The Highwire with Del Bigtree - THE POPULATION CONTROL PUSH

Episode Date: November 13, 2023

A deep dive analysis into the origins of global depopulation for the earth traces its steps from Thomas Malthus, to the Club of Rome, and to the doorstep of Bill Gates’ vaccine charitable giving. As fertility rates fall around the world, things may not be what they seem.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

We've done some deep dive reports on this show, you and I together about some hot-button topics, the origins of eugenics in the U.S. and England, even origins of what we're being told is this current climate crisis, tracking it back to the Club of Rome and how they decided that they would choose human beings as kind of the cause of the climate crisis. That was decided upon. It was written about in a book. Well, when we see headlines like this in Bloomberg, I think it's time for us to go a little deeper in this conversation. Earth needs fewer people to beat the climate crisis, scientists say. Now, most people seeing that, it probably sparks a lot of questions or maybe some shock. Where is this coming from?

How do we still have these headlines going on? And really, where did the start? So one of the people you can really point to is a person named Thomas Malthus. He was an English economist, and he was probably best known for his book, he wrote, an essay on the principle of population. that was in 1789. So let's just take a little bit of an excerpt from here, and then we can talk about it. So he writes, the power of population is so superior to the power in the earth to produce subsidence for man that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race.

The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly, seasons epidemics pestilence and plague advance in terrific array and sweep off their thousands and tens of thousands should success be still incomplete gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear and with one mighty below levels of population with the food of the world this guy sounds like a fun guy to party with so what so obviously his idea i mean from that concept there but also from his body of work is the population has a caring capacity

the earth has a carrying capacity and this population must be maintained or if it comes out of balance then you're going to see epidemics in war and starvation well it was so popular that a group of people started the malthusian league in 1777 and it said this about that the malthusian league advocated for limiting family size voluntarily through contraception to avoid the overpopulation and poverty cautioned in malthus's work the malthusian league's activism during the late 19th and early 20th centuries led to more tolerant views of contraception and family planning in Great Britain in the 20th century. So Malthus was kind of the first mover in this space. And he influences Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin is kind of like the competition between species, evolutionary biology,

survival of the fittest. Darwin's cousin is Francis Galton. This is where we pick up one of our deeper dyes. Francis Galton is the father of eugenics. That movement took off in America and in England. in the early 1900s, late 1800s, early 1900s, and really went through until publicly after World War II, and it became, after what happened, what Germany did, it became kind of not too helpful. Hitler gave eugenics a bad name. I mean, he really, just bad advertising for eugenics, they had to sort of regroup. Right.

And so this whole eugenics conversation was, well, we want a better stock of people. We want people with better blood. we don't want people with any type of issues with them they can just so that really didn't talk about the planet too much mouth this is where the planet came in and we're talking about the planet in relation to population so that brings the club of rome so organization started in the late 1960s they fund mit shortly after that to do a computer simulation about the carrying capacity of the planet and this was when the book limits to growth comes out limits to growth is is kind of a compilation of this doomsday computer scenario that they did to talk about all the possible ways this could turn out.

That was in 1972. And if you can see on this book, it says a report from the Club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind. So now we're getting somewhere talking about a predicament of mankind. Well, one of the co-authors was Dennis Meadows. And you would think, you know, obviously these these thoughts are kind of foregone conclusions. They're not really popular in especially eugenics. It's really a disgusting dark time in our past.

But in 2017, the co-author Dennis Meadows did an interview. You listen to what you had to say. It's politically inconvenient. Politicians wouldn't want to tell you that if you, to deal with climate change, you have to lower your standard of living. So we still have this fantasy, collective fantasy that we will somehow solve climate change but without giving up our material standard of living and for sure not doing that politically incorrect thing to try to talk about birth rates.

The planet can support something like a billion people, maybe two billion, depending on how much liberty and how much material consumption you want to have. If you want more liberty and more consumption, you have to have fewer people. And conversely, you can have more people. I mean, we could even have eight or nine billion, probably, if we have a very strong dictatorship, which is smart. Unfortunately, you never have smart dictatorships. They're always stupid.

But if you had a smart dictatorship and a low standard of living, you can have a... But we want to have freedom and we want to have a high sentence, so we're going to have a billion people. And we're now at seven, so we have to get back down. I hope that this can be slow, relatively slow, and that it can be done in a way which is relatively equal, so that people share the experience and you don't have a few rich, you know, trying to force

everybody else to deal with it. So those are my hopes. I mean, these are pretty pessimistic hopes, you know, but that's what lies ahead. So let me get my choices straight. I get smart dictatorship or slow annihilation. Is that what he just laid out for us? his pessimistic hopes for the world. Great. I hope we can do this equally, so we can equally the population. We should all equally, even though, like, I just want to see equal distribution.

Well, he's got some china plates sitting in the background there. They're probably ridiculously worth some ridiculous amount of money. No one will ever eat off of them or are totally purposeless. But I'm sure he's going to make sure that it's equal distribution. All right. Amazing. So why are we doing these deep dives with some guy from the 1700s? Well, because headlines like this, we're seeing these coming back around.

The Malthusians are back. Climate activists who worry that the world has too many people are joining. Ugly Tradition. So one of the people that's really caught up in this conversation of climate change, of population and vaccines is Bill Gates. He's kind of a power player in this space. And in 2011, he sat down with Forbes to do kind of a tell-all article. And it's really tell-all in this light.

So let's look at this. The headline, with vaccines, Bill Gates changes the world again. So this was right around the time a little before that that he decided to take the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and focus it on vaccination. And, you know, the front-facing view is he really cares about kids. He really cares about kids' health and developing countries. He wants to pull them up. Well, listen to this article. It says here, Bill Gates' plan to eradicate disease stems from a bold concept.

The demographic theories of Thomas Malthus generally accepted for the past two centuries are wrong, specifically that subsidence eventually translate into population. and population growth eventually translates into misery. The logic was crisp and Bill Gates friendly. Health equals resources divided by people. And since the resources, as Gates noted, are relatively fixed, the answer lie in population control. So there it is right there, population control. Thus, vaccines made no sense to him.

Why save kids only to consign them to a life of overcrowded countries where they risk starving to death or being killed in a civil war? Bill's dad, remember on the board of Planned Parenthood, Bill's dad had set up a dinner at Seattle's posh Columbia Tower Club with the program for appropriate technology and health path. While the meeting started with birth control, among other efforts, Gates began consuming data that startled him. In society after society, he saw when the mortality rate falls specifically below 10 deaths per 1,000 people, the birth rate follows, and population growth stabilizes. It goes against common sense, Gates says. In terms of giving, Gates did 180-degree turn.

say rather than prevent births, he would aim his billions at saving the kids already born. We move pretty heavily into vaccines once we understood that, says Gates. So there's kind of a short little synopsis of the Bill Melinda Gates vaccination program and the genesis of it, but don't take it for me. It's not like we're just trying to pick out a couple pieces of the article. Take it from Bill Gates himself being interviewed by Klaus Schwab in 2008. Take a listen. All right.

What would you like to see as your legacy in 10, 15 years? Of the new work? Of the new work? Yeah. If your new function. Well, I've set very ambitious goals because I'm quite optimistic. If you look at, say, the 20 diseases that our global health program goes after, I hope that within 15 years, over half of those, we could have had a very dramatic impact.

Some of them will prove to be harder than others. For example, AIDS, we will have made an improvement, but not the dramatic improvement, probably in that time frame. Malaria, perhaps. And a number of the other ones, we have things in the pipeline. So, you know, huge change in the mortality rates in developing countries, which then has this effect of reducing population growth. That's this big benefit that then makes everything like education and nutrition. a lot easier. If you slowly annihilate people, you have less people to feed and educate, basically.

I want to make it clear here because people get hoodwings. He's like, no, but do you see, Del? He's saying he's trying to make kids healthy. Let's be clear. He had, and I think there's a better set of words we should use. He wants less souls on this planet. He wants less children on this planet. When giving vaccines, I was thinking, well, why make kids healthy only to live like, I want them to

I want fewer of them on this planet. Oh, wait a minute, if I vaccinate and the families are healthier than there's fewer kids, let's do that. And the reason I bring this up, I mean, it's wordsmithing at its best, but let me just ask this question to everyone in the audience. So let's just say he actually does believe that vaccines make you healthier, and by being healthier, you end up having less kids, especially in third world countries like that. So he's vaccinated to make kids healthy, only to reduce the population, which he has admitted

and time again is his goal. Here's my question. If that vaccine is designed to make you healthier somehow has a side effect like sterilizing you or sterilizing a percentage of those that receive it, do you think he would say, whoa, stop, stop, stop. That's not what I wanted this product to do. I mean, would he really interfere?

If this, for some reason, this vaccine, for some people that have certain genetic susceptibilities actually shortens your lifespan, do you think he would say, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, that's that is not what vaccines are here to do. I'm trying to help people live longer, healthier lives. Or would he say, you know, let's get back to my original issue here, which is too many damn people. So if this product where I'm trying to make people healthier,

you know, ends up sterilizing you, which vaccines that he has delivered and been a part of have been caught having sterilizing agents in them, we use vaccines to sterilize deer, so it's not outside of the realm of possibility that we could do that with human beings. And what if it's shortens lifespans on some people. Do you think that Bill Gates would stop that product? Is there anything that has come out of his mouth that makes you think he would think that is an unfavorable side effect?

I think that's the question we should be asking ourselves. And frankly, why I will never touch a single product to let anything go into my kids that ever received a single red scent from this man who I know is telling me honestly, right to my face, Del. I want less souls on this planet. And so when we look at the headlines, we have to ask ourselves what is going on

because we're seeing headlines like this. We just heard from people. We just heard the ideology that goes way back to the 1700s, and it's peppered throughout to present day of less people on the planet. And then we see headlines for the first time really ever, recently like this. America's fertility crash laid bare.

Interactive map shows how birth rate has plummeted since 2007, falling up to a third in some states. And you go into this article and it has a map there. And you can see largest decline in Utah, 36.2, average decline over negative 22%. And you go to another graph, the number of children born to each woman in the 1800s there at the first line. It's up to about seven. And then you track it to 2020. You have less than two. Got a little bump up there in the 1960s for the summer of love. But other than that, we're going downhill. And this isn't just an American phenomenon. Japan is one of the worst performers in this space. Last year, Japan considers offering even more money to new parents as birth rate crashes.

This year, Japan on the verge of societal collapse due to birth rate, Prime Minister says, says the replacement rate. Poland, same thing. Poland birth rate found to be the lowest in 30 years. And then if you go to the economist, it just says global fertility has collapsed with profound economic consequences. So this is a, I mean, this is a whole different conversation about, perhaps why this is happening.

There's a lot of moving parts, but these are the headlines that we have to pay attention to. This is a really serious, serious problem. Well, our generation as we get older and certainly the very next generation behind us will just be a giant burden on our social systems and our government that will have to take care of us because we will have less kids.

We have fewer kids that we have people dying or getting old so they're not gonna be able to take care of their parents. You know, my kids in that generation will just not have enough man power to fund their elderly when they get older and what happens to that social structure system it comes crashing down this is just you know one bad decision on top of another really interesting reports today Jeffrey and they kind of all go together right it's this really limited thinking that didn't just

start 10 years ago I think what you really see is this is an agenda that go back to the Fabian Society you know all of these really scary eugenics programs are now really taking, they're taking hold and they're being funded in, and this is what I think is so interesting, Jeffrey. You know, people said to me everywhere I travel and I get to go to these great conferences where, you know, we'll talk about Central Reserve banking systems and AI and, you know, bio weapons and all of it. And they'll say, and, you know, and Bitcoin or whatever it is. And they'll say, you know, they'll say to me, well, vaccines is one of the issues or hell. I was like, no, no, you don't understand. And Jeffrey, the truth is, is we've been on.

on this beat for just about six or seven years now. And this issue of health, everybody may think, oh, it's just about health. It's not literally the takeover of the world is being masked in this guise of health. The WHO, the W.E.F. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Gavi, all of these, the World Monetary Fund.

It's all about health. They're all investing in a social structure system that uses your fear of death, or this that we need to protect people, even though we want less than them on this planet, trust us, we need to make all your decisions for you. There's nothing else that touches what this is going to do. There's nothing else that's going to rob us of more security. There's nothing else that's going to rob us of more rights.

This is the number one issue of our time. And Jeffrey, I am just happy to be on this ride with you because you're one of the best there is on the most important topic I think is proving out. We were right. This is where our focus should have been. Keep up the great work. we're going to keep people informed to make sure that we stop this beast before it devours everything we know and love. Absolutely.