The depopulation agenda

[BlackGoo]

I disagree. If you put all human population on earth (7.8 bilion) on squares with the side of nine meters (81 sq meters for each human being) you will occupy a surface smaller (631 800 sq. km) than the state of Texas (695 662 sq. km) w.Practically would remain 63 862 sq kilometers unoccupied. You do the math. I think in the actual technological conditions Earth could virtually sustain a population at least 10 times bigger.Of course, if people would accept to live simple and let other live also. Northern emishere, especially in the situation of warming of the climate would have huge spaces in Russian Siberia and in Canada for a a good living. Imagine all Russia has below 145 mil people, less than half US population being almost twice bigger. Canada has under 38 mil people ! So, the country is about US aria and has a population about 8 times smaller! I add to this: green technologies which are thriving from one year to another, the endless food supply that ocean could offer, the endless number of colonies that could be build on water. That, on future could go at a potential of 100 times the population that earth has now...The problem is the rulers of this world who want domination.

Genesis 1, 28 :

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Apparently, God didn`t say : Take care when you will reach at that number, did He ?

But this will never happen. If people can voluntarily agree to live simply so that everyone can live why don't people do that now? What do you think is going to persuade people who have a lot to give to those who have less? This is the thinking of the elites. As they revealed in both versions of Utopia (2013 and 2019) Nobody wants to live like that. Nobody wants to share. They - the elites who actually make this decision - don't want to share. I also don't want to.

Honestly. I am sorry to admit it. I WISH I were Christ-like enough to voluntarily agree to eat bugs/a diet of vegan grain and soy slop and never have a car and never fly on airplanes (I have family in two continents, so this wouldn't even just be about frivolous vacations for me if they actually start penalizing people financially for flying) and live like a Hong Kong cage person because land is so overpriced due to shortage (I will get to that in a minute) so that 11 billion people can live the same joyless, depressing life as me...but I am not. I would probably agree to whatever imperialist machinations of my first world country to seize the resources of the third world and condemn them to starvation so that I and my family can live a healthy, natural human life instead of that of a Klaus Schwab wet dream ()

I honestly cannot tell which is more immoral - sterilizing people/one child policy or letting billions of people be killed off due when Peak Oil happens. I don't LIKE it. I want to stop it. I just honestly don't see a solution. I fundamentally don't like the idea of having to eat a vegan diet and be restricted in basically everything I do, have my freedom of movement stripped, my freedom of choice, just so that some African woman in the third world can shit out 6 kids. Overpopulation isn't even our fault. Most Western people only want to have 1-3 children and some don't even want any. We can debate about how degenerate that is, but my point stands. Western people know that children are a huge responsibility - not just raising them, but also innovating new ways to feed and provide for them. We know we aren't yet capable of providing for all the children if everyone right now decided to have 8 babies per couple. So we don't. Other peoples have a more r-selected strategy. And the tired old argument is that it doesn't matter if they have 6 babies per woman, they still use way less resources than us. Ok, well they also aren't the test subjects of gigantic world-controlling multinational corporations hellbent on brainwashing us to consoom more and more and more of their products so they can get rich. We aren't the ones programming obsolescence into products so that you have to buy a new phone every 3 years. We aren't the ones making people sick so they need to consoom pills for the rest of their lives, or even convincing people to become sick and chop off their genitals so they have to take synthetic hormones for the rest of their lives.

About the space thing, there is more to providing for a population than space alone. I do not know how valid the common arguments are. For one, the meat and land use argument. I don't know how viable it REALLY is to supply meat to a population of 11 billion people. I do know that animal products are the ideal sources of nutrients - most bioavailable - for human beings and most people can't even absorb the plant forms of these nutrients. Like for example it has been proven that 90% of British women do not absorb any plant vitamin A - beta carotene - from carrots. I believe it was a study that included multiple ethnicities, but it could be just native British women. What are they going to do when the meat tax comes so that 11 billion people can live - on grain slop? Age faster, become sick, die sooner. So we all get to live, but we have to live on a timeline of accelerated aging and in a joyless fashion, tediously worrying about providing for even more grain slop eaters.
The same concerns exist for water usage. I get to live, but I can't take baths, I have to time my showers to 4 minutes or incur a fine or something, and water is overpriced because it all has to be converted from salt water to potable water first. The only affordable water is filled with contaminants and will slowly make you sick. I don't want to live in a world increasingly filled with such choices that essentially amount to "be a slave to my job and spend all my money on basic human necessities like food and water OR slowly be poisoned and malnourished to death"

I have been increasingly been thinking about these dilemmas and feel very burdened by it all. I find myself sympathizing with the sterilization agenda and wondering if I have been duped with false information - (maybe the planet CAN just support a population of 20 billion humans on an ideal human diet and hygiene regimen with access to sufficient water and animal products without ANY negative impact on other species or the land and water of the planet, maybe each human really does only need a few kilometers of space, and that can supply his every need) - or if there really are just some very hard times and hard choices inevitably coming soon that no sudden brilliant innovation is going to save us from.

 

[Edek]

But this will never happen. If people can voluntarily agree to live simply so that everyone can live why don't people do that now?

Sad but probably true. I live in a rural area that is not considered poor, but not rich by any means. I garden and grow food as a hobby, so I pay attention to gardens. Every garden, unless it is left to turn wild, takes some time, energy, water, and money to maintain. Practically no one here has a wild garden, and a minority of people have a crappy lawn with paving and gravel around it. Most people have fairly nice looking gardens. I estimate that at best, 15% of garden space is used for growing food & raising animals. I see houses of people who I know are poor, with kids to feed, and they grow flowers, maybe some sunflowers.
Compost toilets are totally unheard of, everyone I have mentioned mine to thinks I have two heads. Imagine that on a large scale: people turning their doo-doo, for free, into free compost (yes, it's safe when properly managed, but if you are still leery of it, you can use it as mulch for non-human-edible plants, which includes plants for fuel, nectar production, and animal fodder, or just let it compost for an extra year or two), instead of paying to flush it and have it to go into a tax-payer funded sewage system that still causes some pollution, and of course uses large amounts of water and toxic toilet cleaning products.
But how many young ladies do you know today who would be thrilled by their man's skill at home sewage management? Without exception, every woman I have ever spoken to (unless they do it themselves) who is "passionate about the environment" has been disgusted by the idea of doing anything with their poo except making it vanish into a gleaming, pine scented toilet.

Growing food is time-consuming. The return on your work is often poor when you add it all up, especially when starting out and buying all the tools, plants etc. But the return on me watching videos, typing this message, and doing many other things is a fat zero, and I can see that the same is true for many "poor people" around me here: they have hours a day to play video games, use social media, and other such things, but no time to make their gardens as productive as possible.

So what is there to lose? Be a fool for Christ instead, I say. No one here is getting out alive, except through the Author of Life himself, our Lord Jesus.

 

[Edek]

There is plenty to nitpick in this hippy propaganda (wind turbines are only really good for windmills, solar is better used for heating water IMO, Tibetan prayer flags are ugly tourist tat, and why is she growing so many flowers and so few tomatoes?), but the principle is sound IF people wanted it and IF there were social incentives to encourage, for example, large numbers of people not racking up debt "studying" how to be gay at university in order to get an office rat job to pay for their fancy pants and dildos, but rather living something much closer to the yeoman farmer's life instead.

Stick a nuclear power plant in there, and this picture becomes a realistic advert for a world where 70 billion people live decent lives without wrecking the place.

 

[BlackGoo]

There is plenty to nitpick in this hippy propaganda (wind turbines are only really good for windmills, solar is better used for heating water IMO, Tibetan prayer flags are ugly tourist tat, and why is she growing so many flowers and so few tomatoes?), but the principle is sound IF people wanted it and IF there were social incentives to encourage, for example, large numbers of people not racking up debt "studying" how to be gay at university in order to get an office rat job to pay for their fancy pants and dildos, but rather living something much closer to the yeoman farmer's life instead.

Stick a nuclear power plant in there, and this picture becomes a realistic advert for a world where 70 billion people live decent lives without wrecking the place.
View attachment 33946

Yeah good point. I studied agricultural sciences and the university I went to had a bunch of Greta Thunberg disciples. I once tried to argue the benefits of nuclear power - following what France is doing successfully instead of what the UK and Germany are doing trying to build so many damned windmills which have so many problems I'm sure you're aware of. They also just looked at me like I had three heads and their only counterargument was "Chernobyl" which I know really was a bad thing, but we should also move on from that when nuclear power is objectively better than anything we have now.

 

[Edek]

They also just looked at me like I had three heads and their only counterargument was "Chernobyl" which I know really was a bad thing, but we should also move on from that when nuclear power is objectively better than anything we have now.

They don't want nuclear, but love all the rare Earth metal guzzling alternatives around solar, electric cars, etc, which mostly come from China and Africa

 

[Bismark_Geist1571]

But this will never happen. If people can voluntarily agree to live simply so that everyone can live why don't people do that now? What do you think is going to persuade people who have a lot to give to those who have less? This is the thinking of the elites. As they revealed in both versions of Utopia (2013 and 2019) Nobody wants to live like that. Nobody wants to share. They - the elites who actually make this decision - don't want to share. I also don't want to.

Honestly. I am sorry to admit it. I WISH I were Christ-like enough to voluntarily agree to eat bugs/a diet of vegan grain and soy slop and never have a car and never fly on airplanes (I have family in two continents, so this wouldn't even just be about frivolous vacations for me if they actually start penalizing people financially for flying) and live like a Hong Kong cage person because land is so overpriced due to shortage (I will get to that in a minute) so that 11 billion people can live the same joyless, depressing life as me...but I am not. I would probably agree to whatever imperialist machinations of my first world country to seize the resources of the third world and condemn them to starvation so that I and my family can live a healthy, natural human life instead of that of a Klaus Schwab wet dream ()

I honestly cannot tell which is more immoral - sterilizing people/one child policy or letting billions of people be killed off due when Peak Oil happens. I don't LIKE it. I want to stop it. I just honestly don't see a solution. I fundamentally don't like the idea of having to eat a vegan diet and be restricted in basically everything I do, have my freedom of movement stripped, my freedom of choice, just so that some African woman in the third world can shit out 6 kids. Overpopulation isn't even our fault. Most Western people only want to have 1-3 children and some don't even want any. We can debate about how degenerate that is, but my point stands. Western people know that children are a huge responsibility - not just raising them, but also innovating new ways to feed and provide for them. We know we aren't yet capable of providing for all the children if everyone right now decided to have 8 babies per couple. So we don't. Other peoples have a more r-selected strategy. And the tired old argument is that it doesn't matter if they have 6 babies per woman, they still use way less resources than us. Ok, well they also aren't the test subjects of gigantic world-controlling multinational corporations hellbent on brainwashing us to consoom more and more and more of their products so they can get rich. We aren't the ones programming obsolescence into products so that you have to buy a new phone every 3 years. We aren't the ones making people sick so they need to consoom pills for the rest of their lives, or even convincing people to become sick and chop off their genitals so they have to take synthetic hormones for the rest of their lives.

About the space thing, there is more to providing for a population than space alone. I do not know how valid the common arguments are. For one, the meat and land use argument. I don't know how viable it REALLY is to supply meat to a population of 11 billion people. I do know that animal products are the ideal sources of nutrients - most bioavailable - for human beings and most people can't even absorb the plant forms of these nutrients. Like for example it has been proven that 90% of British women do not absorb any plant vitamin A - beta carotene - from carrots. I believe it was a study that included multiple ethnicities, but it could be just native British women. What are they going to do when the meat tax comes so that 11 billion people can live - on grain slop? Age faster, become sick, die sooner. So we all get to live, but we have to live on a timeline of accelerated aging and in a joyless fashion, tediously worrying about providing for even more grain slop eaters.
The same concerns exist for water usage. I get to live, but I can't take baths, I have to time my showers to 4 minutes or incur a fine or something, and water is overpriced because it all has to be converted from salt water to potable water first. The only affordable water is filled with contaminants and will slowly make you sick. I don't want to live in a world increasingly filled with such choices that essentially amount to "be a slave to my job and spend all my money on basic human necessities like food and water OR slowly be poisoned and malnourished to death"

I have been increasingly been thinking about these dilemmas and feel very burdened by it all. I find myself sympathizing with the sterilization agenda and wondering if I have been duped with false information - (maybe the planet CAN just support a population of 20 billion humans on an ideal human diet and hygiene regimen with access to sufficient water and animal products without ANY negative impact on other species or the land and water of the planet, maybe each human really does only need a few kilometers of space, and that can supply his every need) - or if there really are just some very hard times and hard choices inevitably coming soon that no sudden brilliant innovation is going to save us from.

The point you missed is that if good ol' Klaus and his handlers' plans come to fruition, guess what: all non-elite people will still live in small Hong Konguesque rooms, confined in "smart-cities" or should I say prisons, eating bug and GMO plant based diets, drinking polluted water (with graphene oxide and God knows what else that will undoubtedly shorten their lifespans and make them more obedient), even if 95% of all people living today on Earth were to be wiped out now. Earth resources are finite, but more than our numbers, is our lifestyle which is utterly unsustainable, and that is known to our elites, which are partially responsible for this lifestyle. This lifestyle is so utterly unsustainable that would turn vast swaths of the earth in wastelands even if it were performed by 1 or 2 billion people. Under those circumstances, its somewhat understandable why they are obsessed with the 500 million limit. Only at those numbers, a consumerist use-it-once system could survive without destroying the ecology.

And by unsustainable lifestyle I mean the one we have now where even toddlers have iPads and smartphones (to their detriment), wear disposable diapers, our women shit out 1.5 babies and then go to "study" in order to enslave themselves to a cubicle while providing nothing of value (like many of our brethren) while they attention whore via the internet, all while consuming disposable furniture (made out of compressed sawdust and a myriad of toxic chemicals) designed to last 4 years tops before being replaced, disposable and toxic clothes, cutlery as well as houses and apartments for singles well into their 30s and 40s that consume viable and necessary land that could either be used for animal grazing or as a forest. Don't even talk about the electric cars madness and the million other utterly unnecessary products, concoctions and radiation emitting (hello 5G, IoT and IoB!!!) devices that pollute our environment...

The solutions exist, and don't involve living in Hong Konguesque spaces or banning meat but the elites of our world are not interested in them, the issue is total hegemony and control, not protection of the biosphere and 7.8 billion potentially unruly useless eaters are a lot harder to control than 300 or 400 million...

 

[Edek]

The solutions exist, and don't involve living in Hong Konguesque spaces or banning meat but the elites of our world are not interested in them, the issue is total hegemony and control, not protection of the biosphere and 7.8 billion potentially unruly useless eaters are a lot harder to control than 300 or 400 million...

Agreed, and the proles are not interested in the solutions either. There is no glamour in being a modern peasant who manages compost heaps as a hobby, never goes on holiday by jet plane, and is happy using all manner of hand-me-downs from their grandparents. Ain't gonna happen with the majority of people, and I can say that as someone who has a lot going on in my garden, so there is always something to do, and yet is spending time here griping online because it's easier than doing something productive while I wait for the next work email.

 

[Viktor Zeegelaar]

Video discussing the articles I shared earlier about depop/transhumanism.

The Demonic Plan To End Humanity Revealed

Jay Dyer of https://jaysanalysis.com guest hosts The Alex Jones Show to expose the demonic plan to end humanity.

banthis.tv

 

[BlackGoo]

The point you missed is that if good ol' Klaus and his handlers' plans come to fruition, guess what: all non-elite people will still live in small Hong Konguesque rooms, confined in "smart-cities" or should I say prisons, eating bug and GMO plant based diets, drinking polluted water (with graphene oxide and God knows what else that will undoubtedly shorten their lifespans and make them more obedient), even if 95% of all people living today on Earth were to be wiped out now. Earth resources are finite, but more than our numbers, is our lifestyle which is utterly unsustainable, and that is known to our elites, which are partially responsible for this lifestyle. This lifestyle is so utterly unsustainable that would turn vast swaths of the earth in wastelands even if it were performed by 1 or 2 billion people. Under those circumstances, its somewhat understandable why they are obsessed with the 500 million limit. Only at those numbers, a consumerist use-it-once system could survive without destroying the ecology.

And by unsustainable lifestyle I mean the one we have now where even toddlers have iPads and smartphones (to their detriment), wear disposable diapers, our women shit out 1.5 babies and then go to "study" in order to enslave themselves to a cubicle while providing nothing of value (like many of our brethren) while they attention whore via the internet, all while consuming disposable furniture (made out of compressed sawdust and a myriad of toxic chemicals) designed to last 4 years tops before being replaced, disposable and toxic clothes, cutlery as well as houses and apartments for singles well into their 30s and 40s that consume viable and necessary land that could either be used for animal grazing or as a forest. Don't even talk about the electric cars madness and the million other utterly unnecessary products, concoctions and radiation emitting (hello 5G, IoT and IoB!!!) devices that pollute our environment...

The solutions exist, and don't involve living in Hong Konguesque spaces or banning meat but the elites of our world are not interested in them, the issue is total hegemony and control, not protection of the biosphere and 7.8 billion potentially unruly useless eaters are a lot harder to control than 300 or 400 million...

Your first paragraph, I agree with, you had some good points.
But please do not use language like this: "our women shit out 1.5 babies" because it is degrading to human dignity, and this is a Christian forum. Not trying to start an argument, but I was not expecting to see something like that here when I looked at the reply to my comment. Also it doesn't make sense, how does having a low birthrate and studying contribute to an unsustainable lifestyle? Children do consume more resources than anyone could account for individually by reducing their own personal impact. You sound like you are just being spiteful.

 

[doodydota]

The "unsustainable lifestyle" is caused by "over-consumption".
"Over-consumption" is caused by lose money aka "money printing".
"Money printing" is faciliated by centrally regulated interest rates.
If the elites were concerned with "unsustainable lifestyle" they would introduce a sound monetary system that incentivises saving aka deferring consumption.
Therefore I don't believe "unsustainable lifestyle" is the rationale for depopulation.
By elimination of the materialistic rationale, it follows , there must be a spiritual rationale. Something sinister, satanic is at play here, that I don't quite comprehend.

 

[Beacon]

The bait for based Africans

WHO recommends groundbreaking malaria vaccine for children at risk

The World Health Organization (WHO) is recommending widespread use of the RTS,S/AS01 (RTS,S) malaria vaccine among children in sub-Saharan Africa. The recommendation is based on results from an ongoing pilot programme in Ghana, Kenya and Malawi that has reached more than 900 000 children since 2019.

www.who.int

They know that it is hard to push the koof wax in Africa due to poverty and Ivermectin but this one is definitely something to counter that. Its efficacy is less than 50% and guess where the funding comes from? Spoiler Alert "the Foundation".

 

[Viktor Zeegelaar]

The "unsustainable lifestyle" is caused by "over-consumption".
"Over-consumption" is caused by lose money aka "money printing".
"Money printing" is faciliated by centrally regulated interest rates.
If the elites were concerned with "unsustainable lifestyle" they would introduce a sound monetary system that incentivises saving aka deferring consumption.
Therefore I don't believe "unsustainable lifestyle" is the rationale for depopulation.
By elimination of the materialistic rationale, it follows , there must be a spiritual rationale. Something sinister, satanic is at play here, that I don't quite comprehend.

Of course, it's about control. And 100 million people are easier to control than 10 billion. All rationales they give are a lie for as you say rightly we must consume at the same moment we must deindustrialize. Those in power needed the industrialization and consumption society to forge the technological innovations needed for technological advancement to an extent they can discard the scaffolding and deindustrialize, to get the masses enslaved to a minimum lifestyle connected to a social credit system. The whole overconsumption, overpopulation rhetoric is just the excuse to go to this new phase of the system, just as cojona is the excuse to go to the next phase of the system. That Satan is the spiritual force behind this is something I don't contend.

 

[El Draque]

Seems clear that there will almost certainly be a pre-meditated cull, it's just a matter of when & how.

 

[r3d]

The point you missed is that if good ol' Klaus and his handlers' plans come to fruition, guess what: all non-elite people will still live in small Hong Konguesque rooms, confined in "smart-cities" or should I say prisons, eating bug and GMO plant based diets, drinking polluted water (with graphene oxide and God knows what else that will undoubtedly shorten their lifespans and make them more obedient), even if 95% of all people living today on Earth were to be wiped out now. Earth resources are finite, but more than our numbers, is our lifestyle which is utterly unsustainable, and that is known to our elites, which are partially responsible for this lifestyle. This lifestyle is so utterly unsustainable that would turn vast swaths of the earth in wastelands even if it were performed by 1 or 2 billion people. Under those circumstances, its somewhat understandable why they are obsessed with the 500 million limit. Only at those numbers, a consumerist use-it-once system could survive without destroying the ecology.

And by unsustainable lifestyle I mean the one we have now where even toddlers have iPads and smartphones (to their detriment), wear disposable diapers, our women shit out 1.5 babies and then go to "study" in order to enslave themselves to a cubicle while providing nothing of value (like many of our brethren) while they attention whore via the internet, all while consuming disposable furniture (made out of compressed sawdust and a myriad of toxic chemicals) designed to last 4 years tops before being replaced, disposable and toxic clothes, cutlery as well as houses and apartments for singles well into their 30s and 40s that consume viable and necessary land that could either be used for animal grazing or as a forest. Don't even talk about the electric cars madness and the million other utterly unnecessary products, concoctions and radiation emitting (hello 5G, IoT and IoB!!!) devices that pollute our environment...

The solutions exist, and don't involve living in Hong Konguesque spaces or banning meat but the elites of our world are not interested in them, the issue is total hegemony and control, not protection of the biosphere and 7.8 billion potentially unruly useless eaters are a lot harder to control than 300 or 400 million...

I also fear that their interest in absolute control has something to do with their sexual desires.

When their access to technology and knowledge is so complete and advanced, they could rule over a population without that access like demi-gods. That would enable them to take away anyone they want from their families for made-up charges or under false pretenses.

I don't even want to spell out who I think they would take and what they want to do.

That to me is both the darkest and most likely reason they are so obsessed with total control.

 

[Bismark_Geist1571]

Your first paragraph, I agree with, you had some good points.
But please do not use language like this: "our women shit out 1.5 babies" because it is degrading to human dignity, and this is a Christian forum. Not trying to start an argument, but I was not expecting to see something like that here when I looked at the reply to my comment. Also it doesn't make sense, how does having a low birthrate and studying contribute to an unsustainable lifestyle? Children do consume more resources than anyone could account for individually by reducing their own personal impact. You sound like you are just being spiteful.

I apologize if my language offended you and I think I didn't explain my position clearly enough. The points I was trying to convey were the following:

1. Our civilization is decadent, we haven't even replaced ourselves for decades (since at least the end of the 70s) and still our way of life is utterly unsustainable from an environmental PoV while being a minority of the world population. With outsourcing we just managed to relocate pollution (Instead of pollulting rivers and arable land in Europe and North America, we spread the whole thing to Asia and Africa indirectly so we didn't have to invest in fixing our own messy processes).
2. In case you have not noticed, too many people attend our universities instead of earning their way into trades or staying home and raising the future generations (women). Many of this people in the times of our grandparents wouldn't have been eligible for University based on their raw intelligence since they lacked the necessary aptitudes. That in itself has given rise to a whole "industry" where titles instead of professionals are the product, thus decreasing wages for real professionals and kickstarting credentialism while ripping off naive young people who could make a better use of their time instead of wasting it "learning" Tourism or Journalism since they lacked the aptitude to apply for real Humanist career paths (not their dumbed down caricatures) or in STEM. And don't get me started with the affirmative action in the US.
3. The mass entrance of women in the pool of labor depressed wages and further destroyed the family structure as well as the transmission of culture from one generation to the next, while increasing consumption (how many stay at home women get to afford all the vain products working women buy? how many km2 had to be destroyed in order to build extra houses and appartments for singles and divorced? for extra malls for hordes of female consumers? how many cars were bought by SAH women vs their careerist counterparts?). Let's not forget that this development encouraged a reduction of births amongst the smartest women who now could be "professionals" and waste their youths in a cubicle. And professional women have a greater need for transportation (more cars, busses and even trains), clothes (more time spent outside of home), more food alternatives (more pre-packaged and industrial food due to time constraints, more plastic and myriad of chemicals, more transportation for the new market niches, etc. etc.)l, new surfaces (more buildings for office space for new customers and new workers in the economy of services, etc. etc., which means a faster rate of land use): I'm startled that you think those developments are a good thing.
4. Regarding children: It would be interesting if you could post references, but I still fail to remember the last time children were buying cars and myriad of appliances designed to last a few years before they had to be replaced or spurring demand of vain products. Even the propaganda publications don't seem to support this conclusion. For example in the linked article, it states two adult households with children have a carbon print 25% greater than childless two adult households far from your statement that a single children consumes far more resources than any individual adult dould save by reducing their personal impact https://www.energylivenews.com/2020...gger-carbon-footprint-than-childless-couples/
5. Planned obsolescense in most of our products and the movement against consumer repairs.
6. All of the above is undergirded by a fiat monetary system that enables waste and overconsumption punishing savings, the traditional family and frugal life while providing the appearance of(albeit temporary) wealth .

Sorry if I sounded "spiteful" in my previous comment but yours sounded like the prepackaged propaganda the elites have fed the public in order to have us accept our own demise without even lifting a finger.

 

[Bismark_Geist1571]

I also fear that their interest in absolute control has something to do with their sexual desires.

When their access to technology and knowledge is so complete and advanced, they could rule over a population without that access like demi-gods. That would enable them to take away anyone they want from their families for made-up charges or under false pretenses.

I don't even want to spell out who I think they would take and what they want to do.

That to me is both the darkest and most likely reason they are so obsessed with total control.

That's a train of thought worthy of consideration and I understand why neither you or me would want to even spell it out. IMHO they are after something else: the creation of two distinct species, a system where they will always have the upper hand since the proles will really be physically, mentally and even spiritually inferior and they will really get to be our betters. They long for a system where no surprise hero's will show up. No more Wilhelm Tells, Robin Hoods, Don Juans from Austria etc. can arise from among the "commoners" (the descendants of those they will preserve after the cull).

Just my 2 cts.

 

[RedLagoon]

I also fear that their interest in absolute control has something to do with their sexual desires.

When their access to technology and knowledge is so complete and advanced, they could rule over a population without that access like demi-gods. That would enable them to take away anyone they want from their families for made-up charges or under false pretenses.

I don't even want to spell out who I think they would take and what they want to do.

That to me is both the darkest and most likely reason they are so obsessed with total control.

Eyes Wide Shut

Eyes Wide Shut - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[MichaelWitcoff]

If you guys want to know what justifications the “elite” use to drive their agenda, they regularly publish their thoughts. The Club of Rome has been sponsoring (completely debunked) doomsday models (called World 2 and World 3, they are currently working on World 4) which give the national managerial class (politicians) fake graphs and data that scare them into doing what the “elite” want. Currently reading “Models Of Doom,” written almost 50 years ago, totally dismantling the nonsense “predictions” the Club of Rome promotes. Their bloodlust and libido dominandi are covered by a very thin layer of fake philanthropy, covering all their wicked desires and agendas with a public mask of “concern for humanity’s well-being.”

 

[infowarrior1]

There is plenty to nitpick in this hippy propaganda (wind turbines are only really good for windmills, solar is better used for heating water IMO, Tibetan prayer flags are ugly tourist tat, and why is she growing so many flowers and so few tomatoes?), but the principle is sound IF people wanted it and IF there were social incentives to encourage, for example, large numbers of people not racking up debt "studying" how to be gay at university in order to get an office rat job to pay for their fancy pants and dildos, but rather living something much closer to the yeoman farmer's life instead.

Stick a nuclear power plant in there, and this picture becomes a realistic advert for a world where 70 billion people live decent lives without wrecking the place.
View attachment 33946

The architecture could be far better. Art Deco is a better look. But on the other hand living in a bug-hive with a high population density is a nightmare in its own right.

 

[infowarrior1]

I also fear that their interest in absolute control has something to do with their sexual desires.

When their access to technology and knowledge is so complete and advanced, they could rule over a population without that access like demi-gods. That would enable them to take away anyone they want from their families for made-up charges or under false pretenses.

I don't even want to spell out who I think they would take and what they want to do.

That to me is both the darkest and most likely reason they are so obsessed with total control.

They seem intent on ruling over a bunch of Favelas like Brazil.