It is symbolic that exactly 41 years ago, on November 26, 1975, the United States adopted the national security Memorandum NSSM-200 (National Security Study Memorandum), which set the task to control the growth of the world’s population and ensure a global decline in fertility.

THE TALE OF OVERPOPULATION OR THE CREEPING GENOCIDE OF HUMANITY

The reason was that further population growth poses a threat to US dominance over global resources, as it increases political instability in the world, especially in rapidly growing regions. It took less than half a century for humanity to face the real threat of the end of the pension system on a global scale.

Shami notes that just half a century ago, in 1965, the proportions in the world between children under 15 and old people over 65 were about 7:1, including in Africa 14:1, Asia and Latin America-11: 1, Europe and North America-3: 1. At present, according to the UN, this proportion in the world is even less than 3:1, and is steadily deteriorating, and on the global age pyramid, you can see that about 30 years ago, the growth of a younger population sharply slowed down. After 10 years, the NSSM-200 began to bear its thin fruit. The world quickly began to age…

NSSM-200

The NSSM-200 Memorandum was the two-hundredth analytical document submitted by national security adviser Henry Kissinger to the President of the United States. On November 26, 1975, it was approved by President Gerald Ford and remained classified until the early 1990s.With the collapse of the Soviet Union, many goals could not be hidden.

Making up 6% of the world’s population, the Memorandum says, the US consumes a third of the world’s resources, and they are mostly located in regions with rapidly growing populations. Therefore, it is in the interests of the United States to control the growth of their population, which threatens unpredictable consequences. The United States was recommended to start a long-term program to reduce the birth rate around the world by all available methods, involving various international organizations – who, UNICEF, UNESCO, the world Bank, the International Federation of “family planning” and so on.

THE ERA OF GLOBAL DEMOGRAPHIC TRANSITION

The most threatening to US interests were named 13 countries: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Turkey, Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mexico, Colombia and Brazil. Some of them do not reproduce themselves today (Thailand), some-on the verge (Indonesia, Turkey, Mexico, Colombia and Brazil).

Henry Kissinger defines the ways to achieve this goal:

1. The introduction of “family planning” as an integral part of the health systems of “underdeveloped” countries and the strict linking of the development of any medical services, especially in the field of motherhood and childhood, with “family planning”. Simply put, medicine in exchange for a lower birth rate.

2. The development of medical technologies for the neutralization and suppression of human fertility.

3. The introduction of “family planning” as a right (“safe sex” and so on) into the minds of the younger generation, that is, spiritual corruption. Moreover, the Memorandum recommends “influencing national leaders” on this issue.

HOLLYWOOD AS A SUPRANATIONAL WEAPON

After 40 years, we can say with bitterness that the plan was a success, when the call of Turkish President Recep Erdogan to give birth to three children even many Turks were subjected to derogatory criticism-before the plan of supranational elites to reduce the population as their alleged PERSONAL choice for the right to “family planning” (in fact – to have as few children as possible) took root in the minds of people.

Kissinger writes that ” there is an urgent need to take a number of measures to start reducing the birth rate and do it effectively in the 1970s and 1980s.” Now, looking back, it becomes clear that the debauchery that became the norm in Hollywood at that time (how strikingly different are the films made before the 1960s!), was an integral part of the global plan.

“The key factor in the effective use of existing contraceptive techniques has been and remains the problem of education. Without reducing the efforts aimed at the adult population, it is necessary to focus on the younger generation – those who are now in elementary school or even younger, ” Kissinger suggests.

The Memorandum provides for “orientation of new generations to create a small family”. “The desired family size is four or more children.” Therefore, “it is imperative to convince the General public that it is in their individual and national interest to have an average of three and then two children,” the secret plan says. In order to avoid suspicion, “we must make sure that our activities are not perceived by developing countries as policies of a developed country directed against these countries.”

As for the implementing organizations of the plan, ” the US should bring together donor countries, who, UNFPA, UNICEF and the world Bank to create a consortium that would help the most needy countries in the organization… a health system that will be an integral part of family planning.” UNESCO was asked to lead the work with primary school students. The current school “sexprosvet” grows legs from there.

It is noteworthy that in 1989, in the pages of the magazine “Washington Quarterly” in the article “Global demographic trends in 2010 in the aspect of US security”, the Pentagon openly called for “population planning” to be given the status of a program for the development of new weapons! It is not known whether this was done, but in fact the NSSM-200 became a real weapon in the demographic war waged against the whole world. And before humanity in it loomed the real threat of defeat and-enslavement. In fact, it had a global character and was only framed in terms of the state. The real customer was the bigger players.

MYTHS ABOUT OVERPOPULATION OF THE EARTH

Ordering supranational elites

According to the historian Andrei Fursov, in 1974 in the United States was over “creeping coup”, which began with the shooting of John F. Kennedy and ended with the removal of Richard Nixon, when power over the United States established transnational corporations, designed in supranational structures. By that time, the club of Rome (1968) and the Tripartite Commission (1973) had been established. Kissinger was one of their active participants and actually ran the United States in the 1970s.

Interestingly, the NSSM-200 memo was filed with the new President Ford four months after Nixon’s ouster.

As Olga Chetverikova, a specialist in closed Western structures, writes, in the early 1970s, transnational business, having “pumped out” everything necessary from the economy of mass consumption and the state of “universal welfare”, came to the conclusion that it is necessary to develop a strategy for global governance. The Rome club and the Trilateral Commission have become new front structures (the real ones can only be guessed at), uniting representatives of the world’s political, financial and scientific elites and implementing the ideas of globalism.

THE SECOND CIRCUIT OF POWER IN THE WEST AND CAPITALISM

It was during these years that the reports of the Rome club “limits of growth” (1972) appeared with the aim of controlling the growth of the world’s population, “Humanity at a turning point” (1974), “Revision of the international order” (1975) – the names of which speak for themselves – as well as the famous “Crisis of democracy” (1975) – about the need to create a “managed democracy” in the interests of the ruling elites. They, and not the US state, were the main customers of the plan for total control of The earth’s population, at first – at the level of population management.

At the same time, a new term was introduced, which entered the Russian language as “sustainable development”, although this is not entirely accurate. Sustainable development means, rather, development supported by long-term interests, that is, managed. Thus, in the 1970s, the goal was announced-global governance in the interests of the world’s ecology. However, the goal of supranational elites was and remains global power. Birth control out of concern for the environment is only one of the means.

International legalization

FEMINIZM AS AN IDEOLOGICAL WEAPON OF GLOBALISM

The International conference on population and development in Cairo in 1994 adopted a Programme of action that reaffirmed the right of all married couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly on the number of their children and the length of time between their births. What was new in this Programme of action was that the focus should be on the individual and their rights. Ensuring universal access to” family planning services ” (i.e., ways to reduce the birth rate) has been identified as one of the main goals on a global scale. That is, humanity’s dissatisfaction with “family planning services” and its rapid growth was recorded as a postulate. The policy of all-round reduction of the birth rate was legalized.

Tragic result

According to the UN forecast (the average version), the world’s population will grow until the end of the XXI century.

POPULATION OF THE EARTH IN THE PERIOD 1950-2100 YEARS

However, its growth rate will steadily decline.

The total fertility rate will also decrease. In the middle of the century, the average birth rate on Earth will fall below the level of simple reproduction, that is, humanity will begin to die out, although its population will still grow by inertia.

At the same time, the age structure of the world population will deteriorate. Since the mid-1960s, when children made up 40% of the world’s population, their numbers have been steadily decreasing. The proportion of old people, on the contrary, is growing all the time and will continue to grow. The current three-fold superiority of children will double in the early 2030s, and around 2070 there will be fewer children than old people. Earth will become the planet of old men. However, the big problems begin now, because all these trends are already in effect, especially in the “developed countries”, and the working population is declining.

The median age of the World’s population is also growing steadily. In 40 years, it has grown from 21 years to 30 years, and by the end of the century will reach 42 years. The world will become a world of pensioners. The trouble is that the old people will no longer be pensioners by that time: they will have no one to pay their pensions.

MEDIAN AGE OF THE EARTH’S POPULATION IN YEARS

On all charts, we can see that the first 20-25 years after the Second world war, the population really multiplied rapidly: the number of children increased, the annual population growth accelerated, the birth rate was very high (about 5), the median age decreased. The world was a world of young people who had a future to build, and it was encouraging. Less than half a century later, the world quickly grew old, and the future darkened, burdened with the main concern for food.

Gloomy prospect

In 1970, only 0.7% of the World’s population was over 80 years old. According to the UN forecast, by the end of the XXI century, this will be almost one in ten. In 1995, Italy became the first country in the world where the number of elderly people aged 65 years exceeded the number of children under 15 years, after which almost all countries in Europe experienced this ominous change. Aging is expected all over the world: by 2050, everywhere except Africa, the share of the population from 60 years and older will be 25-30%!

PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION AGED 60 YEARS BY REGION OF THE EARTH

All this will happen against the background of a declining birth rate. Already, 75 countries (almost half of the World’s population) have a birth rate below the level of simple reproduction, which is just over two children per woman. In General, in the world it is about 2.5, that is, only slightly higher than the level of simple replacement of generations.

FUTURE MIGRATIONS OF PEOPLES. . HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF UNTIL IT IS REALIZED

This means that almost half of the planet is already virtually extinct, and in General the planet is facing a real prospect of global extinction. The population structure is rapidly deteriorating almost all over the world. And with it, a real threat of extinction looms over the social state. As can be seen from the global fertility map, almost all over the world, except for Africa and some countries in South Asia, the total fertility rate is below the global average.

That is, almost the entire world, except for these regions, is either facing the immediate threat of inability to reproduce itself, or already in a state of hidden extinction (when the population is still growing by inertia, but the birth rate is already below the level of reproduction), or at all at the stage of explicit extinction (Europe). The” end of history ” that Fukuyama dreamed of is quite real, and it is clearly visible in the demographic dimension.

WHO NEEDS LGBT PEOPLE

The UN predicts that by the end of the twenty-first century, almost the entire world will die out: the birth rate will ensure the reproduction of the population only in some countries of Central Africa. This managed “sustainable development” will become total control in exchange for maintaining the lives of an aging population that will only be interested in old-age benefits. “Family planning” in the long run turns out to be a slow way to take away humanity’s freedom in exchange for the Chimera of “reproductive rights”. Although it is precisely the right to procreation that is most hindered. This explains the worldwide decline in financial support for families. And all the tools continue to work to reduce the birth rate: propaganda of egoism, individualism, careerism, consumerism, equality, sodomy, contraception, sterilization, abortion, euthanasia, debauchery and other abominations. The fact that this plan is not subject to revision, recently said us President-elect Donald trump, when he said that about Sodom “marriages” “the issue has already been resolved.”

SODOM

The stable state of humanity that some dreamers dream of, when the population simply moves to a stable zero population growth, is impossible without breaking the fundamental institutions of marriage and the state. Before humanity reaches this imaginary stable state, it is doomed to a catastrophic deterioration of its socio-economic situation, when, rather, will agree to give all power in private hands, if only they provide it with a minimum that the “demographically exhausted” state will no longer be able to fulfill. This will be the finest hour of transnational corporations, which will declare that they are more effectively performing those services that can not be performed by the state, and will take all power into their own hands. In fact, the process of discrediting the state as an effective economic regulator has been unfolding for several decades, when private companies duplicate state institutions under the pretext that they supposedly more effectively perform their role. Like, what difference does it make who provides services to the population, because the state is only a tool for providing services. The term “public services” is promoted for a reason.

And as for the desired stable state, in demographic science, a stable population is one that is characterized by a constant level of birth rate and mortality and a constant age structure. That is, for example, a stably dying population is also stable, since at the same time it changes by the same relative value, only “in minus”. “Sustainable development” in fact turns out to be a planned and managed “legacy”.

In Russia, the nssm-200 plan has largely achieved its goals. “The rapid political, economic, social and demographic changes that took place in the Russian Federation in the 1990s have historical significance and far-reaching consequences,” the UN population Fund mission said in a report. Unfortunately, this is true: the damage to Russia has been done for decades. However, since the beginning of the XXI century, our country has embarked on the path of restoring sovereignty. As psychologists Irina Medvedeva and Tatiana Shishova write, ” Russia’s policy should be aimed at multiplying and protecting life, and not at planning non-existence.” At the same time, the policy of a country is largely determined by its residents by their actions or inaction.

The post GLOBAL POPULATION MANAGEMENT PLAN first appeared on Global Policy.

Are forests so important in the production of oxygen?

In fact, land plants in the process of photosynthesis produce oxygen about as much as then consume themselves.

Most of the O2 is produced by microscopic ocean algae-phytoplankton, which produces ten times more oxygen than it needs.

Another source is the dissociation of water molecules under the action of solar radiation.

So even if all the forests disappear from the surface of the planet, the oxygen content in the atmosphere will not be affected. After all, once the forests on Earth had oxygen, even more than now.

The forest is very important for cleaning the air from dust, saturating it with phytoncides — substances of antimicrobial action. Forests provide shelter and food to many animals and birds, give people aesthetic pleasure. But to call them “green lungs” is at least illiterate.

Will the individual contribute to improving the environment by planting a tree on his own?

I am not at all against planting trees: no matter how useless this case is on a global scale, but it is noble and at the local level really improves the environment.

But this is nothing more than a good deed.

Planting trees will not help against carbon dioxide emissions, because all the gas absorbed by the trees returns to the atmosphere in the autumn, with the rotting of leaves and fallen branches, and then, after the death of the tree — with the oxidation of the main trunk.

That is, planting trees in the best case will leave the content of oxygen and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at the same levels. Or, on the contrary, increase the amount of CO2-it depends on what species of trees and in what climatic zones to plant.

Do you benefit from resource savings and re-use of materials?

Here there is a conflict: for whom does society save water, electricity and fossil fuels if the Executive and corporations dispose of the surplus?

After all, from the fact that we have saved the resources of public utilities, nature has not become easier, except that our bill for housing has decreased. Reduced the consumption of tap water – gave the opportunity to developers to put another house. Because before the water supply network could not pull it out, but the tenants were pogulis.

Energy-saving methods also do not entail a reduction in electricity generation, and this is a real contribution to environmental protection.

Half of the electricity of the Leningrad region is supplied by the nuclear power plant. Do you think it will be closed if the requests are reduced? Rather, a number of supply” for the consumption of excess energy ” aluminum plant.

No matter how much waste paper we hand over, deforestation will not decrease. And trees will go if not on paper, so on pellets.

The same is with the secondary use of plastic: we do not reduce the production of primary plastic. They do not replace each other and are used for the production of different goods.

Perhaps only the secondary use of metals really serves the cause of nature protection, reducing the primary extraction of ore.

Is it difficult to find alternative energy sources?

Today, as an alternative source of heating in the world are widely used heat pumps using the natural heat of the earth’s interior. This is a good solution for a detached house, which is supplied with electricity. If we need to heat the whole village, you can use the deeper layers of the Earth to produce heat.

For the Leningrad region, a potential source of energy is the growing cow parsnip, for the processing of which Russian scientists have already received a patent. The plant contains an average of 24% sugars, which is comparable to sugar cane, which has long been used in Brazil for the manufacture of motor fuel.

For boiler rooms, except peat, can approach and fuel chips, and wood pellets, however, they are quite expensive. Now in the Kingisepp district of the Leningrad region, installations for the production of bio-coal from the felling residues and the same cow parsnip are being created.

Solar and wind energy in our region are already used to illuminate bus stops.

One of the promising sources of energy can be biogas, formed during the decomposition of solid waste. Unlike solid waste incineration technologies, biogas production and use is an environmentally safe technology.

Do electric cars cause less damage to the environment?

This is absolutely not the case. At the stage of production of one electric vehicle, the same amount of electricity is consumed as is released when burning 10 thousand liters of gasoline. This amount of fuel an ordinary car of the middle class consumes in its entire life. Further, batteries for electric vehicles are expensive and poisonous, most of them can not serve more than five years. Of course, they can be recycled, and Yes, the electric car does not emit CO2, but it does thermal power plants that supply electric energy.

It turns out that electric cars run on the same energy from the burned fossil fuel as the usual cars. For electric cars to really become “clean”, they must receive energy from” clean ” sources. At the current stage of development of science and technology is definitely impossible.

What is actually the environmental damage from vehicles?

It is believed that cars are guilty of air pollution in large cities by at least 80%.
But these numbers are completely wrong. The statistics do not take into account emissions from domestic sources — for example, gas stoves responsible for the emission of 21% of carbon monoxide and 3% of nitrogen oxides.

Carbon dioxide emissions from “biological sources” — humans, their Pets, and trees-are also ignored. In addition, we forget that humanity is responsible for only 25% of air pollution.

The remaining 75% is due to natural causes, such as volcanic eruptions, dust storms, forest fires, dust of cosmic origin, etc.thus, the exhaust gases of cars — not the biggest threat to the atmosphere.

Is it Difficult to organize separate garbage collection at the Federal level?

Separate collection is a good method of waste preparation for recycling, but now it is applicable only in low — rise suburbs, where the “middle class”lives. On one communal kitchen on eight families you won’t sort garbage. From the fifteenth floor with different packages in the yard will not run, it’s easier all together in the garbage disposal to pull. But the problem here is not this: it is necessary to begin to dispose of garbage with the creation of enterprises for the processing of secondary raw materials, and not with the purchase of multi-colored containers for selective waste collection. What’s the point if one garbage truck comes to pick up the contents?

Does global warming Occur and how much is the person to blame?

Some researchers have come to the conclusion that in a couple of decades the Kingdom of ice will come. Periods of warming on Earth naturally alternate periods of cooling times ten longer. And the current period of warming, contrary to the common stereotype, is already at an end.

The planet’s climate is changing, but man is not involved.

The so-called scientific underpinnings of the theory of global warming cannot stand the test of common sense. In the alleged events blamed carbon dioxide emissions from sources created by man.

But the annual release of carbon dioxide from the world ocean is 100 times more than anthropogenic.
Who benefits from the spread of myths about”anthropogenic causes of warming”?

I think those to whom these myths help to retain power.

Those who thus inspire the masses to believe that their governments can govern literally everything. After all, if a climate disaster is caused by people-then, then, in their power to prevent it.

But in reality, all our attempts to change the habits of the planet look pathetic and futile.

So even the adoption of a common environmental policy by all States will not be beneficial?

Hardly such a Union can ever happen, because ecologically important decisions, as a rule, hit economic interests. But it must be based on facts, not on misconceptions. Now we hear, for example, that the melting of sea ice will lead to an increase in the level of the world’s oceans — and this, let me remind you, is a denial of Archimedes ‘ law. As long as humanity is possessed by stereotypes, it is even more powerless than it really is.

It Turns out that man absolutely can not help nature?

Don’t get pessimistic. Yes, to fight the inevitability of stupid, and save the planet, saving water in the toilet, will not work. But there are a lot of things we can do based on our own understanding of good deeds. You can plant a tree in your garden or work in a shelter for homeless animals, feed the birds in the Park in winter. It is the inability to remedy the situation in a global sense that tells us to act in good faith. Besides, there’s nothing left for us to do.

Will not the awareness of his powerlessness be an excuse to stop any attempts to improve the world around and become selfish?

You know, there are people who, as a teenager, realize the inevitability of death and decide that they will die young. But there aren’t many, are there? So here. If you can not save humanity, start with yourself-just try to live by conscience.

The post SAVE THE PLANET, SAVING WATER IN THE TOILET WILL NOT WORK… first appeared on Global Policy.