It isn’t secret

It's not as if United Nations documents are secrets, it's just that almost no one reads them, or researches their authors.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0006/000681/068197eo.pdf
is a wonderful place to start, folks.
Then you can move on to his brothers' expose, https://archive.org/stream/endsandmeans035237mbp/endsandmeans035237mbp_djvu.txt
Sorry to hijack your comment.

Ah yes. I meant you can look into the headlines and see it today but yeah, that’s for digging up an oldie but goodie!

What about the feminist-movement? I believe it’s why people have less children. Did the CIA create Madonna?

The biggest issue with population control is that it isn't a "necessity" as the elites would have you believe. We have the resources to house, feed, and clothe all 7.5 billion human beings. We have plenty of arable land and clean water. We are on the cusp of technology that could move us into a post-scarcity age and allow for the basic necessities to be synthesized at little to no cost. No one needs to die.

Now whether we utilize the coming technological breakthroughs, whether we ensure power is distributed to the masses, and whether we ensure resources are properly dispersed, is up to us, collectively, as a species.

We technically have the resources but we don't need all the people.

I don't think we don't need all the people either. We are fine with our current population level if we take advantage of our current resources, technology on the horizon, and ensure we practice sustainable farming and fishing, as well as transition to a green economy.

All that being said, the UN still estimates global population to level off about 2050. Even if the Sub-Saharan African economies keep growing at their incredibly slow rates, within the next 30-40 years their economies should reach the current level of the developed world. Population is expected to peak in 2050 at around 9.5 billion, after which it is expected to level off and then slowly decline.

What we need is selective depopulation for the time being. Because while we technically have enough resources, they aren't getting where they should be.

What we need is selective depopulation

And who will choose who lives or dies? Who gets to reproduce or not? It's a very slippery slope to start going down, one which can not easily be re-climbed.

Unfortunately for most, only two real forces are fighting over that very issue, right now, and every day after.

I'm not talking about killing people. But we should be trying to get the most at risk populations to slow down their birth rate. Places where there are famines, water scarcity and such.

ng. Because while we technically have enough resources, they aren't getting where they should be.

eugenics much?

Be careful devaluing your fellow human. It is a slippery slope.

The fewer people we have, the higher the value.

I mean sure, if you're a robot with no feelings.

The fewer people we have, the higher the value.

The fewer people we have, the smaller our chances of ousting the ruling class. That's why the final goal is to cull the population. They understand the power we could have over them if we were to ever wake up en masse.

It would be silly for them to cull the population. The ideal situation is to have a large population of impoverished people. The majority of the people would work and shop at walmart. Never being able to rise above their station in life but also never being poor enough to think about uprising. Ideally they have a few kids to keep them tied down and too worried about supporting a family to think very much.

You've just described the world as it is now! Yes, it would seem silly to us normies. But they don't think like us.

Unfortunately, sounds like your one of the ones that has to Go :(

yeah do not devalue a fellow human because he might murder you in a horrendous way, good thing God actually said he would unleash hell upon the Earth in its last days. What a time to be alive, alas it is Death.

Case in point.

Nihilism distilled is Death's Meta and Vice-Versa.

Choose Life, Choose God.

Now consider that the majority of the population doesn't have access to a walmart or equivalent..

What a dumb analogy .... The problem is people are clustered in too highly populated areas together (cities) while millions of acres of desolate or less populated areas go unused .

Yeah, if we didn't care about the natural environment or any of the animals that inhabit it, we could probably house, feed, and clothe more than 50 billion people.

Unfortunately you're one of the ones that needs to Go ;)

And why is that, friend?

Or they could just advocate birth control. Provide contraception to third world countries and give women easier access to abortion. In general, populations also decline after a country reaches a certain point of stability.

Honestly, there should probably only be like 100 million on the planet anyway.

I doubt that would help because plenty of women have access to both and yet we still have more babies being born than people are dying. It's also very expensive. Sex education would probanly be more beneficial so women can take steps to prevent pregnancy like contraception. Too many women think abortion is a form of contraception. I've gone through a miscarriage, it was excruciating, and emotionally damaging. I wouldn't want anyone having to go through an unnecessary abortion.

But Jesus wants more Jesus loving babies.

Tell me more about how you don't think you or your children don't have a place on this earth.

I don't intend to have have kids because I can't presume that another person wants to exist. I think breeding is the most immoral act possible, because you're saying that your desire to make a person trumps that person's right to be made or not.

If I ever have a parent yearning, I'll adopt another person was forced to be be here through no fault of their own.

Awesome, my kids are gonna love the extra space you're making.

Seriously though, do you think it is normal for a species to be so self loathing it decides to end its existence via self-neutering?

Georgia Guidestones

No i would say in 20-30 year pretty well all the gramparents and parents of 1980-2000 babies will be dead. And they have like all the money. Im pretty interested how the world will compensate for those deaths

Millennial's parents will still be alive in 20-30 years, most are only in their 40's and early 50's atm. Give it 40-50 before that generation is gone for all intents and purposes, and the youngest Millennials are reaching middle ages while the oldest are in their 70's.

National Security Memorandum 200

They're only concerned with white population reduction. Once that problem has been demographically solved the remaining mixed and nonwhite populations will start witnessing the shift away from pretend-liberty into despotism.

"They" are the ones making sure the US can't give birth control to (predominantly non-white) third world countries though.

What is and will never be explicitly defined is that "Climate Change" is a public excuse for the UN's policy Agenda 21, now referred to as the 2030 Agenda. It outlines a global initiative for governments to control land, resources, and population. What many people feel is that this initiative isn't driven by the interest of the habitability of the planet, it's an excuse to gain control over the land and people. The continuous wars over oil and resources, and ongoing country legislation to challenge the public's freedom further this speculation.

Some Docs The Global 2000 Report prompting Agenda 21

1974 Population Control report prompting the Global 2000 Report

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1983/05/the-global-2000-juggernaut?

Refusing to do anything about climate change until it causes global catastrophe is a great way to ensure global government. Adopting some of the entirely non-binding, mostly reasonable suggestions in Agenda 21 would be an absolute necessity to preserving national sovereignty and individual liberty in the long term.

Maybe. Over here in the US it seems like everything revolves around money. So many are obsessed with materialsm and the idea of becoming famous. Is this an agenda that's pushed by our government, who knows, I don't, but I think it's possible. Our food is trash, our health care is trash, our government overall doesn't really seem to care about us. If you have money than you have nothing to worry about besides maybe your wife leaving you and taking half of everything. If you are poor like me then you are fucked unless you give up certain things 😆

The climate changes they've made sure are going to happen are going to do a lot of population culling in the coming century.

Population control is about preserving resources and the environment for the rich. Too many poor people ruins the scenery. Now that AI and robotics can meet their labor demands, they don't want the desperate poor to reproduce anymore.

While I was sitting in bad traffic the other day, the thought occurred to me that if I was in a position that entailed immense power, population control might be a tempting idea..

There's strong incentive not to improve infant mortality rates and combat malnourishment in Africa. One estimate I've heard is that the continent could conceivably push 4 billion people if they had higher standards of living.

If you put every man, woman, and child currently alive on the planet into a box that measured 2' x 2' x 6' for each of them and assembled all those into a cube it would measure exactly 1 mile x 1mile x 1 mile with some room to spare for a few more.

I want you think about that in comparison to the size of the world we live on. We're not short of space and we're not short of resources we simply have far to many wasteful and destructive habits and there's nothing more offensive than the idea that we need to get rid of people so we can keep right on being wasteful and destructive instead of becoming proper stewards and careful managers of a natural world that is more than capable of comfortably sustaining even twice as many people as currently exist.

When you see someone like Bill Gates talking about too many people in the world just remember that he lives in a 50,000 square foot mansion that he needs a golf cart to get from one end to other. Or any of the British royals pushing the same line, living in castles with estates that encompass thousands of square miles.

In fact it's almost always inordinately wealthy elitists who are the very last people who should ever be complaining about being pressed for space or unable to find enough food for themselves to be talking about there being too many of the rest of us for their liking.

Their real problem is that there are too few of them and too many of us to ensure their complete control and dominance and the fear that we'll come to realize that it's them and their vision of what they want this world to be for their own relentlessly greedy and extravagant ways that is greatest problem that is actually facing us.

Yet at the same time say it’s necessary to flood Europe and Japan, USA with “refugees”. Something foul at play for sure.

Millennial's parents will still be alive in 20-30 years, most are only in their 40's and early 50's atm. Give it 40-50 before that generation is gone for all intents and purposes, and the youngest Millennials are reaching middle ages while the oldest are in their 70's.

It would be silly for them to cull the population. The ideal situation is to have a large population of impoverished people. The majority of the people would work and shop at walmart. Never being able to rise above their station in life but also never being poor enough to think about uprising. Ideally they have a few kids to keep them tied down and too worried about supporting a family to think very much.