The Highwire with Del Bigtree - THE ROOTS OF THE DEPOPULATION MOVEMENT

Episode Date: January 22, 2023

From population bomb to false prophet, Ehrlich, and his protege John Holdren’s, book Ecoscience has a concerning passage about a bioweapon as a “solution” to overpopulation. Meanwhile, history shows Holdren lifted the moratorium on gain-of-function research less than two weeks before Trump’s inauguration in 2017. Another data point to a troubling, ongoing investigation.#PaulEhrlich #JohnHoldren #GainOfFunction #DePopulationBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

There's a gentleman. He just did the rounds on some interviews that have really received a lot of attention. His name is Paul Ehrlich. And he wrote a book in 1968 called Population Bomb. And if anybody wasn't around back then, it was a big deal. It really went viral before viral was going viral. It created a lot of conversation. And this is what some of the interviews that he was on would look like. Check out the tone of these interviews. Given the population explosion, let alone in this country, what can the government, what ought to be able to, what ought to be. the government to do about this? Well, what it ought to do is this. The first thing, you don't want to put, I'm against government interference in our lives. You want to minimize that. So the very first thing the government should do is try and take the pressure off to reproduce. There's a lot of pressure in our society now to reproduce. If you're single, people try and push

you into getting married. You know, your wife, you have a bachelor over, and your wife says, gee, shouldn't I have a nice girl over the ideas, you know, nobody should escape. So there's pressure to get married. Young couples, if they don't have children, people say, gee, they must be They never say, gee, maybe they like good wine and going to the theater and so on. They prefer that to scraping diapers. So there's pressure to have children. So the first thing that should happen is that the president ought to say from now, here on out, no intelligent, patriotic American family ought to have more than two children, preferably

one, if you're starting a family now. Not any law, but just say this is what responsible people do. He ought to make the FCC see to it that large families are always treated in a negative light on television, wherever they appear. There ought to be a tremendous amount of television time, devoted to spot commercials, that's what we've had against smoking. But ones in the middle say in the middle of Beverly Hillbillies, you get a scene which shows Los Angeles in the smog, and it just says this city has a fatal disease. It's called overpopulation. So long. Now, that sort of campaign, you could have a census, a sample census, which would see whether that was having a desired effect. If that didn't,

you could move to giving women bonuses for not having babies. That almost certainly would do the job. If that didn't have the effect, then you could move to changing the tax structure so that people who had the money and had the children paid for the children. In other words, you would increase taxes on people with children rather than decrease them since when they have the children, they require more services. If that doesn't work, then you'll have the government legislating the size of the family. And people say, oh, that's impossible. Government can never intrude and tell you how many children to have. Well, I got news. You know, it intruded a long time ago and told you how many wives you can have,

and there's not the slightest question that if we don't get the population under control with voluntary means that in the night, not too distant future, the government will simply tell you how many children can have and throw you in jail if you have too many. You know, I have to admit something here, which is I know there's a lot of people that are probably like shocked by these statements, but as I watched this and we were looking at this, I have to say being raised as a Democrat, these are kind of values we were carrying. I mean, and I never saw that video. I didn't know who this guy was, but I remember saying to friends in high school, and debates that we were having on topics like population that I thought, you know, you shouldn't be allowed to have a bunch of kivs if you're on welfare. Why not offer women

money to use nor plant or something like this capsule that we did end up developing, right? And it would be temporary. You can poll it if you get a job and everything. I mean, these are the kinds of conversations that are really commonplace for Democrats. And now that I find myself politically marooned, I'm really having to rehabilitate from some of the thinking, you know, and a lot of it is that people are too stupid to take care of themselves, I think is a central theme. We're a disease on this planet, and there's too many of us. And it really, as I sort of grapple with it, really conflicts with my Christian upbringing, which is I'm created in images and likeness of God. So which is it? Are we created images in likeness of God, or are we just

a vile disease on the planet? So I'm coming clean on this. that. These are some things when I said, oh, the party changed on me. I'm not sure that it did, right? Right. And so listening to him back then was shocking because he was saying it so openly and flippantly. But this did, as you said, it folded into the generational thinking and actions of people around the world. And so this helped spawn, his ideas and thinking helped spawn the environmental movement. And it fueled a crusade, actually, which was really the big problem of this anti-population growth, which led to human rights abuses around. the world. And so his book, this is the headlines now because 60 Minutes just recently did

another interview with him. And this is why he's back in the news. So that headline, humanity is not sustainable. 60 Minutes Cites discredited population bomb author as environmental authority. So remember, his book in 1968 originally predicted widespread famine, overall end of civilization within that next decade, which obviously never happened. So we're starting this segment out talking about him. But now what did happen within 10 years was He wrote another book with another person. So this is 1977. The book is called Ecoscience, Population Resources Environment.

And the book co-author was a gentleman named John P. Holdren. So remember that name, John P. Holdren, because he becomes the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy under Barack Obama when he was president. So let's look at some of these quotes from the book, from 1977, Ecoscience by John B. Holden. And you can see this thought process is now starting, they're starting to play around with ideas that you just heard in Ehrlich's interview. So one of the quotes here, we'll take a look at a couple of them. He says, 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. The capsule could be implanted at puberty.

It might be removal with official permission for a limited number of births. Here's another one. a program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men. So obviously, these are some, you know, shocking quotes here trying to think about how we can really bring this population down. But what brought, what got our attention here at the highwire was this quote right here, because now they're starting to talk about the medical piece of this in a really up-to-date way. And here's the headline, not the headline, but the

quote, indeed, with the rapidly increasing ability of biologists to manipulate the genetics of microorganisms, the possibilities for creating deadly agents seems endless. Furthermore, there is little sign that the U.S. action has led to the end of work on biological weapons elsewhere. Biological warfare laboratories are a potential source of a man-made, quote, solution to the population explosion. What a weird, weird statement that is. Like, are you against it? You're kind of like, but you know it has this really nice side effect that it will reduce population right right so why are we reading a book from 1977 well this guy was uh working he was the assistant to the president as well under barraq obama and the director of the office of science and technology and he puts this out

this is recommended policy guidance for p3 c oh this was on january 9th 2017 he says adoption of these recommendations will satisfy the requirements for lifting the current moratorium on certain life science research that could enhance a pathogen's virulence and or transmissibility to produce a potential pandemic pathogen and enhanced PPP. So John Holdren, who is the director of this office, basically releases this moratorium on this type of research. But when was this done? January 9th, 2017. Look at that date. That was a little less than two weeks before the inauguration of President Trump. So now we have this setup. That is that's gain of function, right? That is gain of function. The guy that could potentially be pointed to is responsible. And we know Fauci's backed with funding

and all that. But as we look at this, I love how you've brought this all full circle, because there's a lot of conversations about population reduction. And a guy that love that conversation releases the moratorium so gain of function can take place again. Having stated, what are the nice side effects of, I don't know if he meant a lab leak or just a weapon would be. It can reduce population, really, really distasteful connections you're making there. It's hard. Right. And, you know, we're getting a string here to the population control piece, to the environmental

piece, and to this gain of function piece. And we still don't know, you know, did it come from a lab? Was it release an accident? Was it on purpose? But this all adds to the conversation here as we approach, as we approach this big question of who did it? Where did it come from? Was it natural?

Was it not? This is just a data point here. I think is very important for people to know. It's really, really fascinating investigation there, Jeffrey. I love how you've put that all together. And it does give us, I think, a deeper insight into many of the conversations that are going on.