have further grounds for scepticism.
Sustainable Development Goals, to save the planet, apparently also require the Climate Bond Initiative [1] (CBI). This is intended to be a $100 + trillion bond market to invest in “protecting” the global commons. Until very recently worldwide interest rates have been extremely low [2] and yet, at the same time, the CBI was offering between an 8% – 12% yield for venture capitalist stakeholders.
The idea of commodifying nature was first formally proposed by then chairman of Banque Privée, Edmond de Rothschild, at the 4th World Wilderness Conference [3] in 1987. This introduced the Rothschild backed Bank the Global Environment Facility [4] (GEF – named in 1991) initially as a subsidiary, and then later as a partner of the World Bank. Announcing his idea, Edmund de Rothschild said:
“The concept of an international conservation banking program involves all sectors of the human community. Governmental and intergovernmental agencies, the public and private agencies, large charitable foundations, as well as ordinary individuals worldwide. By thinking forward as to how to reach out to the public at large, to every corporate entity throughout the world, to put aside, hopefully tax free, a part of their profits to fund our ecological and environmental protection. This international conservation bank must know no frontiers, no boundaries.”
This was a clarion call to the GPPP to set about the creation a new global economic system. One where investment was measured in terms of its ecological and environmental value. The stakeholder capitalists at the meeting recognised the need to sell this idea to the public. Another delegate, Montreal banker David Lang, suggested the following approach:
“I suggest therefore that this be sold, not through a democratic process, that would ta
ke too long and devour far too much of the funds to educate the cannon fodder, unfortunately, that populates the earth. We have to take almost an elitist program, [so] that we can see beyond our swollen bellies, and look to the future in time frames and in results which are not easily understood, or which can be, with intellectual honesty, be reduced down to some kind of simplistic definition.”
Despite the fact that Mr Lang couldn’t form a coherent statement, his elite intellect enabled him to appreciate the eugenicist sentiments of those gathered. The cannon fodder’s (human beings) existence was unfortunate. David Rockefeller, undoubtedly in full agreement with Lang, was also present at the conference.
This explains why the Rockefellers, staunch eugenicists and arguably the wealthiest oil tycoons in history, are funding the CBI. They are devoted to the so called Green New Deal and pledged $1 billion to fund a sustainable and, of course, inclusive green COVID 19 recovery [5]. Something the world's MSM reported without an ounce of scrutiny or indeed irony.
The man behind the Club of Rome, David Rockefeller, whose brother founded the Population Council, speaking to the Business Council of the United Nations in 1994, said:
"The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident. The rapid and growing exploitation of the world’s supply of energy and water is a matter of deep concern……The United Nations can and should play an essential role in helping the world find a satisfactory way of stabalising the world population."
It must be another, in a never ending succession of extraordinary coincidences, that the people who are the architects of the new global zero carbon economy are also the same people who are devout eugenicists and population control enthusiasts. That many of the same are also the driving force behind the pseudopandemic, the economic outcome of which is almost indistinguishable from the proposed carbon neutral economy, is just another almost unbelievable coincidence.