Category Archives: Eugenics

WORDS BY CARRIE VAN RENSBURG

Sometimes the pill can do more good than bad.

The power to choose when Id have children was never a power I questioned. Control over my reproductive freedom. This right was pledged by countries that signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1979.

Its been over 40 years since the international treaty was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly and to uphold this social concept of reproductive freedom, many forms of contraception have been developed. However, the history of the contraceptive pill is one burdened by eugenics and deceit. One of the most influential figures in the development of the birth control pill was Margaret Sanger who was known to support eugenics.

Eugenics is a racially biased theory that aims to study how populations with undesirable characteristics could be controlled through breeding. Trials of the birth control pill were unethically conducted on poor Puerto Rican women who were not informed that the pill was still in the experimental phase and as a result, many of these women experienced serious side effects. Three women died during the clinical trials. Further trials were then conducted on women in mental asylums without consent.

This pill, founded by the decision to withhold informed choice, has afforded me the freedom of reproductive choice. Going forward, I want to acknowledge the women who came before me. The women who valued reproductive freedom and were so desperate to avoid pregnancy and sterilisation that theyd try this foreign medication.

Since then, plenty of other types of contraception have been developed and improved, however, having experienced hormonal acne at a young age my doctor recommended the birth control pill Brenda-35 ED to be exact. This type of birth control pill contains both progesterone and an oestrogen hormone.

I was on the pill for five years, and it worked for me. My period cycle became regular. My hormonal acne went away. I didnt have to worry about pregnancy. It cost about $16 for three months worth of medication. It defined freedom for me.

Then at the age of 19, I started following some holistic health bloggers. All of them seemed to demonise the birth control pill as this unnatural medication that causes a neverending list of side effects. While I personally hadnt really experienced any side effects from my prescribed pill, I thought Id give this natural thing a go. So, I stopped taking the contraceptive pill.

The first three months went well, I even felt a bit empowered by my choice, however, as the fourth month hit so too did the acne and amenorrhea. I didnt menstruate for seven months. I decided to see a naturopath as thats what all these bloggers recommended. I was prescribed a herb tonic that would cost $40 for two weeks worth. As a student, this was completely out of my price range. Still, I drank my herbs and tried to focus on stressing less. It didnt work.

At this point, I wasnt sure what to do. My confidence absolutely plummeted as my acne got worse. I had never felt so at war with my body. I booked myself in to see a gynaecologist who ran some blood tests and gave me a referral to get an ultrasound. She finally diagnosed me with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), a condition that affects a womens hormone levels. This explained my abnormal menstruation cycle and acne.

The gynaecologist informed me that, due to a lack of research, currently the best way to treat these symptoms was with the birth control pill. We had a reassuring conversation where I expressed all my concerns about the use of the pill. The doctor kindly dispelled many of the myths associated with it, one being that it can cause infertility, and even showed me the studies which suggested that the pill has been linked to a reduced likelihood of cervical cancer. I realised that the pill gave me more than it took away.

Now, as I live in the real world, this story does not end all neatly tied up. In fact, a year after being back on the pill I started bleeding occasionally during sex. I went to see my general practitioner who screened for STIs and cervical cancer. She identified that I had a cervical ectropion, a condition where the soft cells lining your cervical canal spread to the outer surface of your cervix. It was caused by excess oestrogen in my body due to my contraceptive pill.

This was a side effect of the pill I had never heard of, however, as I talked to my doctor more about it, I understood it wasnt really something that needed to be treated. For me, treating my PCOS with the birth control pill was far more beneficial than treating cervical ectropion by going off the birth control pill.

But I also need to recognise those who do experience harsh side effects of the pill. Speaking to my friends who have been deeply affected by these effects was a strong reminder that choosing ones contraception is a personal journey. It highlights the importance of having access to various contraceptive options as well as having a medical professional go through those options with you to provide the correct information.

Defining for yourself what your sexual and reproductive health looks like is one of the most empowering things you can do. Reproductive freedom is a right I will defend and exercise for my entire life. I look forward to a future where there is a more proportionate amount of ethical research dedicated to reproductive health issues that affect people with a uterus.

Disclaimer: All opinions expressed in this article are of the authors. Please talk to your medical practitioner to determine what type of contraception is right for you. For more information on the side effects of the pill, head here.

Read more:

Cervical ectropion is a side effect of the pill I can live with - Fashion Journal

Britney Spears has been locked in a court battle 13 years in the making. While her father was suspended as conservator of her estate on Sep. 29, 2021, her conservatorship might not be terminated until the next hearing on Nov. 12.

During this conservatorship, she was limited in her ability to make everyday choices that most people take for granted.

One revelation that came out of Spears emotional testimony was that she was not allowed to go off birth control.

[T]his so-called team wont let me go to the doctor to take [my IUD] out because they dont want me to have children any more children, Spears said.

Spears anguish over the loss of her reproductive agency was palpable. And her story is one shared by disabled women across the country who are denied the right to make decisions about their sexual and reproductive health.

Ensuring the reproductive rights of disabled women is a professional and personal issue for me. I am a public health researcher at the University of Iowa studying the social factors that influence accessibility for disabled people. I am also a disabled woman who has faced tough decisions about my own sexual and reproductive health.

Disabled women, especially those with intellectual or developmental disabilities, are often trapped by paternalistic decision-making. Courts and caregivers make choices about their lives with little input from the women themselves. Society views this approach as benevolent because women with physical and mental disabilities are often seen as sexually vulnerable and in need of protection for their own good. But these beliefs come from the long shadow of eugenics and the stigma and stereotypes that continue to dominate conversations around disability and reproduction.

The United States has a history of forced sterilization policies that targeted disabled people, women of color, and those living in poverty.

These policies arose from the 1927 Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell, which permitted the sterilization of Carrie Bell, a young woman deemed feebleminded by her adoptive family and, eventually, the Supreme Court. Buck v. Bell became a bellwether of the eugenics movement, which sought to eliminate negative traits through selective breeding. The ruling opened the door for an estimated 60,000 to 70,000 forced sterilizations in the U.S. in the 20th century.

Buck v. Bell and the U.S. eugenics movement has affected both state disability policies and reproductive health services. Today, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recognizes that disability is not a reason for sterilization, and that people should be able to make decisions about their own health as much as possible. However, this is only an ethics guideline for medical professionals, not enforced by robust public policy.

Stigma refers to the discrimination and exclusion that individuals or groups face when certain characteristics are labeled as undesirable. Disabled people often experience stigma because their bodies fall outside of what is considered normal by society.

One way that stigma takes shape against disabled women is that they are often stereotyped as uninterested, asexual or incapable of consent. These stereotypes prevent honest conversations with health care providers, sex education teachers and others about access to reproductive care and contraception. Disabled women also report barriers to accessing family planning counseling because of these assumptions.

Paternalism, or when an authority figure limits an individuals or groups freedom in what they perceive to be their best interests, also affects the sexual autonomy of disabled people. One way it manifests is through consent determination, a legal strategy that attempts to gauge whether a disabled person is capable of consenting to a sexual relationship.

While it is supposed to protect disabled people from sexual abuse, prevention of sexual activity does not necessarily equate to protection. Disabled people are still at an increased risk of experiencing sexual abuse and violence regardless of their consent determination status. Interviews with women with mild intellectual disability have revealed that they felt unable to report sexual abuse and that they lacked both social support and the ability to protect themselves.

Consent determination may also block access to sex education because its deemed unnecessary. Inadequate sex and healthy relationship education are risk factors for sexual abuse and violence. Disabled women are less likely than their nondisabled peers to receive formal sex education; if they do, it is often long past when its age-appropriate. For instance, one disabled woman deemed incapable of consent was informed by her high school that she was exempt from taking sex ed without being asked if she wanted to take the class.

Spears conservatorship centered around the stereotype that disabled people are unable to manage their own lives. However, she had produced four albums and gone on several world tours in this 13-year period. That she was still not allowed to act on her desire to have children is a testament to the enduring stigma around disability and especially mental illness.

Recognizing the reproductive rights of disabled women is about promoting reproductive justice for all women. This includes ending what one research subject called the roaring silence around sterilization, supporting evidence-based sex education, and fighting disability health stereotypes.

The disability rights slogan Nothing About Us Without Us conveys that disabled people know what is best for them and should not be excluded from conversations about their own health. And this includes reproductive rights.

[Understand key political developments, each week. Subscribe to The Conversations politics newsletter.]

Visit link:

Britneys conservatorship is one example of how the legacy of eugenics in the US continues to affect the lives of disabled women - The Conversation US

The logo of theSecond International Eugenics Congress

This year marks the centenary of the Second International Eugenics Congress in 1921, an event supported by the best and brightest of American scientists of the early 20th Century. The opening address was given by Henry Osborne, the president of the American Museum of Natural History for 25 years. He declared that the terrible losses of the First World War made eugenics all the more necessary. In certain parts of Europe the worst elements of society have gained ascendancy and threaten the destruction of the best.

The Congress was an endorsement of eugenic policies such as forced sterilisation.

One hundred years later, the journal Science has acknowledged that it and its publisher, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): played a shameful and notable role in the scientific acceptance of eugenics in the United States and the world.

It is clear that AAAS, Science, and many in the scientific community supported the biggest proponents of eugenics in the early 20th century, when the ideology started gaining wider traction. We must never forget that the unwavering march toward scientific progress is sometimes built on a problematic past. Unless we understand the depths of these problems, we will continue building on rotting foundations.

In another article, a contributor to Science points out that there are abundant opportunities for a new kind of eugenics to take hold:

With modern genetic techniques, including precision gene editing, we are inventing unprecedented possibilities for control of human biology, and society should proceed with a clear understanding not just of the limitations of this science, but of its grim history. Today, we hear frequent discussions about ideas such as embryo selectionnot just to reduce disease risk but to enhance traitsand indeed, companies are emerging in the US with this as a potential service offered by their future businesses. Before embracing such technologies, its critical to remember that these techniques are both scientifically dubious and share an ancestry with the racist history of eugenics.

Michael Cook is editor of BioEdge

MORE ON THESE TOPICS |

Go here to see the original:

'Science' apologises for complicity in spreading the philosophy of eugenics - BioEdge

Heres a look at what The Conversation, a non-profit source of explanatory journalism from experts in academia, is offering today.

AP members may find The Conversation content on AP Newsroom or through AP webfeeds. For technical assistance, please contact apcustomersupport@ap.org or call 877-836-9477.

If you have any questions on The Conversation content, including:

- Requests for cut-down copy

- Photos and chart availability

- Information on upcoming stories and coverage plans

Please contact Joel Abrams at us-republish@theconversation.com or 857-233-8429.

-------

TODAYS HIGHLIGHTS:

-Puerto Rico

-Tylenol

-Bible interpretations

-------

STORIES:

Puerto Rico has a once-in-a-lifetime chance to build a clean energy grid but FEMA plans to spend $9.4 billion on fossil fuel infrastructure instead

COMMENTARY Four years after Hurricane Maria wreaked havoc on Puerto Rico, federal money to rebuild its electricity system is finally about to flow. But it may not deliver what islanders want. 896 words. By Patrick Parenteau, Vermont Law School and Rachel Stevens, Vermont Law School

Cherry-picking the Bible and using verses out of context isnt a practice confined to those opposed to vaccines it has been done for centuries

RELIGION A historian of the Bible in American life explains how Bible verses are being picked out of context to make a case for the anti-vaxxer movement. 951 words. By John Fea, Messiah College

Five years after largest marine heatwave on record hit northern California coast, many warmwater species have stuck around

COMMENTARY The Blob, a long-lasting mass of warm water, sat off the Pacific coast of North America for years, bringing new species to formerly cold waters. What allows some to survive while others fade away? 835 words. By Erica Nielsen, University of California, Davis and Sam Walkes, University of California, Davis

How education reforms can support teachers around the world instead of undermining them

COMMENTARY If national teacher policies are not comprehensive, practical and inclusive of teachers, they can undermine the very workers they aim to help, a global education policy expert argues. 969 words. By Gerald K. LeTendre, Penn State

How did white students respond to school integration after Brown v. Board of Education?

COMMENTARY Americans collective memory of school desegregation involves crowds of screaming white protesters. But less well known are the whites who stood by quietly, and those who approved of the changes. 843 words. By Charise Cheney, University of Oregon

Why some college sports are often out of reach for students from low-income families

COMMENTARY Students who come from families that are more well-off financially have an advantage in their quest to become a college athlete, researchers have found. 1136 words. By Chris Knoester, The Ohio State University; James Tompsett, The Ohio State University, and Kirsten Hextrum, University of Oklahoma

Tylenol could be risky for pregnant women a new review of 25 years of research finds acetaminophen may contribute to ADHD and other developmental disorders in children

COMMENTARY Tylenol has long been considered a go-to medication for low to moderate pain and for fever reduction, even during pregnancy. But mounting evidence suggests that it is unsafe for fetal development. 581 words. By Ann Z. Bauer, University of Massachusetts Lowell

Britneys conservatorship is one example of how the legacy of eugenics in the US continues to affect the lives of disabled women

COMMENTARY The legacy of eugenics is still active in the U.S. Paternalistic attitudes and policies on the reproductive agency of disabled people is one way it manifests. 881 words. By Michaela Kathleen Curran, University of Iowa

Use of these stories is subject to the conditions at http://bit.ly/TCUSinfo.

Read the original:

BC-The Conversation for October 4, 10am, ADVISORY - Associated Press

Farm swaps cows for goats amid changing industry

Fluctuating milk prices and rising costs have driven some small family farms to either go big or leave the industry. Two brothers operating their familys dairy farm in Vermont made the drastic decision to give up hundreds of cows for goats. (July 20)

AP

Out of the nearly 7,000 farms in Vermont, only 17 are Black-owned, according to the 2017 U.S. agriculture census. A $2 million fundis seeking to expand access to farm land ownership in Vermont for people who have been historically denied land based on their race.

The design and governance of this "land sovereignty" fund will bedetermined byBlack, Indigenous, and other people of color. Itis part of a broader$6 million initiative by theHigh Meadows Fund, Vermont Community Foundation, and Vermont Land Trust to promote the economic viability, sustainability, and diversity of farming in Vermont.

"The historic Clemmons farm is one of the few Black-owned farms remaining in the state and nation.We look forward to joining hands with others to support the important work ahead," said Lydia Clemmons,executive director of the Clemmons Family Farm in Charlotte.

The Vermont Land Trust permanently restricts development of land using a legal tool called conservation easement. Since 1977, they have conserved 11% of the state's land, over 590,000 acres, most of which is actively farmed or managed for timber by private owners.

Nationally, Black land ownership has declined by nearly 90% over the last century, resulting in a total loss of36.7 million acres,according to Census of Agriculture data. Investigations by Mother Jones and The Atlantic attribute this decline toracist government policies,discriminatory lendingpractices, white vigilantism, and police violence.

Indigenous people have lost 1.5 billion acres of land since the founding of the U.S., according toUniversity of Georgia historian Claudio Saunt.

"Indigenous communities, once the sole stewards of Vermonts land, have been diminished and marginalized by centuries of displacement and discrimination, including the eugenics movement in Vermont in the early 20th century," the High Meadows Fund wrotein a press release about the new grant.

Contact April Fisher at amfisher@freepressmedia.com. Followher on Twitter: @AMFisherMedia

The rest is here:

Black people own just 17 of the 7,000 farms in Vermont. New grant seeks to expand access. - Burlington Free Press

An aspiring scholar on TikTok has broken down why transphobia is rampant in the UK and why the collection of nations has become known as TERF island online. (TikTok/@danieltalkstoomuch)

An aspiring scholar on TikTok has broken down why transphobia is rampant in the UK and why its now being called TERF island online.

One TikTok user asked if anyone knew why the UK became known as TERF island which prompted Daniel who goes by the username danieltalkstoomuch on the video-sharing app to share his insightful response on the topic.

The initialism TERF stands for trans-exclusionary radical feminist and refers to people who describe themselves as feminists but who exclude the rights of transgender people

Daniel opened the video by sharing his list of impressive credentials including that he did a dissertation project on transphobia, is starting postgraduate studies looking at transphobic dehumanisation and plans to further his studies with a PhD on TERFism.

So he knows his stuff.

Daniel then spoke about a 2020 essay that he loved called Empire and Eugenics: Trans Studies in the UK by Ezra Horbury and Christine Xine Yao. He said the studys authors point out that trans studies are a marginalised discipline in the UK, a bit more so than in the US where it is to an extent, institutionalised.

What that means is that when we talk about trans issues in the UK, were not consulting trans studies scholars were consulting TERFs, Daniel explained.

And its very easy as a result of this for TERFs to say that trans studies scholars have no evidence and when evidence does come out, its also very easy for them to ignore it, deny it exists or claim that its biased despite no actual evidence to substantiate that claim.

#stitch with @julesbuet Id love to hear other peoples thoughts on this #terfsnotwelcome #uk #terfs #whitefeminism

original sound Daniel

Alongside the discipline just not being taken seriously in the UK, Daniel said Horbury and Yao point out that there is a massive problem with intersectionality in the UK.

He explained, although the UK is the birthplace of the British Empire and many prominent eugenicists, many people refuse to recognise that and refuse to recognise even to this day that there is racism and implicit bias in our society.

And as a result of this, we have a lot of upper to middle-class white feminists in our public discourse in academia who a) have never spoken properly to a feminist of colour and b) have never had to look at something through an intersectional or post-colonial lens, he added.

He continued: And then when we have something like TERF-ism, which is a branch of white feminism that exploits narratives of white female vulnerability and has bioessentialism that has been likened to eugenicist racism, it does really well in this country under these conditions.

At the end of this amazingly thought-provoking explanation of Horbury and Yaos work, Daniel also threw in his own conspiracy theory. But he cautioned that he had no evidence to back it up so said, please take it with a grain of salt.

He pointed out that British people have such a fixation with politeness culturally that it can be really hard to call people out for their transphobic prejudices and biases. And therefore, its difficult to get anybody to learn because its seen as really impolite to accuse someone of being transphobic, he said.

Its also not really polite to be a bigot though so people will find ways to express their prejudice in such un-implicit ways and they will lie to themselves about why they hold those biases, Daniel added.

And if you can substantiate your transphobic beliefs with feminism or concern for the safety of children, that is a great way to make yourself feel better about holding those biases and to prevent people from criticising you.

Daniel isnt the only one to point out that this anti-trans bias exists in the UK.

If you look up TERF island on Twitter, several people can be seen tweeting about the rise in anti-trans sentiment and hate in the UK.

Additionally, a damning report by the Council of Europe recently singled out the UK for its baseless and concerning anti-trans rhetoric. The UK is mentioned throughout the report and referenced the rise of anti-LGBT+ hate speech on social media.

The extensive report which also named Russia, Poland and Hungary as areas of rising hate against LGBT+ people also described a marked increase in anti-LGBT+ hate speech and hate crime.

The council, which is Europes leading human rights organisation, vehemently condemned the extensive and often virulent attacks on LGBT+ rights in the community.

More:

Transphobia scholar explains why 'the UK became TERF island' and it's eye-opening - PinkNews

In this special issue devoted to the study of pigmentation, it is only fitting that we reflect on how this trait has been utilized to promote specific political and social agendas in both the United States and Europe. It was Francis Galton, a cousin of Darwin, who coined the term eugenics in 1883 while advocating that society should promote the marriage of what he felt were the fittest individuals by providing monetary incentives.1 Shortly thereafter, many intellectuals and political leaders (e.g., Alexander Graham Bell, Winston Churchill, John Maynard Keynes, and Woodrow Wilson) accepted the notion that modern societies, as a matter of policy, should promote the improvement of the human race through various forms of governmental intervention. While initially this desire was manifested as the promotion of selective breeding, it ultimately contributed to the intellectual underpinnings of state-sponsored discrimination, forced sterilization, and genocide.

From the perspective of an academic in 2008, it can be hard to fathom how pioneering studies of chromosomal segregation would be juxtaposed to studies of Pedigrees of Pauper Stocks in England, Individual and Racial Inheritance of Musical Traits or Heritable Factors in Human Fitness and Their Social Control. These examples come from the 1923 report of the Second International Congress of Eugenics, titled Eugenics, Genetics, and the Family.2 In the opening address, Henry F. Osborn, then president of the American Museum of Natural History in New York (the site of the meeting), stated,

In the US we are slowly waking to the consciousness that education and environment do not fundamentally alter racial values. We are engaged in a serious struggle to maintain our historic republican institutions through barring the entrance of those unfit to share in the duties and responsibilities of our well-founded government.In the matter of racial virtues, my opinion is that from biological principles there is little promise in the melting-pot theory. Put three races together (Caucasian, Mongolian, and the Negroid) you are likely to unite the vices of all three as the virtues.For the worlds work give me a pure-bloodedascertain through observation and experiment what each race is best fitted to accomplish.If the Negro fails in government, he may become a fine agriculturist or a fine mechanic.The right of the state to safeguard the character and integrity of the race or races on which its future depends is, to my mind, as incontestable as the right of the state to safeguard the health and morals of its peoples.

It is important to appreciate that within the U.S. and European scientific communities these ideas were not fringe but widely held and taught in universities. The report of the Eugenics meeting was the lead story in the journal Science on October 7, 1921, and this opening address was published, in its entirety, beginning on the first page of the issue.3

To understand why eugenics became a serious scientific movement in the 1920s, it is useful to look back 20 years earlier. In 1902, Charles B. Davenport, then a Professor of Zoology at the University of Chicago, approached the Carnegie Institution with a request for $45,000 to create a Biological Experiment Station for the study of evolution on the Cold Spring Harbor Campus.4 His aim would be the analytic and experimental study of the causes of specific differentiationof race change. He proposed to accomplish this by the cross breeding of animals and plants to find the laws of commingling of qualitiesthe study of the laws and limits of inheritance.4 Within this brief two-page proposal, Davenport commingles the scientific genetic approach that dated back to Mendel with his personal fascination with the perceived human racial differences of his day.

Within 5 years the Experimental Evolution Department had established over 100 animal stocks that included 20 mammals and dozens of insects (including crickets and Drosophila), and over 400 flowering plants.5 It took until 1910 for Davenport to begin studies on human inheritance with the creation of the Eugenics Record Office. Financial support came from Mrs. E.H. Harriman (a wealthy philanthropist), John Harvey Kellogg (the breakfast cereal magnate), and the American Breeders' Association. This association was the first membership-based group whose mission included the promotion of eugenics research in the United States through a subcommittee chaired by ichthyologist and Stanford University President David Starr Jordan.6,7 By 1918, H.H. Laughlin was hired as the superintendent of the Eugenics Records Office, which transitioned from a freestanding, self-supporting endeavor to a sub-department of the Experimental Evolution Department under the control of the Carnegie Institution.8 Davenport conceived of this office to mainly serve eugenical interests in the capacity of repository and clearing house and to provide data adequate to making eugenical studies.8 Their method was to collect family histories from better families and subnormal families based upon methods previously described by Galton.

By the 1920s, three major efforts pushed the eugenic agenda in the United States and subsequently throughout Europe: (1) The Eugenics Research Association with Laughlin and Davenport as leaders and in affiliation with the American Association of the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (2) The American Eugenics Society founded by Laughlin, Harry Crampton, Madison Grant, and Henry Fairfield Osborn with the purpose of promoting the eugenical movement at both the scientific and popular level. (3) The Eugenics Records Office, directed by Davenport and run by Laughlin with the express purpose of providing the scientific data to support the eugenics movement.

A concerted effort of this magnitude with the expressed support of the mainstream scientific establishment (e.g., AAAS as operator of the journal Science; the American Breeders' Association, which later became the American Genetics Association; and the Carnegie Institution) had an effect throughout both the scientific and governmental establishments worldwide. Specifically, by 1936 when both England and the U.S. genetic scientific communities finally condemned eugenical sterilization, over 60,000 forced sterilizations were already performed in the United States on mostly poor (and often African-American) people confined to mental hospitals.9,10 The practice of forced sterilizations for the unfit was almost unanimously supported by eugenicists. The American Eugenics Society had hoped, in time, to sterilize one-tenth of the U.S. population, or millions of Americans.11

Laughlin's publication of Eugenical Sterilization in the United States in 1922 included the drafting of a model law for compulsory sterilization that was the bedrock of forced sterilization programs throughout the country. According to Davenport, Laughlin's book on sterilization is recognized as the standard.12 In 1930, Laughlin comments about the U.S. Supreme Court upholding a Virginia sterilization statute as, the establishment of the eugenical authority of the state[enabling] the prevention of hereditary degeneration by a method sound from the legal, eugenical and humanitarian points of view.It is now possible for any state, if it desires to do so, to enact a sterilization statute.12 A typical study prepared by Laughlin and used to justify these laws is excerpted below:

The Problem of the Feeble-Minded in Connecticutthe 11,962 feeble-minded personsthe total number who came under the purview of the Surveyhave been studied individually in reference to nine subject as follows: (1) sex, (2) age, (3) recidivism, (4) diagnostic class, (5) intelligence quotient, (6) race descent, (7) nativity, (8) citizenship, (9) kin in institutions.At the present rate every inhabitant of Connecticut is expending5 and 1/3 as many dollars on the socially inadequate and the individually handicapped as the average inhabitant was spending for the same purpose 20 years ago.13

Davenport's eugenical research is very typical of countless studies purporting to link perceived human differences to the burgeoning field of Genetics. This work is best appreciated by quoting the author directly:

Successful naval officers are of various types.The three commonist traits are: (1) love of sea; (2) capacity for fighting; (3) capacity for commanding or administering.The performance of a man depends in large degree upon his inherent, inheritable traits.The sea makes to different people varied appeal.The love of the sea, sea-lust or thalasssophilia is apparently a specific trait to be differentiated from wanderlust or love of adventure.One of the most striking characteristics of sealust is that it is wholly a male characterso the appeal of the sea develops under the secretion of the germ gland in the boy. It is theoretically possible that some mothers are heterozygous for love of the sea, so that when married to a thalassophilic man half of their children will show sea-lust and half will not.14

What is often not appreciated is that Nazi efforts were bolstered by the published works of the American eugenics movement as the intellectual underpinnings for its social policies. One of Hilter's first acts after gaining control of the German government was the passage of the Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring (Gesetz zur Verhtung erbkranken Nachwuchses) in July 1933.15 The Nazis, when proposing their own sterilization program, specifically noted the success of sterilization laws in California documented most notably by the American eugenicist P.B. Popenoe.16 The Nazi program ultimately resulted in the sterilization of 360,000375,000 persons.9 The intellectual linkage between the United States and Nazi eugenic programs is further illustrated by Davenport's presence on the editorial boards of two influential German racial hygiene journals, Zeitschrift fr Rassenkunde und ihrer Nachbargebiete and the Zeitschrift fr menschliche Vererbungs- und Konstitutionslehre.17 Sadly, with the benefit of 70 years hindsight, we can see the alignment of the stated goals of the Eugenics Records Office with Nazi social engineering programs as revealed by Davenport:

To investigate the nature of those forces or agencies which improve or impair racial or family-stock qualities. These forces which act upon immigration, mate selection and fertility, differential by race and family-stock quality are those which have been given most attention. In the field of immigration, studies have been made in Europe and America on the selection of immigrants have played as recruits to the breeding stock of the American people. Many of these researches were conducted in collaboration with the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House of Rep. and the Immigration Service of the U.S. Government.18

It wasn't until 1935 that a review panel convened by the Carnegie Institution concluded that the Eugenics Research Office research did not have scientific merit, and subsequently withdrew funding in 1939.19 In examining this dark history of American science, it is equally important to appreciate that eugenics was but a small part the work of the Carnegie. The Department that Davenport created, which under his tenure later became the Genetics Department in 1920, was not focused on eugenics. In fact, often eugenics-related work represented less than 1 page in what was typically a 30-page summary of the department's yearly activities. This was a department that went on to support the efforts of Thomas Hunt Morgan (genes are carried on chromosomes, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1933), Alfred Hershey and Martha Chase (DNA as genetic material), A.H. Sturtevant (first genetic chromosomal map, 1 map unit=1% frequency of recombination), and Barbara McClintock (transposons, for which she received the 1983 Nobel Prize).

In this special Pigmentation Issue, and on the eve of the election of our first President of European/African ancestry, it is useful to revisit the history of the eugenics movement to recognize the contributions of the scientists who have eliminated it from today's scientific life and analyze and learn from our mistakes.

In 1925, T.H. Morgan clearly identifies an important criticism of the eugenics movement. He directly attacks Davenport's and Laughlin's approach (without mentioning their names) by pointing out that despite all their exhaustive family pedigrees, they failed to really understand the nature of the trait they thought they were studying.

In the case of man's physical defects, there are a few extremely abnormal conditions where the evidence indicates that something is inherited, but even here there is much that is obscure. The case most often quoted is feeble-mindedness that has been said to be inherited as a Mendelian recessive, but until some more satisfactory definition can be given as to where feeble-mindedness begins and ends, and until it has been determined how many and what internal physical defects may produce a general condition of this sort, and until it has been determined to what extent feeble-mindedness is due to syphilis, it is extravagant to pretend to claim there is a single Mendelian factor for this conditionuntil all the social conditions surrounding the childhood of the individual are examined and given proper weight, serious doubts will arise as to what form of inheritances is producing the results.20

Some have argued that the lesson of this period was that:

Genetics was corrupted in the 1920s by the confusion of folk knowledge with scientific inference. For whatever reasons, outsiders who recognized it were shunned, and insiders were, as they say, a day late and a dollar short. The fairly obvious lesson to be learned is that where science appears to validate folk beliefs, it needs to be subjected to considerably higher standards of scrutiny than ordinary science.21

We may want to ask ourselves: What (if anything) that we research today will seem as unfathomable as the sex-linked trait, love of the sea?

Link:

U.S. Scientists' Role in the Eugenics Movement (19071939 ...

Given the enormous sophistication and complexity of the elite agenda being implemented under cover of the so-called SARS-CoV-2 virus, our resistance must match the sophistication of the coup if it is to succeed. And, in this case, it will require far more action in the home than on the street.

by Robert J. Burrowes

[ LONG READ]

Fully understanding significant world events as they happened yesterday and unfold today invariably requires an understanding of the long arc of history; that is, knowledge about how the human world really works. Moreover, without that understanding, it is impossible to devise and implement an effective response. This is certainly the case in the world of 2021.

Increasingly, people around the world are realizing that there is a great deal more going on under cover of the official narrative that we are the victims of a virus that has, so far, required 18 months of onerous restrictions and a series of government-ordered mandates that tell us all that we must submit to several experimental, gene-altering injections and other measures that will deny our rights and freedoms ongoingly into the future.

What most people do not yet realize is that this deeper agenda is monumentally huge: the world as we knew it has ended. Moreover, if we are to recover the vaguest semblance of what we once had and, hopefully, an even better version of it, we have an equally monumental struggle ahead of us.

Undoubtedly, despite extensive effort by elite agents including international organizations (such as the UN and WHO), governments, the medical and pharmaceutical industries, and the corporate media to conceal what is happening, the massive death toll and other costs that have resulted from the near-total dislocation of the global economy, coupled with the rapidly increasing death and damage toll from the injectables program, are key factors in this awakening. See, for example,Local Detroit TV Asks for Stories of Unvaxxed Dying from COVID Gets over 180K Responses of Vaccine Injured and Dead Instead.

Tragically, however, virtually all who become aware that something is wrong do not understand the long arc of history and are therefore trapped in a powerless mode of complaint and begging elite agents, such as governments and legal systems, to fix things for them. But this will not happen. SeeAre We Human? Are We Free? Defeating the World Economic Forums Great Reset before it Destroys Us. Consequently humanity rushes headlong to the fate planned for us by the elite long ago.

So while the global elites long-planned coup dtat marketed by the World Economic Forum asThe Great Reset is certainly intended to utterly transform the human individual and human society, the driving motivation of its agenda remains hidden.

And yet this driving motivation is hidden in plain sight. The Global Elite intends to kill off a substantial portion of the human population while enslaving virtually all of those left alive. Why? So that the elite can control access to, and utilization of, the Earths remaining but now depleted resources.

Let me briefly explain something of the origin of this motivation, elaborate the key ways that it has manifested over the past 500 years and identify precisely how it is manifesting now. Most importantly, let me explain what we must do to resist this agenda effectively.

The Origin and Brief History of Eugenics

While the notion of selective breeding to secure offspring with desirable traits dates at least since the publication of PlatosRepublicin about 378 bce and has reappeared periodically since that time in one guise or another, the term eugenics was coined in 1883 by British explorer and natural scientist Francis Galton. During the early 20thcentury, eugenics was given the appearance of being serious scientific study because of its pursuit by both biologists and social scientists. Their interest was understanding the extent to which human characteristics considered socially important were inherited. Of particular interest were the predictability of intelligence and certain deviant behaviours. But interest was not confined to scientific laboratories and academic institutions: it soon gained attention in cultural thought in various parts of the world. SeeEugenics.

Notably, it attracted the attention of wealthy oligarchs who wanted a justification for elite rule of society that discarded outdated appeals to supernatural order and seemed to rest on a bedrock of science. An idea that could explain hownouveau richeupstarts like the Rockefellers and Rothschilds had risen to positions of prominence in society alongside the old royal dynasties of Europe. Eugenics fit the bill perfectly. The answer was in their genes. SeeHow Big Oil Conquered The World.

Of course, eugenics has always been pseudoscience. But it appealed to the vanity of the researchers, usually hailing from successful and wealthy families themselves. And it gave an excuse for social engineering on a scale never before dreamed of. The idea spread precisely because it provided an explanation of elite superiority and so, as soon as the idea crossed the Atlantic, it was picked up by Charles Davenport, a Harvard-trained zoologist who had grown up in a strict, puritanical family.

Davenport concocted an ambitious idea for furthering the eugenic cause: the creation of a Eugenics Record Office to register the genetic background of every single individual in the USA so that each person could be categorized by their family line and assigned a genetic rating. Once completed, those with the lowest eugenic value could be eliminated from the gene pool. Not surprisingly, Rockefeller individuals and institutions, as well as others, invested millions of dollars to fund research and other activities in support of these efforts to identify and control the eugenically unfit.

Consequently, fueled by the support of Americas rich and powerful and with the blessing of many high-profile public figures, the field of eugenics transformed from the quaint hobbyhorse of a few mad scientists into the social cause of an entire generation. Economists, politicians, authors, activists by the 1920s, everyone who was anyone was extolling the need to eradicate the germ-plasm of the lower stock. Popularized by the corporate media, taught at universities, written about in best-selling books, it became a mass movement. So while the state of Indiana had passed the first eugenic sterilization law in the United States in 1907, by 1927 the US Supreme Court had endorsed it and the practice had become commonplace. SeeHow Big Oil Conquered The WorldandBuck v. Bell: Inside the SCOTUS Case That Led to Forced Sterilization of 70,000 & Inspired the Nazis.

And, by this time, the Nazis in Germany were being inspired, encouraged, guided andfundedby eugenicists, particularly the Rockefellers, in the United States. The Third Reichs Law for the Prevention of Defective Progeny was passed on 14 July 1933, less than six months after Hitler was appointed interim chancellor. It mandated sterilization of defectives in eight different categories and, at its peak in the 1940s, resulted in the forced sterilization of 400,000 Germans. In this period too, the program was expanded to include euthanasia resulting in over 70,000 German children, senior citizens, and psychiatric patients being murdered by the Nazi regime. SeeHow Big Oil Conquered The World.

Of course, Germans were not the only victims of Nazi eugenics programs during World War II.

But so powerful had been US influence in shaping this program, that when senior Nazis were put on trial at Nuremberg after World War II for their eugenics program, the Nazi defence cited revered US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes who wrote the 1927 US Supreme Court decision. SeeBuck v. Bell: Inside the SCOTUS Case That Led to Forced Sterilization of 70,000 & Inspired the Nazis.

Nevertheless, whatever damage was done to the eugenics movement by the radical interpretation of it that manifested in Nazi practices prior to and during World War II, ranging from sterilization to killing of people with a mental illness, physical disability, a history of poverty or criminal behaviour, or in relation to those people not conforming to their notion of racial hygiene, the movement has never gone away and has had some prominent exponents. In fact, it is now making a profound resurgence although its proponents know better than to label themselves eugenicists.

And the United States remains the true home of eugenicists with forced sterilization practiced up until the 1970s and still the law of the land in 2021. It doesnt happen now, you might say. SeeThe U.S. Is Still Forcibly Sterilizing Prisoners.

Nevertheless, it is true that the Nazi experience had tarnished the reputation of eugenics which forced ongoing work in the field to be disguised by repackaging. And this means that the ideas and many of its practices survive to this day but in different form and certainly under different labels.

But it should also be noted that while the above might be considered a heavily-abridged history of the formal eugenics movement, which scholars like Anton Chaitkin have elaborated listen toAnton Chaitkin on the Eugenics/Euthanasia Agenda and upon which others like Dr David Martin have cast a very different slant by highlighting the role of life insurance companies in driving it watchThe Illusion of Knowledge it is also true that one version or another of the practice, by various names in different contexts, has been around for a very long time. This is the case notwithstanding, for example, considerable academic discussion regarding the precise relationship or otherwise between eugenics and genocide. As one detailed study concluded: eugenics is in fact deeply implicated in the history of genocide once it is placed in a wider context. SeeEugenics and Genocide. Without delving deeper than 500 years into human history, consider the following, for example.

Since European imperialism began in the 15thcentury, adversely impacting indigenous peoples in many regions around the world who were subjected to the genocidal practices of their imperial conquerors, a steady sequence of geopolitical developments has taken place with each of these having a seriously adverse impact on local human populations: the enclosure of the commons and other measures that started being introduced during the industrial revolution in Europe in the 17thcentury and which denied local people the land on which their ancestors had lived for generations, the establishment of the system of nation-states with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, as well as the widespread introduction of capitalism. Each of these transformations, involving military, political, economic and social measures, exacted a significant ongoing death toll readily attributed to the violence built into the state, industrial society, capitalism and colonialism.

But one way of understanding the ideas that justified and drove this violence, which took both direct and structural forms, is to consider them through the prism of eugenics. This is because the national elites who implemented these measures that have resulted in the massive displacement and death of local peoples the world over since the 15thcentury have always actively promoted this outcome against those they considered of lower stock (however this has been described in any given context), and as evidenced by their ongoing resistance to efforts to transform the global system into anything that offers recognition and an appropriate response to their imperial genocide of indigenous peoples or offers more equalized access to opportunities for ordinary people everywhere even now.

In essence, elite intention has never really wavered: Whatever ideology supposedly guided any elite in a particular context, the elite has usually wanted a substantial proportion of any local human population killed off and the bulk of those left alive reduced to slavery, in one form or another, while endlessly commandeering planetary resources for elite use.

And it has used a variety of means to achieve this. Notably, genocide (particularly against indigenous peoples in Africa; Asia; North, Central and South America; and Australia), war (with about 20 million people killed in World War I and 70-85 million people killed in World War II alone), and starvation through control of the global economy (which was already killing 100,000 people each day before the current crisis was generated to play its part).

Anyway, my point is simple: What is the World Economic Forums Great Reset all about? It is simply the latest (and intended final) step in the Global Elites long-standing eugenics agenda. In this instance, it is being further and primarily implemented through destruction of the global economy and the forced injectables program being carried out worldwide, with deployment of 5G and geoengineering playing roles as well, while the enslavement of those left alive is being achieved by measures to implement the technocratic/transhumanist agenda. SeeBeware the Transhumanists:How Being Humanis being Re-engineered by the Elites Covid-19 Coup.

If you think that this program is not being forced upon us, I hope that you will continue to monitor the destruction of your human rights, including your right to freedom of expression which includes the simple right to question and gain access to conflicting analyses of what is happening, so that the many (dis)guises under which this agenda is being implemented become clearer.

But your observation will also soon reveal that some other very basic human rights, such as those to food, medical choice and privacy are all but gone. And winning them back is going to take a monumental struggle and require millions of people acting strategically.

Killing off Humanity: Starvation

There are many ways to kill off a human population with, as touched on above, wars and genocide both obvious examples, and the death toll from wars and genocides over recent centuries is testament to their effectiveness in achieving substantial depopulation.

But if you want to kill off substantial human populations in a way that is less obvious to those not paying attention, two highly effective methods are starvation in those countries outside the West, where tens of millions die annually under the usual circumstances that is, as an inevitable outcome of the inequities built into capitalism which is designed to concentrate wealth without serious effort being made to address the problem, and by producing a toxic substance and compelling the bulk of the human population, one way or another, to submit to accepting it, through the air, their food and water, or even medically.

So while control of food, for example, is an ancient practice that can be dated to at least 4,000 years ago, today the world food supply is controlled by a small number of giant corporations interested only in profit, not sharing food equitably. Hence, while there is ample food, distribution reflects profitability not response to need. As a result: Each year tens of millions die from the most elementary lack of their daily bread. For a comprehensive account of corporate control of food, seeThe BA Cartel, Part 2andThe BA Cartel, Part 3.

But it is not just elite-driven corporate practice that is responsible for this starvation. Governments are actively involved in implementing elite policy in this regard too, as was made clear in the neo-Malthusian policy which Henry Kissinger promulgated in 1974 as U.S. Secretary of State, in his National Security Study Memorandum 200. SeeImplications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests. NSSM-200 outlined a policy of genocide and depopulation against the Third World, and ultimately, against the industrialized sector.

Just one factor in this elite control of food and the massive deaths by starvation it is generating is the model of industrial agriculture including large-scale corporate ownership of land (at the expense of millions of small-holders), the use of genetically mutilated organisms and extensive use of synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides that has been systematically imposed worldwide. For one account of this that elaborates the interrelated set of problems in some detail, seeIndustrial Ag Is Poisoning the World and Causing a Global Hunger Pandemic.

But since formal destruction of the global economy began in March 2020 (thus achieving the concealment of its fragility and likely collapse in any case), even the perverse distribution system in place as part of this corporate grip on the world food supply has been further distorted leading to what one author called lockdown starvation. By closing down the global economy supposedly in response to the pandemic, the global elite was able to conceal a significant component of its depopulation agenda by largely confining it to places where such deaths are already routine and readily ignored: countries in Africa, Asia and Central/South America. As a result, substantially greater numbers are dying of starvation now. See, for example,The Cure is Worse Than The Disease Whats Really Going On in India.

So while the sudden destruction of the global economy impoverished tens of millions of people in industrialized societies through unemployment, making them even more vulnerable to homelessness and destitution, in April 2020 the chief of the World Food Program, David Beasley, warned that: the world faces multiple famines of biblical proportions that could result in 300,000 deaths per day because of the starvation resulting from disruption of global food production and supply. SeeWFP chief warns of hunger pandemic as Global Food Crises Report launchedandCOVID-19 could kill more people through hunger than the disease itself, warns Oxfam.

More than a year later, in June 2021, Oxfam reported that 20 million more people have been pushed to extreme levels of food insecurity, reaching a total of 155 million people in 55 countries. Government measures to destroy economies since the alleged pandemic began, have seen the number of people living in famine-like conditions increase sixfold to more than 520,000.

What we saw as a global health crisis has quickly spiralled into an inflamed hunger crisis that has laid bare the stark inequality in our world. The worst is still yet to come unless governments urgently tackle food insecurity and its root causes head on. Today, 11 people are likely dying every minute from acute hunger. SeeThe Hunger Virus Multiplies: Deadly Recipe of Conflict, Covid-19 and Climate Accelerated World HungerandEvery minute, 11 people die of hunger: Oxfam.

Of course, with the worlds attention focused elsewhere, it is also easy to just let people die, even if some people get a little attention before doing so. SeeNothing left: A catastrophe in Madagascars famine-hit south.

In any case, one would be naive to believe that governments or international organizations now, any more than at any time in the past, are going to urgently tackle food insecurity and its root causes head on. Such words are simply the most straightforward way of pretending concern until the readers attention moves on to the next subject without asking was anything done? Of course not, and it will not be.

In addition, as touched on above, by deliberately crashing national economies it was easy to conceal the fact that they were on the brink of crashing anyway. In the words of Scott C. Tips: As the American and other economies falter from major structural problems, out-of-control debt, reckless spending, and government stupidity in shuttering businesses, the blame for markets crashing and economies tanking is borne by the conveniently available COVID-19 disease. SeeNever Has So Little Done So Much Harm to So Many: The Latest Coronavirus Attack Is A Cover for Restricting Our Health Freedoms.

As the elite coup (the Great Reset) proceeds and key measures to tighten its control and consolidate the transfer of wealth from poor to rich are implemented, populations in industrialized countries will also be confined to the economic margins and starved to death.

Killing off Humanity: Injectables

Parallel with economic measures to kill off a substantial proportion of humanity, the global elite has long used medical measures to achieve a similar outcome.

Dating from the time when the Louis Pasteur model of disease based on germ theory: microorganisms attack the body and must be fought off individually gained ascendancy over the Antoine Bchamp model based on terrain theory: the health of the body and its environment determine health outcomes in the late 19thcentury, the focus of allopathic medicine has been treating disease with synthetic drugs, chemotherapy, radiation, surgical removal of body parts and vaccines. SeeBechamp or Pasteur? A lost chapter in the history of biologyandGerm Theory Versus Terrain: The Wrong Side Won the Day.

However, despite the focus of the dominant medical system on germ theory, it has never been scientifically established that the SARS-CoV-2 virus actually exists. More fundamentally, according to Dr Stefan Lanka: Contrary to what most people believe, there are no pathogenic viruses. All claims about viruses as pathogens are wrong and are based on easily recognisable, understandable and verifiable misinterpretations. A real and complete virus does not exist anywhere in the entire scientific literature. SeeThe Misconception Called Virus: Measles as an example.

To reiterate in the words of two other authors: there is no original scientific evidence that definitively demonstrates that any virus is the cause of any disease. SeeWhat Really Makes You Ill? Why everything you thought you knew about disease is wrong. But you can read more inDismantling the Virus Theory The measles virus as an exampleand watch the video interviewThe Real Science of Germs: Do Viruses Cause Disease?

And so the entire foundation of health practice underwent a profound transformation during the late 19thcentury. The shift from highly effective natural health modalities to pharmaceutical medicine was keenly facilitated by the Rockefeller family whose oil products needed outlets given that the automotive industry was just starting (and was generating only limited demand) and the drugs being promoted were made from oil byproducts. Consequently, the Rockefeller family and its allies made strenuous efforts to obliterate the natural health modalities popular and effective prior to the turn of the 20thcentury and invested hundreds of millions of dollars to ensure the emergence of pharmaceutical medicine based on the petrochemicals its oil industry made possible. SeeRockefeller Foundation Moments in Time: 1921-1929andHow Big Oil Conquered The World.

As a result, chronic ill-health and deaths from medical treatments skyrocketed during the next century as has been extensively documented. See, for example,Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of HealthandDeath by Medicine.

In brief, and notwithstanding the many fine doctors who have done what they could to genuinely restore health, this model has meant that large segments of the human population have been condemned to one or more of the medically-induced forms of chronic ill-health while many others have been the victims of iatrogenic (medical error) deaths, the leading cause of death in many countries, including the United States: the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the US. SeeDeath by Medicine. Of course, the second and third leading causes of death cancer and heart disease could also be attributed to a medical system that promotes a grossly unhealthy diet of poisoned (by synthetic herbicides and pesticides), processed and unhealthily prepared foods (as well as fluoridated water) while suppressing awareness of a nutritionally/environmentally sound and ethical diet (biodynamically/organically grown, whole and preferably vegan/vegetarian food) as well as effective treatments, such asGerson Therapyfor cancer.

But a vital component of the injuries and deaths inflicted medically occur by vaccination, for which there is zero science of any benefit. As Dr Stefan Lanka has explained about vaccines generally:

Only ignorant people who blindly trust in the state authorities who are testing and approving the vaccines can regard vaccination as a small harmless prick. The verifiable facts demonstrate the danger and negligence of these scientists and politicians, who claim that vaccines are safe, have little or no side-effects and would protect from a disease. None of these claims is true and scientific; on the contrary, upon precise scientific analysis, one finds that vaccines are useless and the respective literature admits to the lack of any evidence in their favour.SeeThe Misconception Called Virus: Measles as an example.

Far from being useless, however, vaccines have an exceptional record of achievement in two realms. They are extraordinarily profitable with even multi-billion dollar fines imposed on pharmaceutical corporations absorbed as a cost of doing business: seeBig Pharma Conglomerate with a Criminal Record: Pfizer Takes Over the EU Vaccine Market. 1.8 Billion Doses and they injure and kill with ruthless efficiency. And for those paying attention this has been well known for a long time with a great many scientists documenting the myriad problems with vaccines for just one example, seeNew Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro- and Nanocontamination and others documenting the extensive injuries and deaths. See Sayer Jis 326 page bibliography with a vast number of references to the literature explaining the exceptional range of shocking dangers from vaccination:Vaccination.

In fact, based on his own experience of promoting vaccines among unaware populations in Africa and Asia and given his well-known sympathies for eugenics, Bill Gates has candidly stated that if we are doing a real good job vaccinating, we may reduce the world population by 10% to 15%. SeeInnovating to Zero!Moreover, he might have added, if we use a gene-altering injectable we can do it far more efficiently.

So how effective at killing are these injectables? Here is just a sample of what some prominent doctors and scientists have described, usually as part of a warning:

In this video, Professor Dolores Cahill, Dr. Judy Mikovits & Dr. Sherri Tenpenny explainThe Truth about the Covid-19 Vaccine.

According to Professor Cahill, great harm will result from these mRNA vaccines in the years to come: I have been saying all along [that] anyone whos over 70 who gets one of these mRNA vaccines will probably sadly die within about two to three years. And anyone who gets the mRNA injection, no matter what their age, can be expected to die within five to ten years.

According to Dr Judy Mikovits, Fifty million people will die in America from the vaccine. Dr Tenpenny agrees, subject to the proviso that if they dont die, they are going to be seriously injured.

In his videoA Final Warning to Humanity, Dr. Mike Yeadon asks Why is the pharmaceutical industry making top up vaccines? You should be terrified at this point, as I am, because there is absolutelyno possible justificationfor their manufacture. I am very frightened of that. There is no possible benign interpretation of this. I believe that they are going to be used to damage your health and possibly kill you. Seriously. I can see no sensible interpretation other than a serious attempt at mass depopulation. This will provide the tools to do it and plausible deniability.

For their part, Doctors for Covid Ethics have recently issued the fourth edition of their own warningJAccuse! The Gene-based Vaccines Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve:

Official sources, namely EudraVigilance (EU, EEA, Switzerland), MHRA (UK) and VAERS (USA), have now recorded many more deaths and injuries from the COVID-!9 vaccine roll-out than from all previous vaccines combined since records began. TOTAL for EU/UK/USA 40,666 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 6,626,502 injuries reported as at 15 September 2021.

It is important to be aware that the official figures above (reported to the health authorities) are but a small percentage (1 to 10%) of the actual figures. This catastrophic number of injection related deaths has NOT been reported by the mainstream media, despite the official figures above being publicly available.

The signal of harm is now indisputably overwhelming, and, in line with universally accepted ethical standards for clinical trials, Doctors for Covid Ethics demands that the COVID-19 vaccination programme be halted immediately worldwide.

Continuation of the programme, in the full knowledge of ongoing serious harm and death to both adults and children, constitutes Crimes Against Humanity/Genocide.

Governments worldwide are lying to you the people, to the populations they purportedly serve.

And in this video, Dr Sucharit Bhakdi carefully explains whythe Covid-19 injection is precipitating a global catastrophe that will decimate the human population. SeeCOVID Shots to Decimate World Population, Warns Dr. Bhakdi.

Having cited these examples, however, it should be pointed out that they constitute a tiny fraction of the rather endless sequence of highly qualified doctors, scientists, geopolitical analysts and others who have perceived the nature of what has been planned and is now being implemented, and been warning humanity of its fate unless vigorous resistance is offered. For just two of these other warnings, consider the following.

In this evocative open letter from twelve holocaust survivors of World War II, they warn:

We, the survivors of the atrocities committed against humanity during the Second WorldWar, feel bound to follow our conscience and write this letter.

It is obvious to us that another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes. The majority of the worlds populace do not yet realize what is happening, for magnitude of an organized crime such as this is beyond their scope of experience.

We, however, know. We remember the name Josef Mengele. Some of us have personalmemories. We experience a dj vu that is so horrifying that we rise to shield our poor fellow humans. The threatened innocents now include children, and even infants. In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013a period of 15.5 years. And people affected worst are between 18 and 64 years old the group which was not in the Covid statistics.

We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately. What you call vaccination against SARS-Cov-2 is in truth a blasphemic encroachment into nature. Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body. It is a medical experiment to which the Nuremberg Code must be applied. The 10 ethical principles in this document represents a foundational code of medical ethics that was formulated during the Nuremberg Doctors Trial to ensure that human beings will never again be subjected to involuntary medical experimentation & procedures.SeeStop the Covid Holocaust! Open Letter. We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately.

In a recent article, Professor Michel Chossudovsky noted:

The vaccine is being applied and imposed Worldwide. The target population is 7.9 billion. Several doses are contemplated. It is the largest vaccination program in World history.

Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body...

The mRNA vaccine is not a project of a UN intergovernmental body (WHO) on behalf (of) the member states of the UN: This is a private initiative. The billionaire elites which fund and enforce the Vaccine Project Worldwide are Eugenists committed to Depopulation.SeeThe COVID-19 Vaccine and the Nuremberg Code. Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide.

Beyond these warnings, however, if we consider theofficialinjury and death figures from the injectables cited above, we know that millions have been injured and many tens of thousands killed (in the European Union, the UK and the USA only) by the death needle already.

Of course, the problem with official figures is that they always profoundly understate the deaths and injuries as an extensive CDC-funded Harvard research study explained a decade ago. In reality, for a variety of clearly identified reasons, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. SeeElectronic Support for Public Health Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

And a recent research study by Dr Jessica Rose highlights this problem in relation to the current gene-altering injectables. Her research demonstrated that more than ten times the official figure over 150,000 people have died due to the injectables in the USA so far. SeeBREAKING Over 150,000 people including 600 children have died due to the Covid-19 Vaccines in the USAand watch a video interview of Dr Rose here:VAERS: What do the Data Tell us?

But remember the warnings from Professor Cahill, Dr. Mikovits, Dr. Yeadon, Dr. Bhakdi and others. The timeframe on deaths is over the next few years so, in short, despite the horrifying reality already, the tragedy has only just begun.

Of course, the truth about the vaccine death and injury toll is being heavily suppressed by international organizations (including the United Nations and World Health Organization), governments and the medical, pharmaceutical and media industries because this knowledge would only undermine support for the elite-driven eugenics program.

Hence, the tragedy will continue to accelerate with resistance confined to that which can be mobilized outside mainstream channels.

Killing off Humanity: Other means

While I will not elaborate them in this article, as mentioned above, it should be acknowledged that the elite is using other means to kill off a large proportion of humanity, with the deployment of 5G and geoengineering just two more examples. For discussions of these issues, seeDeadly Rainbow: Will 5G Precipitate the Extinction of All Life on Earth?andExtinction is Stalking Humanity: The Threats to Human Survival Accumulate.

So How Can We Resist?

Fortunately, there is considerable resistance already. However, we need to expand this and also get it onto a more strategic footing so that it functionally undermines the power of the Global Elite to conduct this coup. And dont assume that the Global Elite will back off. It is criminally insane. SeeThe Global Elite is Insane Revisited.

So, as I have explained before, our defense strategy must thwart those key measures of their coup that would give them the control they want. This will not be easy because we must mobilize millions to act strategically. Random acts of resistance, such as the mass mobilizations without strategic focus that have been conducted so far, can have no impact.

For an integrated strategy to defeat the elite coup, see theWe Are Human, We Are Freecampaign, which has 29 strategic goals for defeating the coup including meaningful engagement with police and military forces to assist them to understand and resist, rather than support, the elite agenda.

But for a simpler presentation, see theWe Are Human, We Are Free 7 Days Campaign to Resist The Great Reset. The Telegram group ishere.

One-page flyers in several languages, outlining essential nonviolent actions that we must undertake, are published with this article.

Conclusion

Given the enormous sophistication and complexity of the elite agenda being implemented under cover of the so-called SARS-CoV-2 virus, our resistance must match the sophistication of the coup if it is to succeed. And, in this case, it will require far more action in the home than on the street. This is because street protests do not constitute resistance in themselves and can only be used as a means of mobilizing strategic resistance, most of which will need to occur as a result of people modifying certain elements of their daily behaviours as they go about their usual routines.

If we cannot mobilize sufficient noncooperation with particular elite agents and specific measures being taken by the elite through these agents, then the Global Elite will succeed in killing off a substantial proportion of the human population and enslaving the balance.

So our choice is simple. Resist, strategically, as outlined above or watch Earth being depopulated to a planet of cyborg slaves.

Biodata: Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author ofWhy Violence?His email address isflametree@riseup.netand his website ishere.

Go here to read the rest:

Killing Off Humanity: How the Global Elite is using Eugenics and Transhumanism to Shape Our Future - Sri Lanka Guardian

A learned scholar on TikTok has broken down why transphobia is rampant in the UK and why its now being called TERF island online.

One TikTok user asked if anyone knew why the UK became known as TERF island which prompted Daniel who goes by the username danieltalkstoomuch on the video-sharing app to share his insightful response on the topic.

The initialism TERF stands for trans-exclusionary radical feminist and refers to people who describe themselves as feminists but who exclude the rights of transgender people

Daniel opened the video by sharing their list of impressive credentials including that they did a dissertation project on transphobia, is starting postgraduate studies looking at transphobic dehumanisation and plans to further their studies with a PhD on TERFism.

So he knows his stuff.

Daniel then spoke about a 2020 essay that they loved called Empire and Eugenics: Trans Studies in the UK by Ezra Horbury and Christine Xine Yao. They said the studys authors point out that trans studies are a marginalised discipline in the UK, a bit more so than in the US where it is to an extent, institutionalised.

What that means is that when we talk about trans issues in the UK, were not consulting trans studies scholars were consulting TERFs, Daniel explained.

And its very easy as a result of this for TERFs to say that trans studies scholars have no evidence and when evidence does come out, its also very easy for them to ignore it, deny it exists or claim that its biased despite no actual evidence to substantiate that claim.

Alongside the discipline just not being taken seriously in the UK, Daniel said the authors point out that there is a massive problem with intersectionality in the UK.

He explained, although the UK is the birthplace of the British Empire and eugenics, many people refuse to recognise that and refuse to recognise even to this day that there is racism and implicit bias in our society.

Story continues

And as a result of this, we have a lot of upper to middle-class white feminists in our public discourse in academia who a) have never spoken properly to a feminist of colour and b) have never had to look at something through an intersectional or post-colonial lens, they added.

He continued: And then when we have something like TERF-ism, which is a branch of white feminism that exploits narratives of white female vulnerability and has bioessentialism that has been likened to eugenicist racism, it does really well in this country under these conditions.

At the end of this amazingly thought-provoking video, Daniel also threw in their own conspiracy theory but cautioned that they had no evidence to back it up so said, please take it with a grain of salt.

He pointed out that British people have such a fixation with politeness culturally that it can be really hard to call people out for their transphobic prejudices and biases. And therefore, its difficult to get anybody to learn because its seen as really impolite to accuse someone of being transphobic, he said.

Its also not really polite to be a bigot though so people will find ways to express their prejudice in such un-implicit ways and they will lie to themselves about why they hold those biases, Daniel added.

And if you can substantiate your transphobic beliefs with feminism or concern for the safety of children, that is a great way to make yourself feel better about holding those biases and to prevent people from criticising you.

Daniel isnt the only one to point out that this anti-trans bias exists in the UK.

If you look up TERF island on Twitter, several people can be seen tweeting about the rise in anti-trans sentiment and hate in the UK.

Additionally, a damning report by the Council of Europe recently singled out the UK for its baseless and concerning anti-trans rhetoric. The UK is mentioned throughout the report and referenced the rise of anti-LGBT+ hate speech on social media.

The extensive report which also named Russia, Poland and Hungary as areas of rising hate against LGBT+ people also described a marked increase in anti-LGBT+ hate speech and hate crime.

The council, which is Europes leading human rights organisation, vehemently condemned the extensive and often virulent attacks on LGBT+ rights in the community.

Continue reading here:

Transphobia scholar explains in the simplest of terms why the UK became TERF island - Yahoo News UK

To most people, food production, home ownership, and energy don't have much in common, but in the hands of 'science is a corporate conspiracy' theorist Dave Goulson, humans are ruining the planet. The common cultural cancer underpinning of our problem, he believes, is capitalism.

Rachel Carson believed misuse of DDT was harming birds, Goulson claims our very existence is. And his solemn false dichotomy choice to prevent it is Draconian. Start culling the human herd or create a level of social authoritarianism that even John Holdren, Paul Ehrlich, and Anne Ehrlich didn't advocate in their book "Ecoscience." And they embraced eugenics.(1)

Goulson thinks capitalism is the overarching culprit. It's always easy for academics to bleat about capitalism because they are getting paid unless the world government they evangelize collapses. It's as disingenuous as some cranky old white guy in suburban Las Vegas claiming that minorities need to stop going on about racism and get jobs. Much of the book reads just like that kind of screechy polemic. It's solely for wealthy white people in developed countries, the poor and brown and black people in less fertile lands are just abstract notions. If they can't afford organic bread, let them eat organic cake.(2)

Using hand-picked papers - including his own, despite criticism from the more rational science community that his methodology wouldn't have gotten past a middle school biology teacher - he insists bees are dying thanks to science, humans are dying thanks to science, and scientists are evil. Unless they are trustees for Pesticide Action Network, like him. In his book, he endorses them yet never bothers to mention his conflict of interest.

In a miracle of time efficiency, it only came out yesterday and 7 people on Amazon have already stated they read it cover to cover and that it is a spectacular work of science. All 5-star reviews. If you believe that, you also may be willing to believe his backyard gardening techniques can feed a planet.

That will be unimportant to his readers (look for 'sales' of it to be primarily PAN buying them to give them away to donors) because this is not a science book, it is a quasi-evangelical one. His Star of Bethlehem in his religious quest to cull humanity is, of course, Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring", and while that book had very little science and a whole lot of anecdotes it came across as a lot more authentic. Goulson instead set out to create a defense attorney's plea for action to potential jurors, and the topics he chooses to include (and accept) are so overtly manipulated it screams opportunism.

For example: "5G promises to chronically expose every city dweller to a dose of higher-energy microwaves." What scientist believes this silliness? It's not microwaves, and while it is radiation - everything is - it is non-ionizing radiation. You get more "microwaves" from a light bulb. All-natural cosmic rays, 100 percent organic, are the only radiation we should worry about.

He dismisses kookier claims that 5G somehow caused COVID-19 but then immediately engages in 'but we don't really know what it does' inference.

And that is "Silent Earth" in a nutshell. It is the Denier For Hire playbook. We must obey the Precautionary Principle and all science Needs More Study. Unless it is things endorsed by the lawyers and groups that are paying him, where he has a reputation for producing papers with a promised, predetermined conclusion for activist organizations. He wants to use government to drive farmers out of business - except the farmers engaging in the process the activist organizations which support him approve.

It all sounds simple, and it is when your livelihood is an intangible like raging against the science machine. The problem is we live in the real world. His fellow progressives, from Malthus to Margaret Sanger, would applaud this kind of war on the poor and minorities, but compassionate people who want everyone to lead better lives see it for what it is - eugenics under the new name of sustainability.

The problem Goulson faces is one that activists always face - logic. They endorsed natural gas before it became popular, then they turned on it. Same for dams and hydroelectric power. Now they endorse solar and wind because, they claim, they accept climate science.

No, they accept any doomsday prophecy that helps raise money. Agricultural science instead feeds people.

Yet Goulson and his political allies claim government agencies and biologists are all being bought off by Big Ag. The problem with his reasoning is the problem with the book - a lack of reasoning. Goulson now claims he accepts vaccines, he claims he accepts climate science. Everyone in fields where he is a science denier has been 'bought off.' How is that climate scientists were not bought off but agricultural scientists have been when Exxon alone has enough money to bribe each climate scientist with $5 million each year? 20X the revenue of Bayer's chemical group? And that is just one oil company?

It makes no sense. It doesn't have to make sense. It is a dirge with no basis in facts, like that honeybees colonies are up 85% in the last 60 years and that wild insects are only impacted by pesticides if activists like Goulson create experiments where critters are poisoned at obscene doses for the equivalent of 5 straight years of their lives.

Yet activist groups that pay Goulson are where science facts go to die so I predict it will be a big hit among people who think all food that contains DNA should have a warning label.

NOTE:

(1)Ecoscience - 1977's Bible for Environmental Doomsday Preppers who favor compulsory abortion and world police.

(2) Modified from "Enfin je me rappelai le pis-aller d'une grande princesse qui l'on disait que les paysans n'avaient pas de pain, et qui rpondit: Qu'ils mangent de la brioche." - Jean-Jacques Rousseau "Confessions", p. 262.

Read the original:

'Silent Earth' Review: Scientists Have Been Bought Off, Organic Can Feed Everyone - It's Retro Creepy In 2021 - Science 2.0