[Eastside]

In case you haven't read this, here it is- http://www.rooshv.com/the-end-goal-of-we...population

I think Roosh brings up a lot of good points here and its worth taking 10 minutes to read through carefully.

With the current (blatantly destructive) immigration policies across Western countries, the promotion of feminism, and other globalist practices that are becoming more and more apparent and aggressive recently, I think it's worth taking a look at what really the end goal of all of this is.

There has been some good analysis of the "big picture" global elite plans mixed in with the Migrant Invasion of Europe thread, the Paris thread, the Trump thread, and other threads related to this topic, but think it deserves a thread of its own.

I'm by no means an expert with this stuff and really only started paying more attention to these sorts of bigger political questions within the last few months, but I think the depopulation theme is something that is a big part of this, for similar reasons that Roosh describes. Its reasonable to assume the elite also want more power as well.

There are several ways I think they can accomplish depopulation, as others have noted here in various threads-

- Feminism and other policies and cultural trends that inspire low birth rates. Roosh goes over this much better than I could in his post. Refer to his article.

- War. Here's a theory that has been bouncing around in my head lately-

I think it's possible a future war is the reason behind the Muslim invasion of Europe right now and it will end with lots of blood spilled. I doubt that the elites are actually fans of Islam. Muslims have high birthrates and stand in opposition to many of the positions that the elites seem to value. I think they are a pawn to start a war in Europe and the middle east. Under the surface of the propaganda in Europe, I think a lot of people are starting to distrust Islam. Elites will continue to push migrants on Europe, causing more crime and attacks, while anger among a silent, growing majority of people continues to mount. Once this anger reaches a critical mass (probably inspired by some sort of terrorist attack in the future), the mainstream narrative (controlled by the elites) will be deliberately "slingshot" in the opposite direction, using the built-up anger of Europeans to launch a war against Islam, leading to many deaths.

This is just one scenario and I'm sure guys like Zelcorpion and Samseau have more nuanced thoughts on this, but what I think is undeniable is that the migrants are part of a bigger plan that involves a substantial conflict of some sort, and almost none of the "end-games" I can think of will end without blood being spilled in at least some part of the world. Curious to hear more thoughts on the longer term implications of the migration/invasion in Europe as well as any possible future war scenarios.

- Disease. Not sure how this will be used (if at all) and I don't want to go off into conspiracy-land, but Bill Gates and his foundation as well as others have said some cryptic things about this. The whole AIDS thing in Africa is suspicious too. In the past, disease (though not of the human-engineered variety) has been a major cause of depopulation (black plauge, small pox in the colonization of the Americas, etc.). It could possibly be a tool going forward as well.

- Other. Share your thoughts

How do recent events fall into the current direction that the global elites want to push forward? What IS that direction exactly and what does the end result look like? How can we prepare for all this? Are elites pursuing these policies because of their own thirst for more power, or do they actually think there is a legitimate population problem and it is up to them to play god and fix this perceived problem for the "greater good" of the people who are alive following their destructive policies? Is the depopulation thing a red-herring and are there really other plans in place? Just brainstorming here, but these are questions increasingly worth asking as the direction the world seems to be going in gets more and more murky all the time.

I've been thinking a lot about this stuff lately and it is hard to separate the tin hat theories with the more legitimate concerns with real evidence behind them, especially being a bit of a newbie to these kinds of issues. I doubt things will turn out exactly (or even anywhere close) how I described above, but I want to get this thread started off by brainstorming some ideas and hearing what others think. Not trying to create a conspiracy thread, but more just a discussion on how the current events going on right now relate to the direction the world is going and the big picture of it all, whether that is depopulation (as Roosh described) or something else. What are your guys' thoughts and predictions for where the world is going?

Here's Roosh's article-

Quote:

Not long ago I proposed that decreasing birth rates in the Western world is happening due to some cosmic force that is seeking balance upon the universe. I missed the mark. The force is not something cosmic or metaphysical, but human. After studying the evidence, it’s clear that there is a conscious scheme to control the human population through both cultural and biological means, which allows the elite to sustain or elevate their power and wealth.

The first piece of evidence showing you have been primed to favor depopulation is that you most likely agree to at least two of the following three statements, even if you consider yourself “red pill”:

“Agendas or schemes by the global elite should be first considered a ‘conspiracy theory.'”
“There are too many people on planet Earth.”
“Needs of the environment must come before plans to increase human fertility.”
It’s not a coincidence that you are already on board with depopulation agenda, and if you live in a Westernized nation, you came to that conclusion “naturally” because since you were in grade school, you have been bombarded with messages about the dangers of over-population and the fragility of the environment. It turns out that all the progressive ideas being spread in the West have one thing in common: they all limit human reproduction.

Here is a short list of progressive causes that have percolated from intellectuals and later sponsored or hijacked by billionaire activists and major government institutions of the West.

1. Abortion is a bodily “choice,” not human murder. Result: it decreases population.

2. Birth control is a “choice” that allows women to better practice consumer lifestyles. Result: it decreases population.

3. Female empowerment in the form of feminism and egalitarianism pushes women into corporate work with the goal of delaying motherhood (or eliminating it outright). Result: it decreases reproduction and family formation.

4. Promotion of sterile human relationships in the form of homosexuality and transsexuality can’t possibly result in the creation of life. Result: it decreases population, reproduction, and traditional family formation.

5. Promotion of atheism, nihilism, individualism, and consumerism as suitable alternatives to traditional living via nuclear family units. Result: it decreases reproduction and traditional family formation.

6. The needs of the “environment” must be served before that of living humans. Result: it makes human guilty of family formation.

7. Massive waves of foreign immigrants are encouraged entry into Western nations to break bonds between tribe and neighbor that decrease notions of nationalism and patriotism while transferring fertility and economic resources from native people to foreigers. Result: it decreases relative population of native citizens.

All of the above decreases the reproductive rate, either directly through the killing of life, or indirectly by promoting guilt and alternative lifestyles that are incompatible with the creation of life. At the same time, immigrant populations are allowed to grow at a faster rate that the natives’ ability to reproduce.

Those who rule over us don’t need more Americans or European-derived people to cement their power and wealth within nations they control through government institutions and transnational organizations and corporations. How would it benefit them if a baby boom takes place among those from American conservative states that believe in the first and second amendments? If you were king of the land, and you regularly met with those who helped you rule, would you really want the type of people who are most likely to overthrow you to reproduce up to their biological maximum, or would you want to hurt their reproductive potential while pushing every degenerate cause under the sun in an effort to limit their numbers?

I wrote Cultural Collapse Theory a year ago, where I detail the specific mechanism that progressivism destroys a host culture, but I could easily re-title it to Population Collapse Theory without having to make many changes to the text. I must admit that I feel a bit foolish for taking so long to realize the agenda all along is depopulation, especially when the elite have openly shared and discussed their plans. All you need to do when watching their interviews is to replace the buzzwords “population control” and “sustainable development” for “depopulation of Western natives.” This is often done under the guise of curing third-world poverty or making the Earth “more livable” for Western children that will never be born.

Here are a few public statements that show how depopulation agenda is important to those who dictate government and corporate policy:

Prince Charles commenting on population control:

I could have chosen Mumbai, Cairo or Mexico City; wherever you look, the world’s population is increasing fast. It goes up by the equivalent of the entire population of the United Kingdom every year. Which means that this poor planet of ours, which already struggles to sustain 6.8 billion people, will somehow have to support over 9 billion people within 50 years.

John P. Holdren, Barack Obama’s top science advisor:

A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men. The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control.

David Rockefeller, gloablist who refuses to die:

rockefeller

Ted Turner, founder of CNN and one of the largest landowners in the United States:



Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, which successfully used abortion to decimate the black population in the United States:

The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.

Thomas Ferguson, former official of U.S. State Department Office of Population Affairs:

There is a single theme behind all our work—we must reduce population levels. Either governments do it our way, through nice clean methods, or they will get the kinds of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it….

Bill Gates talked about using one of his foundations to play god in Africa and limit the population using biological means. It’s quite interesting to see a dorky looking geek so interested in population control, but then again his father served as head of Planned Parenthood.



Gates’ friend, Warren Buffet, is also on board with depopulation. He gave $3 billion to his wife’s Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation. Take a guess as to where that foundation donates most of its money? Planned Parenthood.

The tax records also show that most of the foundation’s spending goes to abortion and contraception advocacy and research. According to Access Philanthropy, a research institute that focuses on the giving preferences of foundations and corporate donors, family planning is one of the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation’s main purposes. The foundation’s nonprofit 990 tax form shows that in 2008, Planned Parenthood and its affiliates in the U.S. received about $45 million; the international arm of the organization got about $8 million. There is no line item for the Ryan program [pro-abortion organization] or the Family Planning Fellowship [pro-abortion organization]. But the foundation paid out around $50 million to universities with one or both of the programs.

By now you should note that the more sinister the individual, the more they are portrayed by the media as harmless, awkwardly geeky, and folksy (e.g. Mark Zuckerberg, the Google founders, and the CEO of Starbucks).

There’s the 1974 document titled National Security Study Memorandum 200 (full PDF text), commissioned by Henry Kissinger, whose obsession with international order led him to the conclusion that rising population of some countries would threaten US interests, and that contraception must be promoted within them to limit their population. Kissinger, another zombie globalist who won’t die, is still instrumental in dictating policies around the world through his consulting firm Kissinger Associates.

The United Nations has an action plan called Agenda 21 that advocates for “sustainable development.” One way it does that is through worldwide promotion of feminism, which has the effect of removing women from the family home and into corporate workplaces that are under control by the same gloabalists in the UN club. As any Western nation’s population chart can tell you, feminism goes hand-in-hand with depopulation. The UN offers confirmation that feminism is a great form of birth control since they consider it essential for “sustainable development,” globalist code for reducing the birth rate.

[Human settlement improvements] should be based on technical cooperation activities, partnerships among the public, private and community sectors and participation in the decision-making process by community groups and special interest groups such as women, indigenous people, the elderly and the disabled. These approaches should form the core principles of national settlement strategies. In developing these strategies, countries will need to set priorities among the eight programme areas in this chapter in accordance with their national plans and objectives, taking fully into account their social and cultural capabilities. Furthermore, countries should make appropriate provision to monitor the impact of their strategies on marginalized and disenfranchised groups, with particular reference to the needs of women.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) is led by Christiana Figueres, the daughter of Costa Rica’s former president, ensuring her admission to the globalist club. She states in the following video that the UN should “make every effort” to decrease population from its current trajectory (start at 4:30).



The former Chief Of Bioethics to the National Institute Of Health (NIH) is Israeli Ezekiel Emanual, who is brother to former Obama advisor and Chicago mayor Rahm Emmanuel. In an Atlantic article, he claimed that we should all consider dropping dead at 75 because it would save the government trillions of dollars. The most anti-ethical and chaotic arguments will come under the guise of ethics and world order.

I am talking about how long I want to live and the kind and amount of health care I will consent to after 75. Americans seem to be obsessed with exercising, doing mental puzzles, consuming various juice and protein concoctions, sticking to strict diets, and popping vitamins and supplements, all in a valiant effort to cheat death and prolong life as long as possible. This has become so pervasive that it now defines a cultural type: what I call the American immortal.

I reject this aspiration. I think this manic desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided and potentially destructive. For many reasons, 75 is a pretty good age to aim to stop.

The quotes, videos, and articles above barely scratch the surface of what you can research yourself on Youtube and Google. While there is an unhinged element on many of the sites that talk about depopulation, I trust you can use your own judgement in separating fact from emotion.

Most corporations, whose sole motivation is profit for shareholders, have for some odd reason pathological soft spots for women and the environment. It’s no coincidence that empowerment of women into becoming corporate workers and mindless consumers shatters their reproduction while promotion of environmental concerns makes you not only guilty to have a family of your own, but inclined to give unwavering support and authority to globalist agendas that limit population in the “privileged” Western world while at the same time supporting the breeding of third-world immigrants to displace them.

Men who have come to the conclusion of depopulation arrive at it from different paths. I saw it not through politics but through sex. I saw firsthand how the government, media, and universities are deliberately trying to promote mistrust between man and woman through feminism, the myth of rape culture, and social justice ideas that allow a divide and conquer strategy to pit the sexes against each other, making every woman see a man as a potential rapist and every man see a woman as someone who could ruin his life.

The fact that men are scared to death of a false rape accusation or are fearful of being taken to the cleaners in divorce is a feature of depopulation-driven progressivism, not a bug. A wedge has been driven between men and women so that you see each other as threats to your happiness and livelihood. It is by design that you are not capable or willing of doing anything more with a woman than mutual masturbation under the influence of alcohol that will not result in family creation. Just in case you do want to make babies, a backup plan has been enacted so that reproduction will still not result: essentially all fertile young women are on birth control, encouraged to go on it after puberty. Even if she does become pregnant, the means to abort it will be so easy, especially with you convincing her to do so since coincidentally there are state and federal laws that enslave any middle class man who thinks having children could somehow serve his interests.

It’s important to understand that birth control doesn’t have to be only biological in the form of pills or abortion, but in the form of ideas and beliefs that instill fear and dread about reproducing by associating having a child with a loss of individual or consumer freedom. I wouldn’t be surprised if “men going their own way” groups are indirectly supported by the state to increase a man’s fear of reproducing with women.

In case you still have doubts that depopulation is the overreaching agenda of Western elites, I ask you to take a look at charts of fertility birth rates from World Bank data and ask yourself why isn’t there any concerted effort to reverse the declines? Why aren’t governments supporting natalist policies like in Russia that aim to seed future generations of natives to create a stronger nation that will endure the ages, instead of importing criminals and democratically challenged Mexicans or radical Islamists?

population-chart

What’s amazing is that the US birth rate is below replacement rate even accounting for its fecund immigrants, showing that fertile peoples become effectively sterile once inserted into an environment that has been slated for depopulation. Currently there is not one European nation west of Russia, even when including Eastern Europe, that has a fertility rate above that of the replacement rate. By comparison, the fertility rate of Niger is 7.56, four times that of the United States, but don’t worry, Bill Gates’ humanitarian “vaccine” program will take care of that problem when the time is right through his pet project, a birth control microchip that can be turned on and off by wireless remote.

The three main cultural mechanisms of reducing native populations is to program people to be concerned for women’s rights, third world immigration, and the environment. This is why nearly everyone on the left, including SJW’s, are fanatically supportive of all three. Leftists have been soundly convinced of issues that lead to the destruction of the family unit, the breakdown of their society’s social fabric, and their own voluntary sterilization. When you combine biological efforts that include birth control and abortion, you can see how Westerners have absolutely no chance of recovering their population compared to African, Middle Eastern, and Asian populations that do not currently face both cultural and biological bombs to reduce their birth rates, but will soon enough be targeted once the Westerners are sufficiently weakened and depopulation goals are met.

You probably now understand why when Brussels accepts a new country into the European Union, the first thing they do is mandate a gay pride parade on the capital streets, and why they immediately start screeching about the need for more women’s rights. This is the cultural attack that aims to limit the reproduction of that country so that their sovereignty can be easily dismantled within only two generations, an attack that begins even before they join the EU in order to “prove” they are ready to destroy themselves for the short term gain of big loans and free trade for that nation’s local elite.

Even the form of game that I taught early in my career, of one-night stands, was compatible with the depopulation agenda since reproduction would often not result from it. This meant that I was a useful idiot for many years. I can’t help but notice that attacks against me have increased in intensity as I move away from teaching sterile sex and anti-family ideas to promoting more traditional values that are far likelier to result in reproduction.

While I would certainly agree with you that there are plenty of people currently inhabiting the Earth, I disagree that a small group of globalists at the top should be able to play Dr. Eugenicist and determine who reproduces or not without limiting their own reproduction, especially since their hypocrisy about caring for the environment is on full display as they fly around the world in their private jets to their numerous mansions. They do not want you to impregnate a fertile 19 year old and have many home-schooled and ritalin-free children with her. Instead, you’re bombarded with messages to marry an aging spinster whose womb is likely already sterile and who can’t give you more than two children, which is not nearly enough to sustain the population.

Perhaps in the 1950’s you were told that having a big family is the masculine thing to do, but it’s almost impossible these days to see images of large nuclear families represented positively in television or commercials, especially with women under 25 who are not already slaves to corporations and government propaganda.

I’m coming to the conclusion that the only way to defeat the evils of liberalism, feminism, social justice, and progressivism is to have huge families and create tribes that are free-thinking, self-reliant, and, most importantly, armed. The men of the future who can resist totalitarianism and unjust government authority come from the wombs of the women living today, and those women must at some point be convinced that being stay-at-home mothers who raise strong men is superior to becoming zombie consumers who poison and sterilize their own bodies.

The last thing that those in power want is for women to pair-bond with independent, masculine men who do not need the state and who place more importance and loyalty in their blood relatives and nation than to leftist ideas, iPhones, and sports teams. In the past, my fantasies were about sleeping with as many women as possible so I can be the playboy that I saw in the Hollywood movies, but now they are about creating the sons who will one day lead their people and their nation. It’s squarely up to us to create the men who can eliminate the parasites that are successfully controlling modern humanity.

[Libertas]

I think the depopulation thing is a red herring.

Law 3 of power tells readers to throw a smokescreen to conceal your true intentions.

Depopulation works for them in some areas geographically, but in others it doesn't.

What is the result of "the elite's" actions? What have they been doing, through whatever reason being ideological and economic?

The goal is to dissolve nation-states (whether de jure or more likely de facto as seen in the EU) and form a one world order. You can call it conspiracy or whatever. I don't believe in the image of the ominous Jewish (or whatever) merchants rubbing their hands and planning precise events 30 years in advance. That's nonsensical in a chaotic universe.

But what you can't deny is that they want a one world, globalized system. This religion of equality that's been the dominant meme of the past 50 years and has logic stretching back thousands (as I am showcasing in an upcoming project), actually, promotes that.

They have a view of "global equality."
They have an equal religious view of the free movements of goods and people across national borders.
Culture is anathema or an obstacle that needs to be removed. Everyone should be seen as an atomistic, isolated, and self-interested individual and not as a member of any tribe or nation.

This is also why libertarians are useful idiots for the most part, at least mainstream ones. The smarter ones have realized that their vision of liberty is incompatible with certain cultures and have justly elevated their desire for liberty above the normal assumptions of egalitarianism.

Depopulation in the west right now serves that goal, so they can bring in hordes of third world, mostly male, immigrants to undermine national identity in the stronger countries. Likewise, Africa's population explosion which pushes people into Europe and elsewhere helps it (remember that Africa would not be exploding without massive GMO food programs).

Again, I don't want to sound sinister, and I hope the defeatism and tinfoil hat shit doesn't come out in full force, but look at the big picture and that's what they want, operated through a nexus of institutions and interests political, economic, and cultural. Like Marine Le Pen said, "nationalists vs globalists."

Oh well, that's my input (you can read a post I wrote called "Check Your Political Sense of Entitlement" on my blog for more info). This should be moved to the Deep Forum.

[Eastside]

Good points. And yeah if the mods want to move this to the deep forum that would make sense. I don't consider anything you said to be too far down conspiracy-land either. I was mainly just hoping to keep this discussion reasoned and not go off the tracks too far with statements that can't be backed up by facts or logical thinking.

[ChrisPitts]

I tend to agree with the depopulation theory and I think Libertas brings up some good points above. It is very interesting that all the things that your modern cultural marxist espouses: feminism, abortion, atheism, faux "equality".. all do the same thing, and that's destroy or hinder the forming of the most important bonds that lead to full and happy lives: family, love, and community. You can see this easily by talking to your average leftist. They are most likely to be an extremely unhappy individual: hate their job, have problems with their girlfriend/wife, low amount of friends, prone to drama. Their lives are unsatisfying because their ideology is not designed for happiness. Their perpetual victim status prevents them achieving real happiness. And that should be your first clue that they don't have the right path in life. For example, I happen to sit next to a rapid Bernie Sanders fan at work. He has, what I can only describe as the "ups-and-downs", whereas he has good days and bad days. The reasons why he has down days: his fiancee cheated on numerous times and moved out. He has little friends and is the very definition of "white and nerdy". He makes a crummy salary and thinks all this country's problems can be solved by taxing the rich at 90%. And then you can see leftism for what it really is: it's the philosophy for losers. The philosophy for the people who don't win in the current system (which rewards the traits exhibited by neomasculine men), and wish to change it (through cultural marxism) to another system where they are not losers anymore.

What's strikingly noticeable about their efforts to change the current system is that most people with the ability to think rationally and critically will not go along with it. They will want to preserve the system that allowed them to make something of themselves. And that's why the best people, people who are at the top of their fields, some of the most intelligent people out there, all tend to skew conservative: they want to preserve the system that enabled them to achieve their current status.

As our world continues to change and the rapid leftism that we see everyday gets further entrenched across the world, it's not shocking to see population rates start to nosedive. Europe has been at barely replacement levels for decades. If not for immigration, the white population of the United States would be the same way. Interestingly enough, it's areas that do not suffer from ingrained state leftism that see the largest population growth like Africa or Asia. I would say as a tool for controlling population, it's incredibly poor. Think about it: you effectively ruin an entire generation (or two or three) of your population by not giving them the mindset and skills to live fulfilling lives. All aspects of culture suffer when you have barely educated people (products of public education) who don't have meaningful skills to contribute to their current society's legacy. A great example of this is art. It wouldn't be hard to find anyone on this forum who would agree that any art created in last 100 years is mostly shit. Especially when compared with some of the masterpieces of Western Civilization from 500 years ago. You can't tell me that Warhol's Campbell's soup can is the equivalent of Michelangelo's David. It's not even comparable and just a symptom of a larger issue. Frankly, it's the start of cultural suicide. We see this now with the large migration of muslims into Europe. These people do not care two figs for European culture. They would rather tear down churches and build mosques in their place. Historically speaking, the easiest way for humans to control population would be through wars, but in the last 200 years, as war has become more destructive and frightening, we have moved away from this method. Something had to replace it. And I think that's why we see these agents of depopulation like feminism, faux "equality", atheism taking effect. It may be nature's way of culling the herd.

That doesn't make it the right option, though, in my opinion. I live my life to the fullest that I can every day. Embracing neomasculine principles have made me the happiest that I can ever remember, and teaches you to value what's really important in life, like your family, your relationships, and your sense of community. It brings out in me the competitive nature to drive and win, no matter what the task. I have taken on more hobbies in the last year than I thought I ever could, all because I desire to live an exceptional life. And that's the difference between us and them. Leftism will keep you a perpetual victim and lead you to never be satisfied. Neomasculinity will teach the principles that will lead to a full and happy life. I know which one I choose.

[Roosh]

Quote:

What is the result of "the elite's" actions? What have they been doing, through whatever reason being ideological and economic?

The goal is to dissolve nation-states (whether de jure or more likely de facto as seen in the EU) and form a one world order. You can call it conspiracy or whatever.

One world government and depopulation go hand in hand, and I believe they are doing it simultaneously. I could agree that depopulation is a tool to achieve one-world government, but either way, it is one of the most defining agendas of the elite today. They want their one-world government to control a stable, ordered, and weak people, and using the depopulation devices (feminism, third world immigration, environmentalism) will help get them there.

[SunW]

I've heard a lot of theories as to what's going on, but it all really comes down to this question:

Quote:

Now we need solid solutions. There are plenty of younger men who are looking for leadership to lead us through the darkness, and right now you are that leader.

I can't jump on board a view that promotes hopelessness. The whole "global elites" Is often a disguise to hide inaction. If they're the bad guys, how do we stop them, or do we build our own society - as I see it, those are the only two options.

Rome was built by young male outcasts, who were farmers. From early history, there's little evidence that there was even women - though they did eventually appear. Is that what we're proposing? Building the next Rome - a bunch of us getting together and starting our own agrarian society? Also, some of us may be near, or in the 1% and we're not globalists, so not all of the "rich" are globalists. What do we do?

In a similar vein a lot of people have criticized the Federal Reserve - and I am one of them. What made Satoshi Nakamoto was that he created a solution, and many of us have built and are building on it. That's the team that I want to be on; I see a problem, now let's create the solution.

[Eastside]

(11-19-2015 09:00 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:

What is the result of "the elite's" actions? What have they been doing, through whatever reason being ideological and economic?

The goal is to dissolve nation-states (whether de jure or more likely de facto as seen in the EU) and form a one world order. You can call it conspiracy or whatever.

One world government and depopulation go hand in hand, and I believe they are doing it simultaneously. I could agree that depopulation is a tool to achieve one-world government, but either way, it is one of the most defining agendas of the elite today. They want their one-world government to control a stable, ordered, and weak people, and using the depopulation devices (feminism, third world immigration, environmentalism) will help get them there.

I tend to agree with the hand-in-hand one world government/depopulation thinking. I do think Libertas brings up good points though about areas like Africa and parts of Asia that are experiencing above replacement-level birth rates right now. I wonder how this fits into everything, or if it even matters because those countries are weaker anyways and easier to control. Maybe they figure they can just kick the can down the line with these countries and deal with them later after they have a more firm control over Western countries.

[Eastside]

(11-19-2015 09:10 PM)SunW Wrote:  

I've heard a lot of theories as to what's going on, but it all really comes down to this question:

Quote:

Now we need solid solutions. There are plenty of younger men who are looking for leadership to lead us through the darkness, and right now you are that leader.

I can't jump on board a view that promotes hopelessness. The whole "global elites" Is often a disguise to hide inaction. If they're the bad guys, how do we stop them, or do we build our own society - as I see it, those are the only two options.

Rome was built by young male outcasts, who were farmers. From early history, there's little evidence that there was even women - though they did eventually appear. Is that what we're proposing? Building the next Rome - a bunch of us getting together and starting our own agrarian society? Also, some of us may be near, or in the 1% and we're not globalists, so not all of the "rich" are globalists. What do we do?

In a similar vein a lot of people have criticized the Federal Reserve - and I am one of them. What made Satoshi Nakamoto was that he created a solution, and many of us have built and are building on it. That's the team that I want to be on; I see a problem, now let's create the solution.

Of course. Part of the solution is better defining the problem though. The more you understand what is going on, the easier it is to adapt. Even though this thread will probably focus more on identifying the big picture issue, feel free to discuss solutions as well. That's important too. There is always something you can do to make the best of a situation.

[Libertas]

(11-19-2015 09:00 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:

What is the result of "the elite's" actions? What have they been doing, through whatever reason being ideological and economic?

The goal is to dissolve nation-states (whether de jure or more likely de facto as seen in the EU) and form a one world order. You can call it conspiracy or whatever.

One world government and depopulation go hand in hand, and I believe they are doing it simultaneously. I could agree that depopulation is a tool to achieve one-world government, but either way, it is one of the most defining agendas of the elite today. They want their one-world government to control a stable, ordered, and weak people, and using the depopulation devices (feminism, third world immigration, environmentalism) will help get them there.

I think it's more the KIND of population than the precise level of it.

They want a homogenized world filled with people with no attachment to anything other than their individual consumerist desires, a global "one" people with no past and no future. That's what makes them easy to control, not so much the level.

Perhaps to do that they need a depopulation, but as I said, I think it's more specific on area and region for the time being. They want the West depopulated and replaced with bastardized peoples. To do this Africa's population explosion is helpful.

But I think it's going to backfire on them. Simon Wolfe at the Iron Legion wrote that Islam is a solution to all this bullshit, and indeed it is, but it's not the solution we want.

(11-19-2015 09:10 PM)SunW Wrote:  

I've heard a lot of theories as to what's going on, but it all really comes down to this question:

Quote:

Now we need solid solutions. There are plenty of younger men who are looking for leadership to lead us through the darkness, and right now you are that leader.

I can't jump on board a view that promotes hopelessness. The whole "global elites" Is often a disguise to hide inaction. If they're the bad guys, how do we stop them, or do we build our own society - as I see it, those are the only two options.

Rome was built by young male outcasts, who were farmers. From early history, there's little evidence that there was even women - though they did eventually appear. Is that what we're proposing? Building the next Rome - a bunch of us getting together and starting our own agrarian society? Also, some of us may be near, or in the 1% and we're not globalists, so not all of the "rich" are globalists. What do we do?

In a similar vein a lot of people have criticized the Federal Reserve - and I am one of them. What made Satoshi Nakamoto was that he created a solution, and many of us have built and are building on it. That's the team that I want to be on; I see a problem, now let's create the solution.

Excellent post.

The Golden One lays this out well:

All this talk of an "elite" is not entirely wrong, but it's not entirely right either. It's a convenient defense mechanism to not take any action, and lay the blame for the problem on someone else.

The fact of the matter is this would never be happening if people said "no." But they prefer to live in their comfort zones.

[Sherman]

I would add two other factors. First, with the rapid advances in robots, they won't have a need for a lot of people. People have emotions and needs and are too risky. The other factor, is that these billionaires are atheists, and having no faith in an afterlife are pushing technology so they can live forever. They are desperate to eliminate death - the one thing that makes us all equal. But, at the same time they are promoting a false equality for everyone else. They see themselves as the owners of the earth and we are temporary renters.

6 billionaires who want to live forever

http://www.techinsider.io/billionaires-w...ver-2015-9

[Virtus]

Current tax sustenance requires use of accountants. There are 1.25 million accountants in the US. Each accountant requires services of hair dressers, gardners, farmers, carpenters, teachers, etc. Etc. Which if you think of it contribute too little to the cultural and scientific progress of the human race. Most are simply fucking shitting breeding useless eaters from that point of view

[CynicalContrarian]

(11-19-2015 09:55 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

I would add two other factors. First, with the rapid advances in robots, they won't have a need for a lot of people. People have emotions and needs and are too risky. The other factor, is that these billionaires are atheists, and having no faith in an afterlife are pushing technology so they can live forever. They are desperate to eliminate death - the one thing that makes us all equal. But, at the same time they are promoting a false equality for everyone else. They see themselves as the owners of the earth and we are temporary renters.

6 billionaires who want to live forever

http://www.techinsider.io/billionaires-w...ver-2015-9

That's one thing I find so tiresome about the actions of the likes of Henry Kissinger.
They spend their entire lives attempting to control this planet & so desperate are they for extended life.

Jokes on Kissinger though.
Just like Lenin, Woodrow Wilson et al.
He'll most likely be dead before any of this globalist nonsense comes to complete 1984-esque fruition.

“Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac,” and “The elderly are useless eaters”. – Henry Kissinger

Pot, kettle, black you elderly, bloated sack of shit.

[Easy_C]

At risk of tipping my hand, you are remarkably close in some areas OP. Particularly about war. I expect WW3 to begin either 2018 or 2024, to be followed by geological ccataclysms in North America approx 2032.

[Ocelot]

(11-19-2015 07:53 PM)Libertas Wrote:  

They have a view of "global equality."
They have an equal religious view of the free movements of goods and people across national borders.
Culture is anathema or an obstacle that needs to be removed. Everyone should be seen as an atomistic, isolated, and self-interested individual and not as a member of any tribe or nation.

This is also why libertarians are useful idiots for the most part, at least mainstream ones. The smarter ones have realized that their vision of liberty is incompatible with certain cultures and have justly elevated their desire for liberty above the normal assumptions of egalitarianism.

I find it's easier to understand things clearly if you replace the word "equality" with "fungibility", because that's what seems to be the wet dream of the elites - total human fungibility.

The reduction of all humans to atomised, completely fungible individuals makes sense if you're at the top of society, because it drastically increases the predictability of the systems you control. The means of achieving this goal has been the destruction of every institution which used to exist between the individual, and the state. Instead of families, churches, communities and nations to 'belong' to, people now face that overbearing power utterly alone.

The proles fill their need to 'belong' with football teams; the middle classes fill it by joining the roving gangs of witch-hunters on college campuses and the throughout the media - and neither of them have the capacity to affect meaningful resistance against the continual degradation of their way of life.

Alongside divorce and family law, this is probably the main contributor to the climb in male suicides. Man was built to endure many things, but ennui is not one of them.

[Durango]

(11-19-2015 07:53 PM)Libertas Wrote:  

This is also why libertarians are useful idiots for the most part, at least mainstream ones. The smarter ones have realized that their vision of liberty is incompatible with certain cultures and have justly elevated their desire for liberty above the normal assumptions of egalitarianism.

Depopulation in the west right now serves that goal, so they can bring in hordes of third world, mostly male, immigrants to undermine national identity in the stronger countries. Likewise, Africa's population explosion which pushes people into Europe and elsewhere helps it (remember that Africa would not be exploding without massive GMO food programs).

Again, I don't want to sound sinister, and I hope the defeatism and tinfoil hat shit doesn't come out in full force, but look at the big picture and that's what they want, operated through a nexus of institutions and interests political, economic, and cultural. Like Marine Le Pen said, "nationalists vs globalists."

Oh well, that's my input (you can read a post I wrote called "Check Your Political Sense of Entitlement" on my blog for more info). This should be moved to the Deep Forum.

Couldn't agree more on your point with current libertarianism. Who doesn't love freedom and liberty in abstract? But it has gotten to the point where they are nothing more than zealots. Kind of like how elite leftists use environmentalism and open border policy to collect more tax revenue and keep their homes and communities unscathed (think Marin County). Libertarians preach liberty and individualism, to the point where national pride and sovereignty come second to profits and economic growth. Both result in weaker communities and a middle class more dependent on the system, thus more obedient and willing sheep.