This is the Sunday Special
The Brave New World
Obamacare was designed to deny medicine to those who are of retirement age because they are non-productive members of society. Though thoroughly documented in its intent, it was not executed in the way that the crafters of the policy designed. Then there were the disturbing YouTube videos that surfaced. The media’s policy of nothing to see here swept it all under the rug. Just like loyal old Major (the horse) in Animal Farm. He was kept until he wasn’t able to pull the plow anymore and then the pigs sent him to the glue factory for cash. In your case, maybe soylent green?
Eugenics Defined: The study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable. Developed largely by Sir Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, eugenics was increasingly discredited as unscientific and racially biased during the 20th century, especially after the adoption of its doctrines by the Nazis in order to justify their treatment of Jews, disabled people, and other minority groups.
The piece below was produced anonymously and has been excerpted and blended with my own comments and data. I can’t give due credit to the co-author.
Population control is merely part of resource management where people are just another inconsequential and unremarkable group competing for existence on the big blue marble. Thus, eliminating people saves other resources and makes more available to the remaining elitists who push for population control in the first place. Understanding this history is critical.
The Malthusian and Darwinian ideals gradually gave birth to Social Darwinism and Eugenics, which were widely adopted by the ruling elite. Social Darwinism argued that class divisions were the will of nature and that this form of natural selection, rather than being evil, was necessary. The most extreme version of this ideology, eugenics, appears to have arisen from two key factors:
-The tribal nature of human beings and the tendency to view all other tribes as inferior (the ruling class felt this way towards the poor).
-The advances of society were making it possible for many of the weaker members of society, who previously would have died off, to survive long enough to reproduce and, over time, significantly weaken the gene pool.
Eugenics in turn advocated preventing those who were less “fit” from breeding. This has been responsible for horror upon horror since its inception, and it provided the theoretical foundation for why, among other things, the Nazis forcibly sterilized the mentally ill. In many cases, programs with more immediate results were also implemented.
While it is difficult to estimate precisely, the use of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) has steadily increased and is expected to continue to do so: the CDC estimates its use has “more than doubled” in the last decade. I have also heard numerous reports that since the vaccines have launched, COVID has significantly increased the need for and difficulty of IVF (that being said, at this time I could not locate data directly supporting this contention). For those interested in medicine’s monopolization of the pregnancy process and the tragic harm it creates, The Business of Being Born (which can be viewed online) and Robert S. Mendelsohn’s writings on the subject are two of the best resources I’ve found on the subject.
As best as I can tell, population control measures typically follow one of three approaches:
-Create social changes that discourage having children.
-Introduce an environmental factor that decreases male testosterone and sperm viability.
-Directly sterilize (or give birth control to) women of childbearing age.
-Second Wave Feminism transitioned a significant portion of the population from raising families at home to a sterile existence working outside the home. Second Wave Feminism was essential for our country and corrected many serious injustices towards women, but there is also some evidence to suggest the movement was hijacked to help the upper class by removing women from a motherly role and doubling the workforce. For example a pioneer of this movement, Gloria Steinem who strongly discouraged being a housewife, was also a CIA case officer at one time.
-The societal messages around dating have been shifted from romantic bonding (which produces children) to a hookup culture without intimacy.
-Women are strongly encouraged to pursue a career before having children or a family, which frequently results in them missing the opportunity to do so.
-Previously rare sexual pairings that either cannot or are unlikely to produce children are actively encouraged by the media and corporatocracy.
-Alternatives to relationships, such as computer or video addictions, are strongly encouraged in society.
-Economically, it has become more and more difficult for individuals to afford to have children.
-Having children is labeled as environmentally destructive and hence strongly discouraged.
-Having children is now characterized as a major obstacle to spiritual growth and self-development.
-The widespread support and social validation for having children has gradually diminished.
I have personally observed as the years have gone by, fewer and fewer people are interested in having children, and some combination of the above reasons are typically cited. I also find people who have children have a much deeper sense of happiness than those who do not, despite media messages suggesting the opposite.
The idea of population control or mass extinction for the greater good has also been increasingly observed within the media. Avengers Endgame was the top-grossing film of 2019, and it was so heavily promoted throughout the media that it accomplished the unique feat of almost doubling the revenue of the runner-up. I have often wondered whether this was deliberate on account of the message the movie spread in the months immediately preceding COVID-19 of the need to be evil and eliminate half the population for the “greater good”.
There are also many factors that directly affect fertility. Each of these appears to have followed a gradual progression like the myth of a “boiling frog” where the onset has been too slow for most of the victims to recognize.
At this time, male health is significantly less studied than female health (for example, many recent graduates feel that “transexual medicine” may have had a greater focus in their curriculum than “male health” in their medical school curriculum). It leads to the question of the importance (or lack thereof) of testosterone in males.
There has been a massive, sustained decline in male testosterone levels over the decades (a male’s testosterone levels goes hand in hand with his health and fertility). This decline directly affects male (and to a lesser extent female) health, and numerous integrative physicians have found rectifying it creates profound benefits in a large percentage of their patients. The decline of sperm quality and viability has also been observed, but as it is more difficult to objectively quantify, not as much as data exists to clearly support this trend.
A common means of controlling animal populations is to universally introduce an agent which decreases male fertility (as these tend to be easier to distribute on a large-scale basis than agents which target female reproduction). In addition, a common method of controlling animal behavior is to neuter males, as this reduces their aggression and “disobedience to authority.” (For example, a recent lawsuit was filed by a 16-year-old boy who developed breasts after he was forced to take estrogen in jail to “control his behavior.”) It is hence understandable why those in the ruling class would be open to using similar approaches on the “useless eaters” of the population (many terms for this concept exist, including those originating from the Nazis’ eugenics program).
Many of the factors causing this decline appear to have been deliberately placed in the environment. The most influential are xenoestrogens, artificial chemicals that mimic the characteristics of estrogen and feminize organisms. Alex Jones’s infamous commentary on chemicals that “turn the friggin’ frogs gay,” for example, was a reference to atrazine, a still widely used herbicide, that for over 20 years has been known to create hermaphroditic frogs. For those interested, the eight-hour audiobook, Estrogeneration: How Estrogenics Are Making You Fat, Sick, and Infertile provides an excellent summary of the topic.
Some of the most common xenoestrogens in addition to atrazine (and some other herbicides) include:
-Birth control pills, which are designed to not break down and thus cycle back into the water supply (this is a common problem in areas that reuse waste water, particularly China, where oral contraceptives are widely used).
-Soy (excluding the rare exception where it is fermented like in Miso or Natto), is a food that comprises a significant portion of the food supply. While much less common (but sometimes still) an issue, a similar effect results from lavender products.
-Bisphenol A and S found in many plastics, which constantly contact our bodies and food.
-Phalates (also found in many plastics).
-Parabens (these are uses for fragrances in many cosmetic products).
-DDT and PCBs are highly dangerous mutagenic chemicals. Despite their known toxicity (Monsanto, the initial PCB producer, saw within three years 23 of their 24 researchers develop disfigured faces) it took decades, and in some cases almost a century of activism, to remove them from the market. Massive amounts of these chemicals were produced, and they persist in the environment, accumulate up the food chain (especially via fish), and still affect people today. In addition to being destructive to both humans and wildlife, a good case can be made these chemicals created many of the changes we are still seeing today (such as the decline of male sperm counts).
-Many other factors also influence testosterone levels and fertility. Two of the more interesting examples are metformin, a very commonly used medication for diabetes that has the curious side effect of reducing testosterone (which can be debilitating for older men who are already deficient in testosterone), and the widely used sugar replacement stevia, which has been repeatedly studied for its testosterone reducing and contraceptive properties. This all goes in a full circle as these many of these substances also interfere with metabolism thereby creating obesity, and fat cells via aromatase further perpetuate the cycle by turning testosterone to estrogen.
While male sterilization methods tend to be uniformly administered throughout the environment, due to mammalian biology, female sterilization typically requires more targeted approaches. The only exception I know of to this rule occurred in India in the 1970s, where their prime minister in return for international loans declared martial law and with military force mandated vasectomies, gruesomely sterilizing six million men before being forced to abandon this initiative due to violent male counterprotest (hence why only women are directly targeted for sterilization).
Sterilization through vaccination has long been viewed as the holy grail of population control, as global faith in vaccination allows the covert mass administration of sterilizing substances, and unlike many other methods, in theory it only needs to be done once. As such, a lot of research has been done in this area, but at least until recently, the technology for it was lacking. To fully understand the context of that approach, we will first review what has been done with the forced administration of traditional contraceptive and sterilizing technologies.
While the Nazis, who forcefully sterilized or executed millions they deemed unfit to breed, are history’s most notorious offenders, many sterilization campaigns have been forcibly conducted by governments around the world against poor women of color. One of the best-known examples occurred in the United States from the 1960s to the 1970s. There, the Indian Health Services, through force and deceit, sterilized between 25% to 40% of the female native American population via tubal ligations and hysterectomies, resulting in a halving of their birth rate.
Other examples include:
-40,000 women that were sterilized in Colombia between 1963-65 by Rockefeller-funded programs.
-A million women were sterilized in Brazil between 1965-1971.
-A U.S.-imposed population control program administered by the Peace Corps in Bolivia sterilized Quechua Indian women without their knowledge or consent.
From a population management perspective, a long-lasting injectable birth control option is the only feasible option. After all, there’s no guarantee people will take expensive pills indefinitely, it’s unlikely you can regularly re-inject a population, and anything besides an injection is too time consuming to apply to large numbers of people.
One of the best candidates for that approach is the injectable Depo-Provera, one of the more harmful birth control options that has seriously affected the health of many women. Depo-Provera, as you would guess, is regularly used by international organizations in third-world countries. Going as far back as almost 50 years ago, in 1979, USAID through the International Planned Parenthood Federation supplied Depo-Provera to 378, 000 women in Mexico, Sri Lanka. and Bangladesh in experimental research projects. Widespread administration of Depo-Provera by these organizations continues to this day (with the additional involvement of more modern organizations such as the Gates Foundation who continue the tradition relentlessly distributing it to vulnerable women).
A push was made to distribute Depo-Provera far and wide, as you might expect, this was often done in an unethical manner where the recipients often had little knowledge of what was being done to them. We will briefly review a few of those examples.
In societies where whites controlled a non-white population, Depo-Provera was often questionably administered to the undesirable demographic. In South Africa, during apartheid, as the whites became increasingly concerned about the accelerating black birth rate, Depo-Provera was forcibly administered to black women at government-funded family planning agencies. To quote Dr. Nthato Motlana, who was at the time one of the country’s leading Black physicians: “there is no such thing as ‘informed consent’ here. The agencies are administering Depo-Provera shots to young black girls without even asking their consent.”
This practice also existed in Zimbabwe, where under white rule Depo-Provera was the most widely used contraceptive among black women until Robert Mugabe, a black man, became prime minister and cancelled the program. Canada, another country that sterilized their indigenous population, also made frequent use of Depo-Provera on this demographic. Lastly, in Western Australia, Depo-Provera was also widely administered by government health services to Aboriginal women. This is a critical context to the cries for help this community has made against the Australian government’s forced COVID vaccination programs.
When desperate situations arise, these too are frequently taken advantage of by international organizations to implement population control campaigns. Receiving Depo-Provera or a sterilization procedure is often made a requirement for receiving international aid. In Bangladesh, an area where individuals frequently starved to death, this was the condition for receiving food. In Thai refugee camps for Cambodians fleeing the collapse of the Khmer Rouge, refugees were often required to receive Depo-Provera to access necessities for survival, and in some cases simply forced to receive it, while male refugees were paid to recruit as many refugees as possible for injection.
When you look back at the above events, there are a variety of different “narratives” that could be used to describe them. Because of how many Depo-Provera shots had been stockpiled for and the money behind the project, for many of those involved in the process, the focus was simply on how to distribute as many as possible. So, whenever an opportunity to increase Depo-Provera uptake arose, it was taken advantage of it, and the ethical questions of using individuals’ desperate circumstances or taking away their right to consent was not even considered.
In other cases, such as that in Bangladesh, it could have easily been reasoned that “if there are too many people here and everyone is starving to death, it is not appropriate to feed someone unless they are also kept from having kids.” Finally, there are the cases, where selected races were deliberately sterilized to protect the interests of the ruling class and it is hard to argue their intentions were anything besides selfish and evil.
Each of these narratives is important to consider as we look at the immoral way the COVID-19 vaccines have been distributed and mandated. These ideas are recurring themes throughout history, and they have all repeatedly shown themselves during the current vaccination campaign.
In our current era, the labor value of individual human beings has been significantly decreased by modern technology (particularly in the recent times with AI and Robotics). From many publications I’ve read, it appears that the Oligarchy now holds the perspective that the productive value our current population level offers has become outweighed by the costs of having that many people. I suggest you consider how the oligarchy might approach its current population dilemma.
Or maybe it’s just a silly conspiracy theory?