The Sky Is Falling Is Falling In: Chicken Little was in the woods one day when an acorn fell on her head. It scared her so much she trembled all over. She shook so hard, half her feathers fell out. Help, help.. She shook so hard and half her feathers fell out. Help..Help.. she cried. The sky is falling I have to go and tell the King!
Selling your family into financial slavery to the UN and Multinational carbon trading minions for the next century. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famibe and the like would fit the bill.. all these dangers are caused by human intervention.. the real enemy then in humanity itseld. (Council Of Rome 1991)
In 2017 David Seymour authored a book titled ‘Own Your Own Future’ A Liberal Vision For New Zealand in 2017. Published 2017 by ACT NZ. The following is a description of some of the content of the text written in the book by Seymour:- We embrace markets, technological innovation *The reason doomers get it wrong they underestimate or even ignore technological change *If you predict the future on the basis of the current technology you will be wrong, not just wrong but wildly wrong. That a few pessimists have gone wildly wrong over the years:- ‘Malthus on population 1798. *Ehrlich 1968 author of the book ‘Population Bomb’ referring this to the Club of Romes Project ‘Limits to Growth. And Al Gore claiming in 2006 we only had 10 years left to save the planet.
The pessimists are wildly wrong, because we are still thriving. The past 30years we’ve witnessed the greatest reduction in global poverty in the history of the planet. Attributed to globalization, international trade and freer markets. He referred to the innovation of ideas being highly relevant to climate change issues, referencing the plunging price of solar power, rising efficiency of large scale wind power. The energy transition that will be underway through the next 2 decades and beyond. Forecasts of global fossil fuel use based on current technologies will be wildly overstated. We should all be skeptical of the intense politicalization of climate science debates. It’s always suspicious when scientific issues seem to line up with political positions. The Left/Right Divide tends to correlate with alarmist/sceptic positions, this is weird from whichever side you come from. Seymour admitted “Personally I am in the ‘luke-warmist’ camp as outlined by Matt Ridley, meaning I think global warming is real, part of it is probably man-made. But I am skeptical as to the degree to which it is dangerous. I have a moderately well informed opinion
Seymour refers to ludicrous claims of near scientific infallibility, science by nature is uncertain. The earth is warming ever since the end of the ice age, that’s true, what happens at the end of the ice age, small or big is pretty much by definition. Saying humans had some influence on warming in recent times, say late 20th century. But its about NZ doing its bit, even though how much warming is uncertain, it’s precautionary to take some action. As time passes and knowledge improves we will find out whether NZ should be responding with greater urgency or lesser. Whatever NZ does as to the impact on global warming there will be zero outcomes, however there is a strong case for NZ to contribute as good global citizens, it’s about doing our bit, even though the contribution is tiny and will NOT determine outcomes. Saying this applies even if one is skeptical about the more extreme alarmist enthusiasms of the climate change zealots, especially those that have built a political program around it. Referring to NZs ETS Scheme he said “the complexity, cost, the rort involved in global emissions trading Acts policy has always been to dump the ETS, it’s a policy disaster.
He said he preferred a simple low tax, then gradually increase the tax like road user charges but the govt should not make a cent out of the revenue from it. If the science suggested the risks of global warming were rising increase the tax, if the science develops the likely risks are lower, lower the tax. As far as NZ is concerned we are very much a passenger as far as global warming is concerned, we can’t have any influence on outcomes.We could gradually increase tax over time, if the science suggested that the risks of global
David Seymour obviously is very uncertain about the global warming debacle. He is in the luke-warmist camp. Accentuates we do not have enough knowledge about global warming as yet, but NZ must do its bit to be good global citizens although will have no effect on outcomes. That extreme global warming alarmist enthusiasms of the climate change zealots have built a political program around it. That the Emissions Trading Scheme is a disaster-complex and costly.
Seymour refers to the ‘doomers’ Thomas Malthus, Club of Rome’s Project/book ‘Limits to Growth’ and the Population Bomb, all being those that practice, believe in the Malthusian theory. That human population will far out grow resources need for the global population to survive, therefore this would bring wars, famine and disease. Not taking into consideration the advancing of technology and the decreasing of populations as is happening now throughout the world. Replacement level of many countries are below 2.1, a population level as set by the IMF & The World Bank (Thomas Malthus Essay 1798 ‘Principle of Population’).
That today the threats of climate change, water scarcity, lack of arable land, energy crisis,famine and endless human population growth fuels the concerns of a ‘Malthusian disaster through a Malthusian Crisis/catastrophe’ that is looming in the 21st century. (The carrying capacity of a species). Since the end of World War11, the UN FAO (Food & Agriculture Organization has been collecting world agriculture stats, using this data to study, implement policies to reduce hunger according to specific targets. The FAO developed a definition of ‘Food security’ (FAO, IFAD, WFD 2015). A population that has achieved ‘Food Security would therefore have a PoU of ZERO.
The Oil Crisis on 2008 sparked the beginning of what you see happening today, the uncertainties of the global food market and its ability to feed populations and the Malthusian catastrophe has ,in my opinion been a justification for the Klaus Schwab’s baby ‘Stakeholder capitalism to replace the worlds innovative ‘Free-market Enterprising Economy’ (Corporate Capture). The signing of an Official partnership memorandum between the UN and WEF is documented as, the partnership officially came about to accelerate, advance UN Agenda 2030. The WEF membership has huge political clout and massive funds to support this advancing of UN’s Agenda 2030.
Environmental Malthusianism being the idea that the human population growth is the primary driver of environmental harms and population control is a prerequisite to environmental protection, hence sterilization programs, birth control programme’s and International Planned Parenthood Federation. Margaret Sanger, a Socialist Activist and believer in Eugenics. Rockefeller Jnr was an early advocate of Sanger’s pioneering work, she originally founded the American Birth Control League which later became the US Planned Parenthood Federation. (IPPF is affiliated with NZ Family Planning Association)
Slowing down the world’s population by using women’s rights to productive decisions, greater access to education and political decision making can effectively slow down population growth (New York Times 19/08/1994). The third UN sponsored International Conference on Population & Development held in Cairo organized by Margaret Sanger. She was willing to employ ‘Eugenicist and ‘Malthusian’ justifications for birth control. Sanger was granted funds from the Rockefeller Foundation. Margaret Sanger died in 1966 from congestive heart failure.
Environmental Malthusianism, is the idea that human population growth is the primary driver of environmental harms and population control a prerequisite to environmental protection, is experiencing a resurgence (Dean, 2015; Gleditsch, 2021; Kallis, 2019; Robertson, 2012). Early in her career, Sanger became a follower of Thomas Malthus, the same man that inspired Darwin. Malthus’s disciples—then called Malthusians and Neo-Malthusians—taught that ‘if Western civilization were to survive, the physically unfit, the materially poor, the spiritually diseased, the racially inferior, and the mentally incompetent had to somehow be suppressed and isolated—or perhaps even eliminated. As Sanger stressed in a talk given at the Fifth International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference, the end goal of her movement was to produce a superior race: ‘To-day the average reliance of civilization is based upon iron and steel, bricks and mortar, and we must change this to the construction and evolution of humanity itself. To do this she advocated euthanasia, segregation in work camps, sterilization and abortion.25 She was very successful in achieving this goal—more than half of the American states launched programs that sterilized their ‘unfit … with Virginia, California, and Kansas leading the way’.25 Sanger was also very influenced by Havelock Ellis, ‘ … the influential sociologist, “sexologist,” and eugenicist. Ellis’s position on eugenics is summed up by his own statement that appeared in the “Havelock Ellis Number” of Birth Control Review February 1919 issue: “We desire no parents who are not both competent and willing parents. Only such parents are fit to father and mother a future race worthy to rule the world.
Ellis frequently published articles in Birth Control Review, and Ellis had major influence on Sanger’s ideas. Chesler wrote that Ellis, who ‘always considered himself both a eugenicist and a socialist’, converted Sanger to his views. Furthermore, Ellis made his most important contribution to the eugenics doctrine … when he assigned women to act as its chief enforcers. Women are critical agents of civilization’s progress … because … they alone have the power to produce and nurture … fitter babies. … Increased sex expression and wider use of birth control were thus significant tools in the eugenic program, and accordingly, he condemned eugenicists who refused to endorse birth control. Sanger wrote that her concern was not just that feeble-mindedness leads to criminality but ‘ … there is sufficient evidence to lead us to believe that the so-called “borderline cases” are a greater menace than the out-and-out “defective delinquents” who can be supervised, controlled and prevented from procreating their kind. … the mental defective who is glib and plausible, bright looking and attractive, but with a mental vision of seven, eight or nine years, may not merely lower the whole level of intelligence in a school or in a society, but may be encouraged by church and state to increase and multiply until he dominates … an entire community. The presence in the public schools of the mentally defective children of men and women who should never have been parents is a problem that is becoming more and more difficult.’28
As early as 1917 Sanger was openly giving ‘public support to the eugenics movement’ and to ‘race betterment’ programs. The eugenicists on her board believed that ‘birth control would eliminate disease and deformity as well as empty the jails and orphanages’.8 Sanger ‘supported sterilization for the incarcerated and considered birth control a necessary component of racial improvement’.30 Her eugenics crusade, although toned down later in her life, was to consume her until she died in 1966. According to Roche, Sanger’s end goal was the same as Hitler’s: to ‘create a race of thoroughbreds’, a pure and superior race and her journal even ‘eerily’ foretold the ‘horrors of the Nazi “final solution”.
Left, the cover of one of Sanger’s openly eugenic books. First published in 1922, it became one of the ‘text books’ of the movement for years and is still in print. Centre, one volume of papers presented at the International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference and published in 1926. The papers published in these proceedings make it clear that Sanger and many of her closest followers were foremost concerned with applying Darwinism to produce a superior race and improve the lot of humankind by eugenics. Right, the cover of one of the many books that Sanger wrote to teach sex-education to young people. This book was written to instruct mothers to teach ‘sex education’ to their young children. It was published in New York by Max N. Maisel, 1916. This set of books openly advocated immoral behaviour such as sex outside of marriage.
Many churches opposed Sanger because she championed ‘sex without consequences’, eugenics, abortion and concentration camps for the unfit—all practices that Christianity has historically opposed. She stressed that she was against especially the Catholic Church because they opposed ‘science’, evolution, eugenics and race improvement. Sanger sought out allegiances with eugenicists to help blunt the opposition to her from the religious community. The church’s view that the handicapped, diseased and deformed were all equals in the eyes of God ‘struck Sanger as anathema to the dictates of the Brave New World’ that she wanted to create. She even argued that persons ‘whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers’ were ‘irresponsible and reckless’ and that the ‘procreation of this group should be stopped’.
Sanger ‘attributed insanity, epilepsy, criminality, prostitution, pauperism, mental defectiveness’, and ‘everything from child labor to world war’, to ‘unchecked breeding’. The church taught these were sins that could be overcome and had many success stories to support this claim—and followed up on these successes with activities like Catholic charities. Until Hitler was defeated, Sanger did little to support positive eugenics (ie: encouraging the fit to have large families), which may have been supported by the church, but rather until later in her career advocated negative eugenics, the prevention of procreation of the unfit by law and sterilization.
Exporting eugenics and sterilization: Sanger also worked hard to spread her eugenic ideas about ‘human weeds’ to the rest of the world. Sanger also worked hard to spread her eugenic ideas about ‘human weeds’ to the rest of the world. Trombley claimed that eugenics, sterilization and birth control projects on a large scale were an Anglo-American export. He notes that Sanger’s birth control movement was the most powerful in the world, and in England its head offices were based at the London Eugenics Society. Sanger’s movement became a ‘truly international organization with the bulk of its multi-million annual budget coming from the United States.’ Most of the money came from taxes; the rest was donated by large corporations such as General Motors.
Sanger’s movement had an impact in many nations, including India, Singapore, Japan, China, Korea and much of Europe. Her programs involving sterilization of the unfit were adopted by Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark and, most infamously, by Nazi Germany. Planned Parenthood today boasts three-quarters of a billion dollars in annual revenue, most paid for by taxpayers, and is active throughout the world. Her role as an icon
Margaret Sanger is still widely admired for her work in the birth control movement. She was listed as one of the most influential persons of the twentieth century by Time-Life and was given many honours during her lifetime including an Honorary Doctorate of Law by Smith College.53 Paul and Anne Ehrlich wrote that ‘America’s heroine in the family planning movement was Margaret Sanger, a nurse. … Sanger and others who joined her rapidly growing birth control movement (then known as the Birth Control League) led the fight for … legal changes and for support from medical, educational, health, and religious organizations. Gloria Steinem wrote a laudatory chapter on Sanger in the Time volume listing the 100 most important Americans. Steinem falsely implied Sanger opposed eugenics and what it stood for and lionized her as a heroine of the women’s movement.
Rewriting history: Although Sanger’s involvement in eugenics and radical politics is well documented, many people today are attempting to whitewash her past eugenics involvement. Her ‘hagiographers, and her most devoted followers in the abortion rights movement, deny and gloss over the eugenicist nature of her program. Reasons for rewriting (or ignoring) history include the fear that ‘exposing birth control’s political history to hostile lawmakers and anti-choice lobbyists’ could affect their political goals. Other persons hid her past because they were concerned about tarnishing her ‘perceived labors on behalf of gender equity, self-determination, and redress of economic and personal privation’. Even many reprints of Sanger’s writings select sections that give a very distorted picture of her beliefs and goals.
Today Planned Parenthood stresses ‘family planning’, but the fact is ‘Sanger sold birth control as the crypto-eugenicist Marie Stopes had, as offering “freedom from fear” … which in aggregate would contribute to the wider social good. The reasoning was straightforwardly eugenic.’ To the end of her life she supported eugenics. In one of her last speeches she ‘attacked welfare programs for not eliminating the “feeble minded and unfit” and proposed “incentive sterilization”’, a program to bribe the ‘unfit’ to be sterilized. NZ affiliated to International Planned Parenthood.
Reasons for her enormous success: A major reason for Sanger’s success was that she met a genuine need of the poor, many of whom had large families they could not adequately support. America, at that time, was changing from an agricultural to an industrial society. Large families could be supported on farms that needed the low-cost labour provided by many children, but large families could not be properly supported by most factory work. This motivated a drive to limit family size, a need that Sanger exploited to further her eugenic goals. The problem is ‘Sanger’s zeal blinded her to the reality that her actions occasionally worked against her desired purposes.
It was only after World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust that Sanger abandoned her dream of producing a socialist, perfected eugenic society. She then played down her eugenic and socialist ideals and increasingly stressed the goals now advocated by Planned Parenthood. In Trombley’s words, ‘after the Nazi atrocities’ she clothed her movement in the words that Planned Parenthood advocates use today because the ‘Nazi’s eugenics became a word to strike fear in the hearts of ordinary people. Thus eugenics re-emerged from the doldrums of the post-Nazi period to exert an influence on a much larger scale than had ever been previously imagined. Partly because of her past association with known racists and a history of several decades of racist and eugenic rhetoric, the name of the American Birth Control League was changed to Planned Parenthood during World War II.11 Unfortunately, despite the name change, the racism of her movement lingered.
Sanger was openly influenced by Darwinists and various radicals in her highly successful campaign against Judeo-Christian morality and in support of eugenics. She worked hard to produce a socialist state based on eugenics, and her movement thrived because it partly fulfilled a real need in the early 1900s. Her movement played a major role in loosening sexual morality, contributing to the current high rate of illegitimacy and sexual immorality. Her goals for society may not have worked in her own life: Flynn claims Sanger died an alcoholic addicted to painkillers, a bitter woman feeling both abandoned and alone, a victim of her youthful, selfish hedonism. She lived and died by her credo published in the Woman Rebel, namely ‘The Right to be Lazy. The Right to be an Unmarried Mother. The Right to Destroy. The Right to Create. The Right to Live and the Right to Love.
The ‘Worlds Population’, Margret Sanger’s Socialist Eugenic Birth Control Activism funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. The Neo-Malthusians such as Margaret Sanger, Warren Thompson, Mukerjee with their vision of a world population reduction due to their perceived predictions of an overcrowded planet, land degradation. The League of Nations International Labour Office and Health Committee created in 1939 the Demographic Committee of Population Research. With the UN, population activists took influential positions. US led philanthropic foundations for example Rcokefeller Foundation and the Population Council with their International conservations on population contrik. The feminist argument for reproductive rights that trumped geo-politics and food security argumens for family planning. NGO’s actively persuring ‘Reproductive health’ and Sexual Health (UNESCO and WHO (UN)Universal Relationship Sexuality curriculum in schools worldwide) all have put ‘Climate Change on the population and environmental limits on todays globalization ‘global boiling’ agenda today. Hence ‘Population replacement levels are seriously declining in many countries worldwide, including in New Zealand.
Replacement of Population level for a population to survive was set by the IMP and World Bank at 2.1 New Zealand Population Level is currently 1.6 well below Population Level of 2.1. I personally call this a Neo-Malthusian ‘Communist Degrowth’ which advances a World Governance to control all human-kind through a ‘Fear Factor’ compliancy.
Socialism-Communism and Neo Nazism ‘survival of the fittest’ and growing ‘Environmental Concerns’ and ‘Population Control’. October 1999 the worlds population reached 6 billion hence influential leaders of neo Malthusian theory were worried that the earth would run out of resources and the environment could not sustain the population at that time. The assumption was made that the more inhabitants on earth the less resources to provide for them, thus creating environmental problems. Population control had been hotley debated as a controversial issue since 1994 UN Population Conference in Cairo and captured the attention of the US Congress. Population control formed huge alliances that brought together environmental and family planning special interest groups about, private funding by philanthropists such as the Rockefeller Foundation funded the cause of these interest groups. 1997 Media Millionaire Ted Turner donated large sums of money to population control, donating $1Billion to the UN Population Fund in February 1999 at this time population control became funded by some of the world wealthiest such as Bill Gates who donated the largest private donation recorded in history $2.2 Billion to support population control.
See UN Population Fund Hails Bill & Melinda Gates’ $2.2 Billion Donation, M2 PREsswiRE, Feb. 12, 1999, available in 1999 WL 12604836. The United Nations Population Fund hailed the $2.2 billion donation given to the William H. Gates Foundation, a family foundation specializing in supporting population and health projects worldwide.
POPULATION & ENVIRONMENT: RETHINKING THE DEBATE 1-2 (Lourdes Arizpe et al. eds., 1994) (noting that complex issues not addressed despite scientific advances must be addressed, and that population-environment debate has not significantly progressed in over 20 years). In order “[flor social scientists to better understand the human dimensions of environmental change, both at the global and local level, they must ultimately adapt their models and analyses by collaborating with natural scientists.”
Population controls link to the environment has been used as justification for regulation of fertility independent of economic concerns. The impact of the worlds population being 6 billion presented National and International policy such as environmental degradation which requires the global community’s need for effective action. Because of the complex issues, factors were to be considered in order to find a successful solution to the worlds environmental and social concerns Factors that include culture, government, tradition and religion and governmental doctrines upon the people these are imposed upon. The current state of the environment ‘population control’ includes us policies and international initiatives, that are collaborative, analyzes, encourages and promotes immoral policies micro level provides data regarding social and economic factors that mediate the relation between population and the environment. See id. at 3. The population-environment issue “does not just involve absolute numbers of people nor even just population densities or overall rates of increase, but also, in important ways, social, political, and institutional factors.” Id.; see also Harold Coward, Religious Responses to the Population Sustainability Problematic: Implications for Law, 27 ENVTL. L. 1169, 1170 (1997) (noting that religion and law can work powerfully together to protect both humans and nature from unethical exploitation). For further discussion of religion, philosophy, government and cultural perspectives on population control, see infra notes 70-108 and accompanying text.
United States policies and international initiatives.18 Section IV analyzes the population-environment connection, discuss ing past and current theories.1 9 Section V raises alternatives to population control.20 Lastly, Section VI concludes the Comment suggesting that population control is not the solution to the Earth’s environmental problems. A debate exists over the current state of the environment and the Earth’s resources.2 2 On one side of the debate are those who hypothesize that the Earth is running out of natural resources, and the human race is therefore on the brink of disaster. People agreeing with this hypothesis claim the Earth will soon reach its limited “carrying capacity.” They claim, therefore, that “only a few decades remain to stop unrestrained population growth and environmentally devastating economic practices before efforts to achieve a sustainable future ‘will be lost and prospects for humanity immeasurably diminished.’- On the other side of the debate are those who believe that although there have been, and still are, environmental problems, current measures have improved these problems. In addition, they believe the Earth does not have a limited “carrying capacity” and that natural resources will continue to be plentiful. (carrying Capacity as in Malthusian Theory)
Doomsayers’ viewpoint, shared by many conventional environmentalists, argues the human dilemma in Terrible Toos terms: There are too many of us! We consume too much! We rely too heavily on technology, which we understand too poorly!” Id. See generally ALBERT GORE, EARTH IN THE BALANCE: ECOLOGY AND THE HUMAN SPIRIT (1992) (noting problems facing environment so severe that if urgent measures not taken soon, we may reach point of no return
David Seymour had obviously read the history around the corruption of the Eco-Socialist-Marxist Global Agenda and Climate Doomism – The Club of Rome and the Limits To Growth. Malthusian and sits on the fence stating in his book that we must be good global citizens.
...
