The Philippines: Underdeveloped, but not Overpopulated …

UPDATE: It has come to my attention that, almost a year and a half after its publication, this essay sill remains the most popular entry on Out of Purgatory, and, as such,its link is still being widely circulated. If any readers are interested in a printer-friendly, PDF version, it is available upon request. Please email me at tasio@mail2philippines.com.

September 1, 2012

The Philippines:Underdeveloped, but NotOverpopulated

March 18, 20111

CONTENTS:

Part I, The Philippines Reproductive Health Bill: Rooted in Pseudo-Economics and Neo-Colonialism

The Problems with the Bill

Overpopulated?

The World Bank Report is Wrong

Population and Economics

Save the Nation!

When the U.S. Opposed Imperialism

A More Just Global Financial System

Part II, Environmentalism as Neo-Eugenics

The Infamous NSSM 200

What is a Natural Resource?

The Climate Change Hoax

The WWF: Enemies of Progress

Epilogue: Reproductive Health Revisted

Notes

__________

Introduction

A great deal of controversy has been made of the proposed reproductive health legislation that is currently being debated in the Philippine Congress. The general argument is usually portrayed as such: those representing the Catholic Church are fighting against the bill because of their opposition to artificial contraception; they are concerned that a government initiative to promote the usage of such devices will lead to an acceptance of a sexually immoral culture. Conversely, those individuals and groups supporting such legislation claim that it will alleviate problems such as the increase in illegal abortions, and the rapid growth in the numbers of poor Filipinos. This unbridled population boom, they allege, mainly stems from the fact that these unfortunate and uneducated people are simply having too much unprotected sex. The pro-RH camp sees the Churchs stance as not only archaic, but also overreaching into the state affairs of the only major nation in an overpopulated East Asia where she has considerable social and political influence.

This political cartoon depicts well the heated debate over the RH Bill.

This political cartoon depicts the heated debate over the RH Bill.

I have no intention at this time to entertain a theological debate about the immorality of artificial contraception, to investigate the charges that some types can be used as abortifacients, or to discourse on whether or not the Church is justified in her attempts to influence government policy regarding this issue. Those legitimate concerns about the providing of adequate health care for women or aiding them in dealing with unintended pregnancies, about fighting infant mortality and caring for abandoned babies and homeless children, about the eradication of sexually transmitted diseases, and about all other societal ills related to sex and pregnancyall of these should be seriously addressed and dealt with by state, church, and citizenry. But the firm stance I do wish to take in regards to the RH Bill and related matters is that the Filipino people should not tolerate, under any circumstances, any sort of government policy for population reduction.

I. The Philippines Reproductive Health Bill: Rooted in Pseudo-Economics and Neo-Colonialism

The Problems with the Bill

Take note of the two following excerpts:

The State shall promote programs thatenable couples, [et.al.] to have the numberof children they desire with due consideration to the health of women and resources available[and] analyze demographic trends towards sustainable human development

[T]he mitigation of the population growth rate is incidental to the promotion of reproductive health and sustainable human development

The limited resources of the country cannot be suffered to be spread so thinly to service a burgeoning multitude that makes the allocations grossly inadequate and effectively meaningless

[E]ducation shall be integrated in all relevant subjects and shall includepopulation and development [and] family planning methods

The State shallencourage [parents, et.al.] to have two children as the ideal family size

[State agencies] shall initiate and sustain a heightened nationwide multimedia campaign to raise the level of public awareness of the protection and promotion of reproductive health and rights including family planning and population and development,[and f]acilitate reproductive health care service delivery andthe production, distribution and delivery of quality reproductive health and family planning supplies and commodities to make them accessible and affordable to ordinary citizens.

The Population Commissionshall[c]onduct sustained and effective information drives on sustainable human development and on all methods of family planning to prevent unintended, unplanned and mistimed pregnancies.

______________________________

[B]y means of the press,[electronic media], cinema, handbills, short brochures, educational statements, and the like, the population must be convinced over and over again how harmful it is to have a lot of children. The costs ought to be cited, and then what could have been bought instead. The great dangers to womens health that can arise in childbearing could be spelled out, and so forth [A]dvocacy and dissemination of contraceptives[should not] be illegal It is obvious that by systematic application of the above measures, considerable success can be achieved

When we have converted the mass ofpeople to belief in the one- or two-child system, we shall have arrived at the goal we stipulated.

The authors of those excerpts take a somewhat similar approach in addressing what they obviously recognize as a population problem. Both recognize that mass media and educational forums are indispensable tools for making the public realize that population growth is a problem. Both look at the solutions to that population problem in utilitarian economic terms. Both agree that two children per couple is the most preferable family size. And both advocate that contraceptives should be made as widely available as possible. The first quote is a composite of various passages from the consolidated version of the The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011.2 I will reveal the source of the second quote later, by which the reasons for its inclusion will be made more clear.

Some voices of opposition to the bill have indeed already cited the fact that population control seems to be its driving intention. And conversely, supporters have cited that the bill does clearly state that [a]ttaining the ideal family size [of two children] is neither mandatory nor compulsory. Furthermore, a Senate version, SB 2378, states in its explanatory note that the bill does not dictate any form of population control.

However, such reassurances seem to be classic cases where the legislators and those working with them do protest too much, since the inclusion of such language only rules out overt methods of population control. At this point in time, the legalization of abortion or compulsory sterilization would be politically impossible in a principled republic like the Philippines.3 Thus, a subtler and more appealing approach to the issue is of course needed. And, lo and behold, here we have a bill being promoted as pro-poor and pro-womens rights.

Although the issue of population control has already been raised by others, what I find necessary in making a case against the bill, but lacking amongst those who oppose it, however, is a more thorough analysis of the proper relationship between population and economics. To launch an effective attack on the forces pushing for population control, we must strike at the underlying assumptions that are upheld in the legislation.

Overpopulated?

Whenever the rapid population growth of not only the Philippines, but the rest of the underdeveloped world in general, is addressed in most public forums, there tend to be not only many misconceptions, but even views rooted in outright, malicious fabrications about the interrelated subjects of population growth, economics, and human civilizations impact on the so-called natural environment. Worse still, there is the appearance of a consensus among those who exert the greatest influence on public opinionpoliticians, academics, and a purportedly truth-seeking pressthat human population growth is the dominant threat to our economic and ecological stability. It is also apparent that the advocates for a population control policy, along with those who campaign for environmental issues like curbing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainable development, are fond of insisting that such policy changes are looking out for the best interests of the worlds poorsince they will be the ones to suffer the most from these alleged social and environmental crises. These axioms are indeed embedded in the RH legislation, which implies that sustainable human development is contingent on reducing population growth and essential to protect[ing] the life opportunities of future generations and the natural ecosystem on which all life depends because resources are limited and cannot support a burgeoning multitude.

The thinking behind RH Bill lazily assumes that poor Filipinos are victims of overpopulation, rather than severe failures in economic policy.

Perhaps to most readers, such assertions do not sound as if they are rooted in an explicitly sinister and fascist intent. Thus, we will have to examine the origins of these concepts, and the motive for pushing them on the people of the Philippines.

The World Bank Report is Wrong

Let us begin with investigating an argument for aggressive population control by citing the evidence from the World Banks recent report, The Philippines: Fostering More Inclusive Growth, which was summarized in a recent series of newspaper editorials.4 Citations from this report claim that population growth contributes to a vicious cycle of impoverishment by creating a surplus in the younger strata of working-age Filipinos. Thus, since there are not enough employment opportunities for that age group in the Philippines, that younger generation becomes a burden on the older strata of the working-age population. The youth, in turn, tend to produce offspring of their own and thus create a new generation of useless eaters that the Philippine economy cannot support. Therefore, the report apparently concludes, solutions to the Philippines economic woes include instituting measures for checking population growth.

But the report also implicitly contradicts itself, since it cites that the highest concentration of poor Filipinos live in rural areas. Other economists and demographerswho are perhaps more competent than those at the World Bankhave already pointed out that if overpopulation leads to impoverishment, then why do the people of the more sparsely-populated, rural areas tend to suffer from worse living conditions than those in the more developed, densely-populated, urbanized areas? Is it not true that urban areas tend to have lower poverty rates because cities are designed to support larger and denser populations? Should not the solutions therefore focus on incorporating the urban and rural areas as an agro-industrial model of modern economy?5

Thus, those purportedly professional economists at the World Bank and elsewhere, who would conclude such incompetent and detrimental nonsolutions in the form of policy suggestions for more effective family planning6 seem to have little intention for seriously solving the Philippines economic problems. Do they instead prefer to cling to the conventional academic dogmas of Adam Smith and Thomas Malthus that have taught them to believe that the relationship between an economic system and human population remains cyclical and void of any intelligent and rational foresight?7 If the economy cannot support the population, their logic supposes, then the population needs to be reduced. In their approach to economic science, do they ever bother to ask that since economic systems are created by human activity, they should be driven by a political intention to better serve the needs of a growing population? The rapid increase in the numbers of the poor in underdeveloped nations like the Philippines is clearly a result of the absence of combined, international economic policy initiatives designed to facilitate those nations in pursuing their sovereign right to economic development. And, as we will see, the global initiative for population reduction is directed by the same forces who seek to undermine the sovereignty of the worlds nation-states.8

To get the most competent view of this issue as possible, we must investigate the true relationship between population growth and economics. And doing so will require us to examine both past and present economic and political developments in the Philippines, and the world

Population and Economics

The global economic system is in a state of collapse. Despite the fanciful reports that we can now expect the benefits of a recovery, the central banks of the United States, United Kingdom, European Union, and elsewhere have desperately flooded the currency markets with money in a doomed attempt to revive a dead global banking system that has been kept in a kind-of zombie state since the late summer of 2007. This collapse is caused by an insanely overleveraged and speculation-driven financial system that produces no real physical wealth for the benefit of the peoples of the world. To quite the contrary, it has gorged itself by looting that physical wealth, and bailing the system out has only worsened things by creating an even wider chasm between physical economic conditions, and the financial schemes created to generate fictitious wealth.9

The recent report by the U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC), chaired by one Philip Angelides, not only documents how this parasitic system gestatedand grew over the last thirty years, but also concludes that little to nothing has been done by the U.S. government to correct the problemin particular, an Obama presidency that claimed it would change things.10 The conclusions of that report should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with the U.S. statesman and economist, Lyndon LaRouche; as it concurs with what he had specifically forecast would take place in the world economy during a public address in July of 2007.11

LaRouches (inset) Triple Curve function illustrates how the decoupling of a financial system from actual physical economic progress will result in hyperinflation and physical economic collapse.

In fact, LaRouche has been warning of such a collapse process for decades. In the 1960s, he announced that a series of currency crises would lead to the dismantling of the post-war Bretton Woods agreements, which would then open the door to currency speculation and the unbridled looting of national economies by international finance. Later, in his 1983 book, There Are No Limits to Growth, LaRouche provided a specific refutation of the allegations of a population problem. Although great feats of economic and social progress are possible in this modern age, he wrote, most of the worlds inhabitants continue to tolerate [miserable living] conditionswhich even existing technologies are capable of solving[because] some people with a great deal of power over the periodicals, universities, financial institutions, and political parties of much of the world, simply do not wish society to solve these problems.

It is the deliberate policies of globalization and neocolonialism that have led to the slide toward lower orders of the economic and technological potential vital for nations to support their growing populations at ever-improving living conditions. Todays result is a degenerated economic state where population growth continues at a deceleration, and with the masses supported at only near-minimal living standards. The population growth among the poor that has been the subject of so much debate is thus another hallmark of the economic collapse we are facingthe complete inverse of the claim that it is a leading cause of hindering the Philippine economy from progressing.12

As distinct from the dominant approach to economics as a speculative science that over-relies on econometric statistical forecasting, LaRouche speaks of a science of physical economy.13 This approach had led him to the discovery that progress in economics can be most accurately measured by potential relative population-density. To effectively expound on this curious dynamic created by the interaction of scientific discoveries, technological advances, and social and political progress is beyond the scope of this essay; but perhaps a general idea can best be briefly illustrated to the reader by the historical example of mans discovery and utilization of electricity.14

World-wide population growth. Notice how surges in population occur following cultural and scientific renaissances.

The twentieth century saw unprecedented, exponential growth in worldwide population (see graph).15This was made possible, in large part, by the economic transformation that occurred in the same era due to electrification. Electricity has revolutionized everythingfrom agriculture, to medical science, to industry, to infrastructure and transportation. It has enabled economies a greater potential tosupport growing populations at better living standards in more concentrated areas. It has even contributed to allowing large cities to exist in parts of the world where the potential for dense human habitation was previously impossible. (Therefore, an increase in the potential relative population-density.) It has truly changed mans relationship to nature and proves that the Earths (or even the Solar Systems) carrying capacity for human habitation is not something of a fixed order.

Save the Nation!

If we view the Philippine economy from this standpoint, we see how adequately servicing the populations need for electricity is not possible with the current levels of infrastructure. This, and many other areas of what LaRouche defines as the physical economy need rapid modernization and expansion to support dignified living standards for a population that is over 95 millionand beyond.16

But, yet, the Philippines does not lack the potential workforce needed for such a task. She has long since proven herself capable of producing very competent professionals and skilled workers in many fieldsobserve how many OFWs are health care workers, technical operators, or engineers, for example. The dilapidated condition of this country should tell us that the solution lies in the creation and utilization of a large portion of skilled, productive labor to solve many of the logistical problems hindering her from becoming a great nation.

These are the kind of employment opportunities that the government should cultivate for the youthinstead of pretending the solution lies in attracting foreign investors to set up things like call centers, simply because Filipinos speak English and are willing to work much cheaper than the average Westerner. The problems presented by the World Bank representatives and others are not simply that there are too many young Filipinos without decent job opportunities, it is that their right to have access to meaningful employment in their own country has been denied to them. It is evident that the Philippine government needs a policy outlook that is every bit as bold the New Deal programs of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt if it is to solve the nations economic problems.17

However, the Philippines faces a very different world than that of America in the 1930s. She is a poor nation in an integrated global system that did not exist before World War II, and economic policy changes will therefore require Filipino leaders to fight for major initiatives like those being prescribed by LaRouches affiliates of the Save the Nation movement.18

Included among the movements urgent proposals is a call for the Philippine government to declare a moratorium on the debt incurred through the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and those related institutions who have successfully enslaved the Filipino people to service a ballooning national debt inflated by the arbitrary manipulation of interest rates and currency values. If we take the amount of debt that, in actuality, the Philippines originally incurred, it is found thatshe has grossly overpaid the amount owed to her creditors.19 Yet, still the costs of continuing to service this illegitimate debt is reported to consume a vast percentage of government revenue, rather than being used to invest in the desperately needed improvements for the Filipino people.20

When the U.S. Opposed Imperialism

In order for one to understand how such injustices are permitted to be perpetrated in our civilized age, we must look at the history of the global financial system. We begin during the twilight of World War II, when Roosevelt began to work toward establishing a more organized system of international finance with the intention to serve the sovereign nations making up the world community. Such a system could not only facilitate the rebuilding of those countries viciously ravaged by the war, but also those that had been bled dry by colonial exploitation. This was the intention for holding the Bretton Woods conference in 1944, which was successful in establishing an approximation of just such a system.

Although the Bretton Woods agreements would indeed prove indispensable to the task of rebuilding Europe after the war, and allowed the opportunity for some steps of progress to be made in parts of the former colonial sector, Roosevelts unfortunate death in the April of 1945, the succession of Harry S Truman, the U.S. support for the recolonization of liberated peoples, and the declaration of the Cold War by Winston Churchill would all mean the termination of FDRs vision for economic and technological progress under a global New Deal. The United States would instead form a Special Relationship with her historical adversary: the British Empire.21

Filipino patriot Carlos P. Romulo accurately recognized that only the U.S. possessed the clout to pressure the European powers to let go of their Asian colonies after World War II. A great opportunity forefieted by the pro-imperialist Truman Administration.

The Bretton Woods system finally came to an end in August 1971, and its fixed-exchange rates would be replaced with the currency speculation that LaRouche had warned of.22 As a result, we now have an international financial system that has been allowed to operate largely outside of the control of the worlds sovereign statesa parasitic imperialism that sucks the life out of nations and governments.

Opponents to this new imperialism in the Philippines and elsewhere have been quick to denounce todays United States as an American Empire. Although some of these observations are not lacking in insight, such denunciations actually misidentify the true nature of the beast that many anti-imperialists believe themselves to be fighting. While the prewar United States flirted considerably with colonialism (the Philippines are, of course, a testament to this fact) and todays U.S. commonly acts as the primary enforcer for todays global imperialism, these practices must be recognized as a deviation from the founding intentions of modern U.S republicanismthe very same intentions that the Philippine Republic based herself upon.23

Those decriers would do well to study that fact, while also observing how even the once-powerful U.S. economy has also suffered at the hands of this present financial system. Major cities like Detroit, Cleveland, and Baltimore that were once centers for productive industry and commerce are now post-industrial hell-holes with ever-higher rates of poverty, crime, and disease that are comparable to those in the underdeveloped countries. The majority of the States public infrastructure is, at best, undermaintained, and, at worst, literally falling apart. Many state and municipal governments are faced with fiscal emergencies that have forced them to cut essential social programs, and lay off large numbers of police, firefighters, teachers, and other public employees. This has led to mass protests by the American citizenrya citizenry that has fallen victim to the eagerness of both the Bush and Obama presidencies to ignore their Constitutional obligations to promote the General Welfare, and instead subject their people to fascist austerity measures in order to finance massive bail-outs of the investment banking system.24 LaRouche has warned that the policy of flooding that banking system with monetary capital will lead to a hyper-inflationary breakdown like that of Germany in 1923which is now becoming evident in the spikes in commodity and food prices. These are the empirical manifestations of economic collapse, done at the bidding of a global financial apparatus largely operating from the City of Londonwhat LaRouche has rightfully identified as the modern, post-war form of the British Empire.25

A More Just Global Financial System

To counter these post-war developments, LaRouche has been campaigning for decades to have the U.S. government reclaim the historical tradition of FDRs anti-imperial strategy to promote nation-building in the former colonial sector. Using Roosevelts legacy as a precedent, LaRouche has called for a domestic policy spear-headed by a restoration of the Glass-Steagall standard which would separate and protect commercial banking for productive purposes from the speculative schemes of investment banking.

For foreign policy, he was the first to publicly call for a New Bretton Woods conference to reestablish a global financial system based on fixed-exchange rates, and has also organized for the establishment of an economic alliance between the United States and the great Eurasian giants of Russia, China, and India. These Four Powers represent well over a third of the worlds population, are abundant in natural resources, and also possess the powerful, high-technology manufacturing capabilities necessary for the development of the major infrastructure projects needed to aid the poorer and smaller nations of the world. Such an alliance would act as the catalyst for the establishment of what LaRouche refers to as a Hamiltonian credit system of world finance, and provide the necessary counterbloc to the destruction wrought by the exploitive, feudal-monetarist system that is typified by the City of London and Wall Street. This would be the equivalent of applying the Glass-Steagall standard on an international scale, where a group of respectively sovereign nations declare that all of the illegitimate toxic gambling debt of the neo-feudalist financiers will be frozen, and then audited and investigated later (i.e. after crisis conditions have been effectively dealt with), thus freeing up the capital being injected into the investment banking system in the form of bail-outs to instead finance much-needed major infrastructure projects.26 The nations of the world can either adopt this model in the immediate term, or, LaRouche has warned, face an economic collapse comparable to the dark age of the 14th century.

For the Philippines, the alternative to fighting for such changes in global policies, as well as implementing an emergency domestic program like that now being advocated by the Save the Nation campaign, is to willingly dive into the mudslide toward dark age. The drive to legislate a program for controlling population growth is simply a reflection of a deeper problem, namely that many Filipino policy makers would seem to prefer to give up on establishing economic self-reliance, and further capitulate to those ill-intentioned, imperialist interests who are destroying their countrys economy.

__________

II. Environmentalism as Neo-Eugenics

The Infamous NSSM 200

Now that we have begun to recognize how population growth and economic development are actually interrelated, we can turn our attention toward examining the background for those ill-intentioned, imperialist interests that are subverting the Philippine government to adopting a population reduction program.

I will first refer the reader to the infamous U.S. National Security Study Memorandum 200. Written by National Security Adviser and British Foreign Office agent Henry A. Kissinger in 1974, and adopted as policy by the Ford Administration in 1975, this document explicitly names 13 underdeveloped countriesone being the Philippinesto be pressured into adopting policies that would severely limit their population growth through initiating contraception and sterilization programs. It also discussed the possibility of having the U.S. Agency for International Development withhold food aid as a way to get these poorer nations to comply with population reduction measures. Although not stated explicitly, the usage of the USAID option would result in curbing overpopulation by contributing to famine. Kissinger also made note of the fact that the United States already contributed more than half of the total funds for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which could be used, along with other U.N. agencies, to carry out the mission he was advocating.

Kissingers justification for such genocide? He believed that economic control over the worlds finite resources was better off in the hands of America and her European allies, ostensibly claiming that they would be needed in the fight against the Soviets. Population growth (and, consequently, economic development) in these resource-rich countries was a threat to that hegemony, as such expansion would require them to draw upon that resource base in their drive to establish themselves as strong, sovereign nation-states, rather than poor, post-colonial banana republics.27

What is a Natural Resource?

Although the ecological effects of population growth were not the main focus of Kissingers report, his assumption in the scarcity of the worlds resources was also expressed throughout policy-making circles and was very much popularized in the late 60s and early 70s by academics such as Paul Ehrlich and Dennis Meadows.28Such theories, which assert that human population growth is exceeding the Earths carrying capacity by depleting natural resources and destroying the equilibrium of nature, provide much of the basis for the ideology popularly referred to as environmentalism.

Ehrlichs Population Bomb (1968) and Meadows Limits to Growth (1972) widely propagandized the fears about an overpopulated planet.

There are, of course, issues and concerns raised by a scientific approach to the management of Earths biosphere and resources that are not illegitimate. Environmentalism as it is commonly preached, however is founded not upon science and reason, but upon dogmas about man and his place in the universe that are not unlike those of a pagan cult. It is a dogma that rejects the Judeo-Christian concept of man being made in the image of his Creator and therefore in possession of qualities which set him apart from the rest of the natural world. In environmentalist ideology, man has no ability to participate in Creation and wilfully change and improve his relationship to the universe; he is instead confined to live like all other creaturesas Earth-Goddess Gaias passive victim within a limited and cyclical natural balance.29

If we accept the misanthropic viewpoint of individuals who think like Kissinger, Ehrlich, and Meadows, we have no choice but to ignore the facts about the history of human progress. For example, when it comes to defining a natural resource, we must ask how a natural substance comes to be made useful for human activity in the first place. Coal, oil, uraniumall of these have existed on Earth long before humanityand when our species finally does arrive on the scene, these materials continue to stay in the ground for millennia, untouched. But civilization has eventually proven itself capable of producing great minds that possess a rigorous drive for knowledge, men and women who have discovered more efficient sources of power from substances that previous generations would have found little use for.

Still, such revolutionary discoveries do little good for the cause of mankind unless they are coupled with the political will and foresight needed to apply them to benefit the economic condition of the general populace. Even nuclear fissionthe most powerful and efficient energy source that man has mastered thus farhas yet to be applied and utilized on the mass scale necessary to solve many of humanitys current problems.

Elements of what later became Germanys Nazi movement were rooted in proto-environmentalist, Wagnerian nature cults (depicted on the left) who disdained artificial industrial society. These groups later fed the membership of the Thule Society (middle), which in turned later spawned the Nazi Party. Nazi eugenic propaganda (right) focused on the economic burdens caused by the excess numbers of useless eaters (e.g., the less-advantaged).

-The Climate Change Hoax-

However, the reporting from much of the worlds predominantly English-speaking media outletswhich tend to be very proud to claim they represent a balanced and impartial viewpointleads us to conclude that there is a regimented scientific consensus stating that the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil produces industrial gas emissions that are causing a catastrophic change in the Earths climate. And, in a similar vein, nuclear power is once again being presented as too dangerous a technology for man to control.30

Since climate change being caused by carbon dioxide is as plain a textbook fact as the Earth being round, and the potential danger of nuclear energy proves that there is such a thing as too much technological progress, the recommended solution is to instead move to more sustainable (i.e., inefficient) sources of power generation like wind and solar.31

But, in reality, much of the alleged proof about both the anthropogenic causes of climate changelike the charges against nuclear energyhave been thoroughly refuted by not a few qualified scientists and other experts in numerous fields. While such rebuttals are worth reading for oneself, they are not to be the main subject of our focus at this time,32 since it is the underlying political intentions of the environmentalist campaign against industrialization (particularly in the developing world) that are to be exposed here in this essay.

Once industrial gas emissions are identified as the driving cause of altering the planets climate, human expansion becomes seen as an enemy in the battle to save the Earth. However, most of the worlds developing nations desperately need to industrialize in order to attain adequate living conditions for their peoples. But, instead of receiving the level of assistance from the more advanced sector that will aid them in becoming industrialized and self-sufficient, they are told that highly inefficient and costly technologies like solar panels and wind mills are the only environmentally-sustainable solution. They are told that they cannot strive to attain the levels of energy consumption (e.g. adequate and dignified living standards) that has been achieved in the developed countries, and that their non-industrialized, sustainable economies will help to enable the industrialized world to offset their greenhouse gas emissions.33

It is not difficult to hear the echoes of the 19th century imperialism that condemned colonial countries to remain as poor, backward agrarian economies, and where any industrialization or infrastructure built was limited and designed only for the benefit of the colonial power. Like the god Zeus who sought to enslave mankind by denying him the ability to control fire, any effective modern imperial policywhether it be the British Empire of the 18th and 19th centuries, or her modern-day bastard, Globalizationthrives on forbidding technological and economic progress for the masses. The not unintended results are the most effective methods that empires have relied upon to check population growth: famine, epidemic disease, and civil discord. Policies influenced by the sinister ideology of sustainable growth thus become a death sentence for the billions of the worlds poor.

The WWF: Enemies of Progress

Of the many international environmental NGOs that are at the forefront of such pro-genocidal, anti-human propaganda campaigns, there is one that is deserving of particular attentionboth because of brevity, and because of its wide influence in the Philippines and other post-colonial countriesand that is the World Wildlife Fund/Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).34 The WWF insists that it is mans overpopulationin and of itselfthat has disturbed the ecological balance, whether it be by encroachment and deforestation (which is usually the result of poor farmers forced to use backwards and outdated methods of agriculture), or by overconsumption and industrialization.35

Those readers who have not yet begun to ponder upon the economic implications of what the environmentalist movement actually advocatesand still think that usage of terms like genocidal and anti-human are sensationalist or hyperbolicshould familiarize themselves with the indisputable influence that eugenics still has on todays environmentalism.36