Archive
John Holdren Remains Unashamed About Hero-Worship of Eugenicist
Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren is back in the news again. Over the last week, bloggers and pundits have continued trying to decipher Holdren’s latest euphemism for global warming, “global climate disruption”:
Global warming could be a thing of the past, thanks to the Barack Obama administration.
No, the White House has not single-handedly managed to stop the apparent rising temperature — but it does think the terminology oversimplifies the problem.
According to U.S. science adviser John Holdren, the public should start using the phrase ‘global climate disruption’ because it makes the situation sound more dangerous.
What’s that got to do with eugenics? Nothing directly. The connection comes from my shock that Holdren still walks around proudly declaiming his views, even after my essay from last year exposing Holdren’s close ideological connection to a notorious eugenicist:
John Holdren and Harrison Brown
Lifelong intellectual infatuation with eugenics-minded futurist casts shadow over Science Czar Holdren’s worldview
John Holdren, the Science Czar of the United States, has long expressed an intense admiration — one that bordered on hero-worship — of a man named Harrison Brown, a respected scientist from an earlier generation who spent his later years writing about overpopulation and ecological destruction. In fact, as Holdren has pointed out several times (including very recently), it was Harrison Brown’s most famous book, The Challenge of Man’s Future, which transformed the young Holdren’s personal philosophy and which inspired him to later embark on a career in science and population policy which in many ways mirrored that of his idol Brown.
Holdren’s regard for Brown was so high that in 1986 he edited and co-wrote an homage to Brown entitled Earth and the Human Future: Essays in Honor of Harrison Brown, in which Holdren showers Brown with accolades and unrestrained applause.
At first glance, there’s nothing remarkable or amiss with this picture: one respected scientist giving credit to and paying tribute to another. Happens all the time. Except in this case, something is amiss. Grievously amiss. Because Harrison Brown, whatever good qualities Holdren might have seen in him, was also an unapologetic eugenicist who made horrifying recommendations for “sterilizing the feeble-minded” and other “unfit” substandard humans whom he thought should be “pruned from society.”
You might think that these opinions would disqualify Brown as someone deserving praise in the modern world; but not to John Holdren, it seems — perhaps because Brown’s views (as Holdren himself has stated many times) were the basis of Holdren’s own worldview.
Skim the whole essay for the stomach-churning details. A sampling, with quotes from both Brown and Holdren:
“The feeble-minded, the morons, the dull and backward, and the lower-than-average persons in our society are outbreeding the superior ones at the present time. … Is there anything that can be done to prevent the long-range degeneration of human stock? Unfortunately, at the present time there is little, other than to prevent breeding in persons who present glaring deficiencies clearly dangerous to society and which are known to be of a hereditary nature. Thus we could sterilize or in other ways discourage the mating of the feeble-minded. We could go further and systematically attempt to prune from society, by prohibiting them from breeding, persons suffering from serious inheritable forms of physical defects, such as congenital deafness, dumbness, blindness, or absence of limbs. … A broad eugenics program would have to be formulated which would aid in the establishment of policies that would encourage able and healthy persons to have several offspring and discourage the unfit from breeding at excessive rates.”
— Harrison Brown, in The Challenge of Man’s Future
“Harrison Brown’s most remarkable book, The Challenge of Man’s Future, was published more than three decades ago. By the time I read it as a high school student a few years later, the book had been widely acclaimed…. The Challenge of Man’s Future pulled these interests together for me in a way that transformed my thinking about the world and about the sort of career I wanted to pursue. I have always suspected that I am not the only member of my generation whose aspirations and subsequent career were changed by this book of Harrison Brown’s…. As a demonstration of the power of (and necessity for) an interdisciplinary approach to global problems, the book was a tour de force…. Thirty years after Harrison Brown elaborated these positions, it remains difficult to improve on them as a coherent depiction of the perils and challenges we face. Brown’s accomplishment in writing The Challenge of Man’s Future, of course, was not simply the construction of this sweeping schema for understanding the human predicament; more remarkable was (and is) the combination of logic, thoroughness, clarity, and force with which he marshalled data and argumentation on every element of the problem and on their interconnections. It is a book, in short, that should have reshaped permanently the perceptions of all serious analysts….”
— John Holdren, in Earth and the Human Future: Essays in Honor of Harrison Brown
This man remains the Science Czar of the United States, appointed by Obama. My previous exposés of Holdren (the whole “forced abortions and mass sterilization” thing) were so widely linked that they entered the mainstream consciousness; but to my mind this lesser-known eugenics-related scandal — the connection between Holdren and Harrison Brown — is even more shocking. And yet he blithely jets around the world as a representative of the United States, as if none of this had ever been revealed.
The Green Agenda Is About Getting Rid Of As Many Humans As Possible
The American Dream
Oct 5, 2010
Most people tend to think of environmentalists as warm, cuddly hippies that just want all of us to love one another and to do what is right for the environment. And in fact, there are a few people out there who are actually like that. However, the people at the very heart of the green agenda are a quite different breed. The truth is that there are a growing number of environmental activists (including some very, very famous people) who are publicly advocating the end of our freedoms, the establishment of a Big Brother style world government and the systematic eradication of at least 90% of humanity all for the good of the environment. Unfortunately, this is not a joke and it is not an exaggeration. As you will see below, these people are very, very serious. To these eco-fascists, climate change is the number one threat to the earth, and in order to eliminate that threat “democracy must be put on hold”, an authoritarian world government must be established and we need to start getting rid of as many humans as possible.
Posted below is a new video about the importance of fighting “climate change” that was recently released by a prominent global warming activist organization known as 10:10 Global. This short video depicts children and adults being savagely blown to pieces for not reducing their carbon footprints. The organization has since pulled the video and has issued an apology, but the fact that anyone would actually put out such a video is absolutely chilling. In fact, there are many advocates of the green agenda who wish that they could actually press a button and do this kind of thing to “climate change deniers”….
Unfortunately, this type of thinking is not confined to just a few environmental nutcases. For example, Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates is absolutely obsessed with global warming and with population control.
The video posted next contains excerpts from a speech that Gates gave at a recent TED conference. As you watch this, keep in mind that Gates has personally donated hundreds of millions of dollars towards the development of new vaccines and towards “reproductive health” initiatives around the globe.
During his speech, Gates presents a formula for calculating the carbon dioxide that he believes is causing global warming….
CO2 = P x S x E x C
P = People
S = Services per person
E = Energy per service
C = CO2 per energy unit
In the video that you are about to watch below, Gates tells the audience that in order to get carbon dioxide levels on earth down to where they need to be, then “probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty close to zero.”
So which of those numbers is going to get pretty close to zero?
Will it be “P”?
In the video, Gates describes how the number of people might be reduced….
“The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”
Now wait a second.
Aren’t vaccines, health care and reproductive health services supposed to help people live longer?
Keep that question in mind as you watch this video….
There are others in the environmental movement who are even more open about what they feel needs to be done in order to save the planet from humanity.
For example, James Lovelock, the creator of the Gaia hypothesis, stated in an interview with the Guardian earlier this year that “democracy must be put on hold” if the fight against global warming is going to be successful and that only “a few people with authority” should be permitted to rule the planet until the crisis is solved.
A Finnish environmentalist named Pentti Linkola has gone even farther than that. Linkola is openly calling for climate change deniers to be “re-educated”, for an eco-fascist world government to be established, for humans to be forcibly sterilized and for the majority of humans to be killed.
The following is how author Paul Joseph Watson recently described some of Linkola’s proposals….
Under Linkola’s proposal to save earth from man-made climate change, “only a few million people would work as farmers and fishermen, without modern conveniences such as the automobile.” This system would be enforced by the creation of a “Green Police” who would abandon “the syrup of ethics” that governs human behavior to completely dominate the population.
Linkola calls for forced abortions, while also adding that another world war would be “a happy occasion for the planet” because it would eradicate tens of millions of people. The environmentalist believes that only jackbooted tyranny can help to save mother earth from “the worst ideologies in the world” which he defines as “growth and freedom”.
Unfortunately, this kind of insanity does not just reside in Finland.
The reality is that academia is brimming with nutjobs such as this who want to see the vast majority of humanity wiped out.
For example, Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka is another advocate of radical human population control.
In an article entitled “What nobody wants to hear, but everyone needs to know”, Pianka made the following shocking statements….
*First, and foremost, we must get out of denial and recognize that Earth simply cannot support many billions of people.
*This planet might be able to support perhaps as many as half a billion people who could live a sustainable life in relative comfort. Human populations must be greatly diminished, and as quickly as possible to limit further environmental damage.
*I do not bear any ill will toward humanity. However, I am convinced that the world WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us.
Now keep in mind that this is a professor that is teaching our kids. People actually pay a lot of money to get educated by this guy.
Unfortunately, his views are very much representative of the mainstream these days.
In fact, some of the wealthiest and most prominent people in the world are absolutely obsessed with the green agenda and with population control. Just consider the following quotes….
David Rockefeller: “The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident.”
CNN Founder Ted Turner: “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
Dave Foreman, Earth First Co-Founder: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”
Maurice Strong: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Michael Oppenheimer: “The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.”
Not only that, but this radical population control agenda has actually reached the highest levels of the U.S. government.
In an absolutely shocking interview with the New York Times, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg openly admitted that abortion is all about population control. In particular, she confessed that abortion is about getting rid of “populations that we don’t want to have too many of”….
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
So was she asked to step down from the Supreme Court?
Did anyone make much of a fuss?
No, Ginsburg is still serving on the Supreme Court and that statement is long forgotten.
You see, the truth is that this population control philosophy runs rampant throughout the highest levels of the U.S. government.
John P. Holdren, Barack Obama’s top science advisor, co-authored a textbook entitled “Ecoscience” back in 1977 in which he actually advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, a one world government and a global police force to enforce population control.
On page 837 of Ecoscience, a claim is made that compulsory abortion would be perfectly legal under the U.S. Constitution….
“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”
On pages 942 and 943, a call is made for the creation of a “planetary regime” that would control the global economy and enforce population control measures….
Toward a Planetary Regime
“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”
“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”
On page 917, the authors advocate the surrender of U.S. national sovereignty to an international organization….
“If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.”
You see, that is what those obsessed with the green agenda want.
They want total control of us all so that they can impose the measures that they believe are necessary to “fix” the planet.
Unfortunately, the measures that they believe are necessary would make George Orwell’s 1984 look like a Sunday picnic.
And the sad thing is that the world is not anywhere close to overpopulated. If you took 6 billion people and put them four to house on a quarter acre of land, you could fit them all in Alaska and still have room to spare.
I have actually written quite extensively in the past about the radical green agenda of the global elite. If you are interested in learning more, I would recommend the following articles….
*The Dangerous Myth Of Overpopulation
*Hillary Clinton: Population Control Will Now Become The Centerpiece Of U.S. Foreign Policy
*New U.N. Report: We Must Reduce The Population To Fight Climate Change
Eugenics Watchdog 