Nazi Euthanasia Propaganda Poster, German government, about 1938.
Back in 2012 there were many articles about the Gates Foundation and its depopulation interests. It is about eliminating the poor, not eliminating poverty. It was 2012 when the push was strong for eugenics, under the "Family Planning" euphemism, of course! Eugenics got a bad name during World War II. Even the word is scarcely being used anymore. Terminology or vocabulary help control this debate. The corporate press helps choose and reinforce words that in themselves condition the reader to accept the unacceptable, programming minds to embrace as 'normal' what was long seen as unethical, cruel, and dangerous. Orwell called it newspeak and we see a lot of that in the NSA and CIA (e.g. coups and imperialism as 'spreading freedom/democracy').
"Terminology or vocabulary help control this debate.""A Contraceptive Crusade" is one example of a blog post interfering with the euphemisms, essentially by calling "crusade" (i.e. terror, torture, rape, maiming, and even murder by crucifixion/sword in the name of ideology/religion) what Gates is doing with the eugenic agenda. "As they point out," it says, "increases in general education and economic development are strongly correlated to family planning, not the availability of contraceptive technology. "
This should be obvious.
Back in 2012 the Gates family was trying to get celebrity endorsement from rich people (Gates got some), selectively targeting the poor with an assault on pregnancy like it's an illness, reducing their numbers by reducing reproduction. They just use lots of marketing terms to make it sound humane, at times 'cool', and generally beneficial. Watch this propaganda and pay careful attention to how it's framed and what words get used. It's gross.
The Washington Times (not to be confused with Washington Post, which had Melinda Gates ties) published "African babies aren’t the threat". The author says: "This disconnect is reflected in the aid that many in the West think they owe to Africa. The most recent and most concerning example of this disconnect is the recently launched No Controversy campaign led by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the British government. Mrs. Gates and her partners, which include the world’s largest abortion providers, have launched an enormous campaign to provide contraceptives for women in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
"Mrs. Gates’ efforts are a concern because apparently the only thing she and her partners intend to cure with this campaign is pregnancy, which is not a disease. One can’t help but wonder what the $4.6 billion they already have raised could do to bring effective medical care closer to those who need it rather than simply preventing our children from being born."
"Pregnancy retardants help fight a symptom of a societal issues; they do not fight physical disease."People will hopefully realise that letting rich people decide on population size is a bad idea. The energy and waste 'footprint' of a Western person is around an order of magnitude higher than that of a human in Africa. There are studies that show this.
Don't let Bill Gates fly in his private jet around Africa, preaching about climate change and food supplies/water shortages. Gates is a plutocratic, hypocritical megalomaniac. All eugenicists genuinely thought they acted in good faith for the best of mankind and only had good intentions, but in retrospect, their propaganda which helped 'sell' these ideas shocks us now. Pregnancy retardants help fight a symptom of a societal issues; they do not fight physical disease. It should be added that on an absolute scale the population size in Africa, for example. is not all that high. Nations like India and China, which are not continents at all, each outnumber the population size of Africa. Women in China and India already have access to contraceptives, so we know that's not the core issue. Pseudoscience should not be used to write public policy; the same goes for ideology. ⬆