In order for manipulation to work the individual being manipulated must not be aware that he is being manipulated. What happens – what he is manipulated into believing to be the natural, organic ebb and flow of events – isn’t planned and contrived by the manipulator.
So it goes with electric cars.
An outright ban on functional cars (those being not electric cars) will not do. It is too obvious. People might object. Instead, not-electric cars are manipulated off the market via regulations few are even aware of and even fewer understand.
As for example, the Biden regime’s imposition of a regulation that will require all cars to average more than 50 miles-per-gallon within a few years from now. This is a regulation only electric cars (or at least, partially electric cars; i.e., hybrids) can comply with. Which serves the purpose of manipulating people into electric cars – which will be the only new cars available within a few short years from now.
People hear that the government is going to prod the oil-beholden car companies to make cars more “fuel efficient” – and less “polluting.” This sounds good to most people. It is rarely, if ever, explained to people what this means.
Or even what the regulations mean.
For example, this “pollution” business.
People are manipulated into believing – in the first place – that current (and recent) cars pollute. This is only true if you equate any “pollution” (i.e., any emissions of compounds that can be characterized as pollutants) with meaningful pollution (i.e., a quantity sufficient to cause objectively quantifiable negative effects on the environment or people). It is rarely – if ever – explained to people that such “pollution” emanates in minuscule amounts from the tailpipes of all cars made since about 30 years ago. That the proposed reduction demanded amounts – literally, this is math; percentages and fractions – to next-to-nothing.
And will have no meaningful effect upon air quality. That it is an irrelevance, in other words.
But a “20 percent reduction” is not presented as 20 percent . . . of less than 1 percent. And thus, people are manipulating into believing that a tremendous rather than fractional reduction in “pollution” is being achieved. They are also made to feel guilty if they object to it. 
They “oppose clean air” in that case.
To accept the costs and other impositions that will be necessary to keep the air “clean.”
Another way the people are manipulated is by not explaining that the very definition of “pollution” has been slyly altered to mean what it never meant before.
It once meant combustion byproducts that cause or worsen air pollution. But these byproducts have been all-but-eliminated, about 30 years ago. So the meaning was altered to encompass a combustion byproduct that does not cause or worsen air pollution or have any negative effect on human health – carbon dioxide. By framing this inert gas as a “pollutant” it is easy to manipulate people into buying into the necessity of reducing it.
We must prevent “climate change” – the undefined horror that will get us if we do not.
Which serves the purpose of manipulating them into electric cars – by regulating non-electric cars off the market and by gaslighting people into believing they ought to be driving an electric car.
The “fuel efficiency” thing is another manipulation. It relies on the imbecilic premise – rarely if ever questioned – that the oil-beholden car companies are willfully denying what the market craves; i.e., “fuel efficient” vehicles. This proposition being as idiotic as the assertion that McDonald’s is willfully denying its customers the soy-patty burgers and celery-beet smoothies its customers crave.
McDonald’s, of course, does provide some healthy alternatives to its staple fare – just as the car companies offer “fuel efficient” alternatives to big trucks and SUVs. Just as there are salads and such available at McDonald’s, there are also “fuel efficient” cars – including hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius I’m test driving this week (the review will be up in a couple of days).
But government manipulates the people into believing that were it not for government regulations requiring them, the oil-beholden car companies would build nothing but fuel-inefficient vehicles such as big trucks and SUVs.
It’s rarely, if ever, pointed out that fuel-efficient vehicles predate government regulations requiring them – which did not exist prior to the mid-1970s. Because that knowledge would undermine the effort to manipulate people into believing that absent government regulations, there would be no fuel-efficient vehicles.
This manipulation also ties into the manipulations regarding “pollution.” People are manipulated into believing that unless they support government regulations mandating ever-more “fuel efficient” vehicles, they are supporting the propagation of “polluting” vehicles. The use of gas having been cleverly associated with the “emission” of gasses; i.e., carbon dioxide – the inert gas that doesn’t cause or contribute to air pollution or negatively affect people’s health in any way.
Thus, when the Biden regime trots out its proposal to force all new cars into compliance with a regulation that they average 50-miles-per-gallon or better, the people are manipulated into believing they aren’t being forced out of their cars and into electric cars.
That is just sort of happened that there are no cars available that aren’t electric cars.
It’s as ingenious as it is loathsome. But most people have no idea they’re being manipulated by some of the most loathsome cretins imaginable.
. . .
Got a question about cars, bikes or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in! Or email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com if the @!** “ask Eric” button doesn’t work!
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!
“But a “20 percent reduction” is not presented as 20 percent . . . of less than 1 percent.”
Brilliant. I will use that in my debates with EV kool-aid drinkers.
thanks
Thanks, Chris!
I recall when I got wise to the EPA’s tricks in this respect. It was back in the ’90s. I was researching what – exactly – they meant by “reduction” of such-and-such. I found out. It’s appalling – and despicable for its dishonesty. The average person has no idea how massively they are being lied to.
The reason they want electric vehicles is to restrict the mobility of those who don’t obey the government. Today I can hand some one a 5 gallon gas can and they could go 125 miles but with electric you need a charging station linked to a digital payment platform to recharge. My guess is that if the charger is capable of monitoring the battery while charging, could it also be capable of identifying the vehicle by it’s VIN number? Bad ESG or social credit score and it won’t charge.
PS- I’ve driven in -40 weather and it’s V8 engine kept my feet warm, just wonder what an EV would do and for how long?
The search for ever slighter reductions in emissions drive up the complexity and costs where people are polluting more because they can’t keep all of those things working, and cause they can’t afford new cars in the first place, so they are just running older cars forever and leaving non essential emissions crap out of repair. And I’m driving a huge old SUV cause I can’t buy a new compact SUV that doesnt come with a ton of expensive unreliable technology that hinders driving.
This is politics in general.
It is used by those who want to change things. Mostly for the worse as far as liberty is concerned.
Be first to claim a topic & define the language.
After that, everyone else is on the defensive.
All the “progressive” side has to do is change & create terms.
You will never keep up and the agenda is theirs.
Minimum wage (keeping blacks out)
Sweat shops (domestic protectionism)
War (never based on facts)
Global warming (money & control)
Patriot act (spy on citizens and circumvent rights)
Public school (benefits professional teachers)
Business regulation (stifles competition)
Covid (control)
EVs are no different
‘War (never based on facts)’ — Dan
We’re reliving 2002’s drumbeat of war against Saddam Hussein, whose alleged weapons of mass destruction proved to be imaginary.
For weeks, the media have been in full cry about the imminent invasion of Ukraine — even as Ukraine itself asks the US for the evidence. Feb 16th, the alleged invasion date, has come and gone. But the Ukraine invasion cult has only doubled down on its doomsday call.
As my member of Congress asked, why aren’t we concerned about defending our own shambolic border, rather than a border between two former Soviet states on another continent?
Evidently NATO, after its humiliating thrashing in Afghanistan, needs a new conflict in the heartland of Europe to reinflate its shrunken manhood — even at the risk of nuclear war with Russia, which actually does have WMDs.
You’d think the gross mismanagement of the pandemic would be enough for now. But no, our insane, venal rulers want to escalate to a whole new, life-threatening plane of clusterfuckery.
The bipartisan near-unanimity, amplified 24/7 by the war-profiteering MSM, warns anybody with three brain cells that we are being scammed like never before; scammed within an inch of our lives.
Gotta keep the money flowing to the military congressional industrial complex now that the USSA has been booted out of Afghanistan.
The lies of covid didn’t work fast enough or well enough, but they did get injections into the bodies of half the people of this world. Now they need a distraction, while the injections do their evil work.
With all eyes turned to the teevee screen to watch video and animations of old war games by the dastardly Russkis, and flashes of destroyed huts and shacks, with the implication that a war is already happening, nobody will even be paying attention to all the trusting injectees dropping like flies.
Eventually it will be revealed that they were dropping due to Chinese/Russki bio-warfare. Or snow shoveling- apparently there is an epidemic of people over 35 dropping dead of snow shoveling.
Their master is a liar and a murderer, by their fruit you will recognize them.
“We must prevent “climate change”, in spite of the FACT that it has been changing ever since there was such a thing. The very notion it can be held static is peak hubris. Few truly understand the smallest part of how climate even works. Much less how to stop it from working.
Scarcity is the natural state. We’ve come up with figurative and literal levers that amplify our actions in ways unimaginable. So we can not only have plenty, but also can anticipate having plenty in the future. This makes people uncomfortable, because for most of mankind’s existance the people who live in the moment without concern for tomorrow meet their own demise. The grasshopper and the ant story come to mind. But now we’re so good at levering that tomorrow’s plenty is pretty much assured, at least as long as no one screws up too badly. That’s not good enough for these people. They need to change things because they think that a land of plenty is contrary to the natural order. So they have to grab on to whatever destabilizing variable they can, and use it for leverage. So a few degrees of “climate change” becomes the end of all species, even though there’s no evidence. A virus that is 99.8% recoverable is reason to plunge the global economy into chaos. Anything to create scarcity.
What’s the end goal though? If you decide that, as the malthusians have, there’s a finite size to everything, then what is the correct population? Why is your estimation any better than mine? And what does the malthusian train of thought do when presented with an game changing exponential gain, such as nuclear fission or petrochemical fertilizer? Do you reset your estimate? Do you encourage research? Or do you supress and withhold technology? What does that do for wealth? What happens when the next Einstein wasn’t born because of your “one child” policy?
Scarcity is indeed the natural state. The question is to what degree? The “scarcity” of flat screen TVs is what determines their price. Once they were very scarce. Now they are ubiquitous. Price went down accordingly. They are still scarce. One does not find a new one along side the road. The issue with scarcity is that, along with the rest of free market principals, people have no concept of it, or how it affects them.
Transistors are another example of exponential gain. Back in the 1960s you looked up individual transistors in the Fairchild Semiconductor catalog, and probably paid about $1-5 each depending on the application. Now I can buy thousands of them for that same $5 (actually more like $0.50 in 1960s dollars), and millions for not much more. Heck if you’re willing to let Google push irrelevant ads at you and pay Verizon a monthly fee for not doing much of anything they’ll give you millions of the things for free, and toss in a convenient carrying package that includes a flashlight (also a semiconductor). And we’ll throw it away next year when the new model comes out. Trillions of dollars and millions of people have new wealth thanks to a few molecules of sand.
But even back in 1981 there were people who only saw the downside of these new devices. They weren’t wrong, but it seems like governments and psychopaths were all too eager to create the distopia they warned us about. What no one really understood outside of the hacker community was that transistors (personal computers) were levers. And like the other simple machines they make it possible to improve our lot in unimaginable ways. The mainframe doesn’t make the world better, the Linux box under my desk does.
https://youtu.be/3H-Y-D3-j-M (Nightline episode aired in 1981. Ted Kopel interviews Steve Jobs and writer David Burnham)
Interesting video, RK. Thanks for posting the link.
First comment:
The biggest change since 1980, IMO, is that your Linux box, and my PC, and most other computers worldwide, no matter their size, are now connected via high speed internet. It is the connectivity which changes everything, at least IMO. High speed connectivity makes possible high speed graphics, in real time.
Some ancient history:
1970
Time sharing of mainframes was a hot topic.
Connectivity, for those who had it, was via dialup lines with a 300 bps modem, frequently using an acoustic coupler. Remember those? I do. 🙂
Data terminals were either teletypes or augmented IBM selectric typewriters, both of which used tractor feed, fan fold paper, reams and reams of it. Teletypes could also read and punch 8 bit paper tape. Using a time share system to write and debug programs, in real time, was a *huge* improvement over punched cards and batch processing.
Computer memory used ferromagnetic core, and “core” was used as a synonym for memory. The DEC PDP 8/I had a whole 8 kilobytes of it.
The earliest ICs were packaged in metal TO5 cans, as were transistors.
In 1967, Texas Instruments came out with ICs in epoxy blister packs, which had 8 gold leads, and cost, IIRC, ~$0.89, as opposed to ~$5.00 for TO5 packages of same IC. Minimum wage, for reference, was, IIRC, $1.25/hr.
The 1967 blister packs contained an entire J-K flip flop, and came with a circuit diagram which referenced discrete part numbers. It was actually possible to build the IC using discrete parts, i.e. resistors, capacitors, and switching PNP junction transistors, of which there would have been ~50 total all components.
1975
Telephone company was still using relays for switching. There were relay rooms in telephone exchanges which contained enormous banks of relays, the contacts of which had to be kept very clean. Dirty relay contacts had to be cleaned with acetone. The backup power supply for telephone systems consisted of banks of large lead-acid storage batteries, which had glass containers for the acid, roughly the size of a jerry can.
1983
A genuine IBM PC-XT, with math coprocessor, a Hayes 1200 bps modem, and a 14″ monochrome CRT monitor, cost more than $3000. Within a year or two, modem speeds had increased to 9600 bps, and the modem cards were were half the size of the earlier models. The “hot setup” is 640kb RAM and a 20mb hard drive. 5-1/4″ floppy disks are standard media.
1992
AutoCAD Release 12 DOS is the first version of ACAD to open directly to the drawing editor. An Intel 486 is the standard CPU. Various graphics card manufacturers offer proprietary display list processors for their hardware, which can drive one 21″ color CRT monitor. The monitor alone costs ~$2,000.
circa 2018
A desktop computer system which operates at room temperature and consumes ~100 watts can be had for ~$1200, less graphics card. A mid range graphics card costs $400-500, and the GPU has roughly the same processing power as the CPU. The equivalent processing power in 1986 would have been the size of a small room, and would have run at liquid nitrogen temperature. The name on the 1986 machine would very likely have been Cray.
And what do people do with all this marvelous computing power, you ask?
Well, that is another question, for another time… 🙂
Sometime around 1976 or so dad picked up a PDP-8e at the old White Swan hamfest. First “home computer” in the house. I could program it to run the lights (not LEDs) in different sequences, not bad for an 8 year old kid. Later we added a teletype, but paper tape and electricity was expensive, at least that’s what dad said, and the logic board had some problems so it would randomly just freeze, so it didn’t get used very often.
1982 brought an Atari 400. Cassette drive, 16K (later upgraded to 48K). As everyone migrated to IBM and clones they starting getting dumped on the hamfests and fleamarkets so by the time I went to college I had upgraded to a 130XE with dual floppies, plotter, dot matrix printer and a pretty large software library. It got me thorugh school but not much beyond that. My roomate got to work on a library database project using this really interesting new computer called a “NeXT” workstation…
I didn’t go IBM until my first full time job. The boss let me pick through the parts bin and I got a pretty nice starter PC. If not for that I probably would have saved up for a Mac LC. This was the golden era of PC home building, where there really was a lot of variation in components and you could save a whole lot of money with DIY builds. I got to know the owner at the local shop well enough that he gave me the educational price on Windows NT, back when no one was really checking that stuff too carefully.
Today’s PCs are boring. So are the Macs and Android tablets. But that’s probably about right, 40 years on the industry should be pretty mature. Building is for gamers because the performance is so good and there’s not much variation in the middle of the bell curve. Kind of like cars.
>Building is for gamers
So is overclocking.
I am not a gamer. 🙂
There certainly isn’t a scarcity of flat screen tvs in the homeless camps occupied by drug addicts. All they have to do is raid one of the freight trains, open up a container and they have all the tvs they want.
Of course there’s no electricity to power them up with but they look great inside their little homeless tent. They can pretend to watch the View while they’re shooting up.
I had read a while back that in some places where pollution is the worst, the exhaust coming out of a vehicles exhaust is cleaner than the air around it.
I work on self driving car tech, and so, interact with many people who are trying to influence the automotive industry. I frequently point out that EV’s and gasoline cars have different duty cycles, and tradeoffs and there’s a place for both. This mild statement triggers people into saying things like, “people like you would let the earth burn..”, or “you only care about having fun, not the earth”, etc.
These are affluent people, all can afford electric cars easily, and do, and trade them in on new ones every 2-3 years, and they always have a gasoline car as well, but never really admit to using it. They don’t know what it’s like to worry about getting to work, or having your car break be a huge problem that could cost you your job. Yet, they pontificate how electrics are better, how it’s the right thing to do to make gasoline cars illegal, all that nonsense. I’m one of very few voices of dissent who speaks up. A number of people agree with me, but are afraid to speak up.
I like to drive up into the mountains – a 200 mile drive into an area with no EV charging network. When I point out that there is no electric that can get me to that area, they simply say, there will be, don’t worry. So much wishful thinking that engineers can deliver the impossible.
2-3º of climate change isn’t “burning” the Earth. Poor forestry management and lack of power transmission line maintenance is.
And yes, having the opportunity to sit in a warm home for a few hours of work per month is really “fun,” in that I don’t have to put much effort into keeping my house heated. Going to the grocery store once or twice a month is “fun” inasmuch as I don’t have to think about my next meal for a few weeks.
And going out into the woods, spending time in a tent or travel trailer for a week is also fun, made more so by being able to carry a week’s worth of provisions, living quarters and clothing easily for miles… after a couple of hours driving to the trailhead, which could be hundreds of miles from my warm, well stocked home.
The key manipulation right now allowing the advancement of the EV agenda is the concept that $40,000 is “affordable”.
The entry level Ford in the US is a $20,000 truck that isn’t truly available at that price.
Really, Ford?
Indeed, Roscoe –
The number of new cars available under $20k is dwindling rapidly… because the number of cars is dwindling. Instead, crossovers – which typically start around $23k for an entry-level/compact-sized model.
There s no legitimate reason there couldn’t be new cars available for around $11k – with AC and basic power comforts. The only reason they aren’t is because that would not serve to enserf the populace.
Through the evils of state regulation, we have a VERY limited choice when it comes to cars/trucks. So we as well have a very limited range of prices to pay for them. They all have excessive bells and whistles because dealers and makers both know that bells and whistles sell. My son was praising the virtues of his back up camera. I told him I had no use for such, because I know how to drive. He said he did as well. I said, for how long, using this crutch?
If I the ship makes it to port, there might be a fire sale on high end luxury EVs soon…
Klaus’ Great Narrative: Locking The Plebs Into Plato’s Cave For The 21st Century
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/klaus-great-narrative-locking-plebs-platos-cave-21st-century
Indeed, it looks like we’re going to live out history’s greatest Greek Tragendy.
Why do you think we have a “chip shortage” that just so happens to affect production of non-electric cars? Interesting how Tesla managed to beat analysts’ expectations in Q4 2021 and deliver more vehicles than expected, while other car companies had to slow it down. Hmmm…
And how is it that sail fawns are still being produced at a high rate if we have such a “chip shortage”? Hmmm….
How much do you think a “sail fawn” would cost if it were made in the U.S.?
$6000?
At that price, there would not be many of them around. Even at $2000, I doubt very many people would buy one. Dystopia we now find ourselves in requires money for nothing (fiat currency) and chips for (almost) free.
And why might that be the case? 90% of a cell phone is manufactured in an automated assembly line. Most of the workers are just moving parts from one line to the next and quality checking. I’d guess the process that is the most hands-on is actually putting the phone into the box, but even that is probably automated.
But then you have to take into account the property taxes, the “doing business” taxes, the “prop up the local governement” taxes, the “inspection” taxes. And then there’s the “getting people to show up for work” fees, the “Sally has an issue with Tommy” fees, the “I want to be a protestor so I’m going after you on social media” fees…
Agree. One of the aspects that Americans, especially virtual signaling ones, do not realize is that over the last 30 years our manufacturing capacity has moved overseas. Smog/pollution over the major metro areas such as LA is a thing of the past because we don’t produce things anymore. Even Mexico City has become alot clearer. meanwhile, India, China, and others ramp up coal while our people struggle to pay heating bills.
All that’s been done is that, like EVs, the true cost has been moved upstream. All to score political points with a certain demographic that has been brainwashed.
This is the same loathsome template that was used to ban affordable incandescent light bulbs.
It’s a central part of “The Long March Through the Institutions”, Rudi Dutschke, 1967.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_march_through_the_institutions
It’s a dovetailing of both the Environmental and Animal Rights movements which are both communistic in nature. Ayn Rand pointed out, circa 1966, in one of her non-fiction works that “environmentalism is the new home for Communism”.
By implementing the Nudge strategy, as described by Cas Sunstein, and taking over “education”, these authoritarians have managed to dupe 2/3 of the population.
It was easy when you think about it. With an education system designed by Prussians to create an obedient worker society it didn’t take much to use that system to manipulate the populace to obedience to Environmentalism and Animal Rights. Just recall the reaction to Michael Vick running a dog fighting operation, there were serious calls for his execution.
Perhaps the only remedy for the situation we now face is for a total collapse of what Western Society has become: Homo-Animism. A rebuild will be done by people who actually understand science and nature because those running the show now haven’t a clue to how the world actually Works. It will be incumbent that we reject the Marxist Feel-Gooders and their ilk and let nature work its wonders on their elimination.
I don’t know if that idea will work but I sure do like the way it sounds!
gates and the other globalist/communists believes the same evil as the nazis. depopulation is number one on their agenda, gates hates mankind. he loves medical tyranny. eugenics.
Some 100 years before the Nazis rose to power, German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) ominously wrote that “we owe the animals not mercy but justice, and the debt often remains unpaid in Europe, the continent that is permeated with Jews it is obviously high time in Europe that Jewish views on nature were brought to an end … the unconscionable treatment of the animal world must, on account of its immorality, be expelled from Europe.”
That such words became prophetic under the umbrella of a secular religion of nature that was Nazi Germany colored by an environmental totalitarian views during the 1930s and 40s, is a historical truth that has been underappreciated for too long a time.For Schopenhauer, this was Jewish animal cruelty.
Furthermore, that Adolf Hitler could quote Schopenhauer verbatim from the top of his head is no coincidence, and neither is the fact that the Jews would find themselves shoved into cattle cars and sent to concentration camps set up like stockyards where they would often be treated like experimental animals. Hitler made sure that the Jews would pay for their animal cruelty by subjecting them to the same punishment that he assumed they were guilty of. …
Unbeknownst to many, the highway to modern environmentalism passed through Nazi Germany.
NOTE: By 1935, the Third Reich was the greenest regime on the planet.
gates and globalist/communists are pushing the co2 lies. now they say there is global warming because of the useless eaters creating co2, destroying animals, nature and the whole planet, so the useless eaters must be culled….cue the extermination injection..
Many scholars have rightly focused on Nazi racism over the years, but have often failed to notice that German Social Darwinism was rooted in ecology. What the Nazis derogatively labeled “the Eternal Jew,” the Jews who tried to overcome nature through international commercialism and cosmopolitanism, was specifically targeted.
It is thus no coincidence that sweeping Nazi environmental legislation preceded the Nuremberg Laws.
Religon implies that humans aren’t animals. Darwin showed that humans evolved from animals, and DNA sequencing backs up that claim by showing that most of the functions of our bodies are replicated in other mamals. There’s only one set of genes for hair, for example, but they have some variations/mutations.
We are natural. We just happen to have figured out how to aquire and share knowledge beyond simple emotion and memory. Other primates share some of our traits but not all of them. If they had, we could be having a completely different conversation. My guess is that there were other primates with simlar traits but we managed to kill them off in competition for scarce resources.
Sorry hit post too quickly. My point is that somewhere along the way we became the villain in our own evolutionary story. That’s when enviromentalism crossed over to religion. That’s not quite correct, probably more along the lines of enviromentalism established itself as an aniti-religion. It’s never about the actual enviroment, because the enviroment will never be pure enough for these people. By disavowing your own animalistic nature you can self-flaggulate and gain acceptence by Mother Gaia.
The notion that humans are just other animals is what got us to where we are today – tyranny, depopulation, eugenics, abortion, eldercide, the list goes on.
People have a thing no other animal possesses to any significant degree. Imagination.
Humans are different from animals in another way too, man is a hunter, there is no other animal that will pursue one thing, idea, goal for years and years, 10 years, 30 years, 60 years, that is one of the ways new inventions or discoveries are made.
Another difference is animals are like a robot, they know what they are doing, programmed, they all have a purpose, a job to do, no free will, man has free will, is not a robot, but doesn’t know what he is doing, what his purpose is…..this can be dangerous though he could become the instrument of his stupidities, for example like leftists….
gates and the wef might have figured this out, they want you hooked up to the grid so they can control you, slavery is the most profitable business in history. you can’t have people wandering around doing what they want according to schwab.
No, the idea that some humans are animals is what got us here. Oh, not the psychopath in charge who ignores his own failings, they don’t see the inner animal. But you are certainly an animal, at least in their eye.
The material only viewpoint of the world means that you are just a bunch of molecules spinning around so if you are exterminated what difference does it make, who cares, no loss.
The elite nobility and billionaires at the top openly call the people on the bottom useless eaters, they thing we are like cattle, the herd must be culled periodically……agenda 2030.
They can use the 2500 year old good vs evil model, they say you are evil (destroying the environment, don’t think leftist thoughts, free thinker, independent, wrong political party, don’t want a forced injections, etc.) this makes it easier and politically correct to cull you, all the leftists will cheer.
David M. Graber, Park Service biologist, from 1989:
“Human happiness, and certainly human fecundity, are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but it isn’t true. Somewhere along the line–at about a billion years ago, maybe half that–we quit the contract and became a cancer. We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth.
It is cosmically unlikely that the developed world will choose to end its orgy of fossil-energy consumption, and the Third World its suicidal consumption of landscape. Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”
These S.O.B.’s don’t love The Earth, they hate humanity.
And WORSHIP the Earth. Few understand how truly brutal the Earth is regarding its animal residents. Hunting is castigated as cruel, while the ordinary causes of death in the wild are starving to death, or being eaten alive, at times both at once.
34 depopulation quotes. 1 – 20
the nwo/ccp/wef/.0001% great reset depopulation agenda
1. UK Television Presenter Sir David Attenborough: “We are a plague on the Earth.
2. Paul Ehrlich, a former science adviser to president George W. Bush and the author of “The Population Bomb”: “To our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population)
3. Dave Foreman, the co-founder of Earth First: “We humans have become a disease, the Humanpox.”
4. CNN Founder Ted Turner: “A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
He was quoted saying: “We’re too many people; that’s why we have global warming.”
Unfortunately for him and other fervent depopulationists, both the overpopulation myth and the man-made global warming hoax, have been repeatedly debunked.
5. Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso about medical patients with serious illnesses: This won’t be solved unless you let them hurry up and die.”
6. David Rockefeller: “The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident.”
7. Environmental activist Roger Martin: “On a finite planet, the optimum population providing the best quality of life for all, is clearly much smaller than the maximum, permitting bare survival.
8. HBO personality Bill Maher: “I’m pro-choice, I’m for assisted suicide, I’m for regular suicide, the planet is too crowded and we need to promote death.”
9. MIT professor Penny Chisholm: “The real trick is, in terms of trying to level off at someplace lower than that 9 billion, is to get the birthrates in the developing countries to drop as fast as we can.
10. Julia Whitty, a columnist for Mother Jones: “The only known solution to ecological overshoot is to decelerate our population growth faster than it’s decelerating now
11. Colorado State University Professor Philip Cafaro in a paper entitled “Climate Ethics and Population Policy”: “Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers may be necessary in order to do so.“
12. Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka: However, I am convinced that the world, including all humanity, WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us.”
13. Detroit News Columnist Nolan Finley: “Since the national attention is on birth control, here’s my idea: we should swap contraceptives for fluoride in Michigan’s drinking water.
14. John Guillebaud, professor of family planning at University College London: “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do,
15. Democrat strategist Steven Rattner: “WE need death panels. Well, maybe not death panels, exactly, but
16. Matthew Yglesias, a business and economics correspondent for Slate, in an article entitled “The Case for Death Panels, in One Chart”:
“But not only is this health care spending on the elderly the key issue in the federal budget, When the patient is already over 80, the simple fact of the matter is that no amount of treatment is going to work miracles in terms of life expectancy or quality of life.”
17. Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger: “All of our problems are the result of overbreeding among the working class” and “The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
18. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
19. Salon columnist Mary Elizabeth Williams in an article entitled “So What If Abortion Ends Life?”: “All life is not equal. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides.”
20. Alberto Giubilini of Monash University in Melbourne, Australia and Francesca Minerva of the University of Melbourne in a paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics:
“[W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. … [W]e propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’
34 depopulation quotes. 21 -34
the nwo/ccp/wef/.0001% great reset depopulation agenda
21. Nina Fedoroff, a key adviser to Hillary Clinton: “We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can’t support many more people.”
22. Barack Obama’s primary science adviser, John P. Holdren: “A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.
23. David Brower, the first Executive Director of the Sierra Club: “Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license , the government issuing licences to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
24. Thomas Ferguson, former official in the U.S. State Department Office of Population Affairs: we must reduce population levels. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it…”
25. Mikhail Gorbachev: “We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren’t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.”
26. Jacques Costeau: “In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it.”
27. Finnish environmentalist Pentti Linkola: “If there were a button I could press, I would sacrifice myself without hesitating if it meant millions of people would die”
28. Prince Phillip, husband of Queen Elizabeth II and co-founder of the World Wildlife Fund: “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
29. Prince Charles, the son of aforementioned Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth II, has openly expressed support for a recent population study by biologists Paul and Anne Ehrlich, calling for drastic global efforts to reduce fertility worldwide.
calling among other things for globally provided “back-up abortions” to avert overpopulation catastrophe.
30. Prince William, just like his father and grandfather before him, has showed his support for depopulation. William has recently stated that the population growth in Africa is putting a tremendous amount of pressure on the natural world and driving many species of animals to extinction.
It’s no surprise to see yet another “elite” depopulationist pushing for the death of billions of humans for the sake of the wildlife, whilst holding massive investments in the very companies that plunder the Earth’s resources.
31. Henry Kissinger, a top architect of the New World Order, is believed by many to be one of the biggest war criminals alive. He has worked hard to put his depopulation plans into action.
“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries”.
32. Bill Gates is possible the biggest depopulationist alive.
“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care and reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”
gate’s father William H. Gates Sr. (the former head of Planned Parenthood – depopulation through abortion and child offerings to Satan),
33. George Soros (one of the biggest sponsors of depopulation through famine, abortions, LGBTQP – “P” from pedophilia – groups and sexualization of children) and notorious self-confessed depopulationists,
34. David Rockefeller (eugenics and sterilisation since the early 1900s)
their groundbreaking 1930 work on Eugenics, an idea that became so popular in Europe Hitler monetized it domestically to justify global domination.
we don’t associate Eugenics with David Rockefeller, like we do with Hitler, but it was actually the Rockefeller Foundation that first did the research,
Beginning in 1930 the Rockefeller Foundation provided financial support to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics, which later inspired and conducted eugenics experiments in the Third Reich.
35. Hitler himself was not only a devout eugenicist (whose racial purification policies emerged through the funding of the Rockefeller, Carnegie Foundations as well as British establishment), but was also a devout Malthusian
hitler said: “The day will certainly come when the whole of mankind will be forced to check the augmentation of the human species, because there will be no further possibility of adjusting the productivity of the soil to the perpetual increase in the population.” he would have loved the wef.
“he would have loved the wef.”
Hell, he IS the WEF
What about the ccp controlled WHO?
The WHO is controlled by Gates, the CCP and GAVI,
Every country in the world signed off on following WHO directives, they are in total control, your government and politicians have zero control, (but were very well paid for going along)…….WHO runs the pandemic response in your country, masking, lockdowns, lethal injections, etc.,
Having the ccp run health care in your country is a bit dangerous, more so now with this agenda 2030 depopulation agenda.
This chinese professor says china defeated the U.S. with biological warfare.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/watch-communist-professor-declares-us-was-defeated-biological-war-china
zhang yongzhen was the chinese scientist that released the genome data for the so called sa…rs co…v 2 vir….us, this data was used all over the world to put in place masking, lockdowns, destruction of small business and now forced extermination injections and to make the vac……ci,,nes (extermination injections).
This faked data was fed into another software program that produced the m..rna vac..ci,,ne in one weekend. Made in one weekend and you are get that poison injected in you? Normal vac…..cines take 10 years to get produce.
Now the cure, the mr..na injection is released, again with no controlled experiments.
ATTENTION: The problem was he used fabricated manipulated data, scientific fraud to fabricate the sars co…v 2 vir…us genome, he used their megahit software program. no controlled experiments were ever done.
Around the world virologists used 49 different software programs and could never duplicate his results. nobody seems to care………..
They’re assuming they’d still have the next generation’s version of Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Saint Paul, Thomas Jefferson, Plato, etc. Or worse, be able to predict, based on whatever pop psychology or other motivation of the time, which babies would be permitted to move on to childhood. But it doesn’t work like that. Steve Jobs was an orphan (embellished a bit, but OK let’s play along). He happend to be adopted by a couple in Silly-con valley. There wasn’t anything especially outstanding about him, yet he was able to see how useful a personal computer could be to the general public and was able to follow through on that vision. In the “Utopia” of Klaus Schwab, he’d be culled from the heard and we’d never know what we lost.
General prosperity allows for large populations, which allows for far greater diversity of work. We can afford to have purely theoretical thinkers. If you kill off the plumbers the Platos of the world have to spend time thinking about shit instead of whatever they spend time thinking about. And you’ll never know who might be the human who changes everything until they change it.
The new gods at the top see the people on the bottom as an inferior invasive species that needs to terminated.
The new olympians, the guardians, that is what the globalist/satanist/one world government trash call themselves, the new gods, they think they are a different species then the useless eaters on the bottom who they now call an invasive species who are killing all the animals and the whole planet.
These monsters running the great reset, think/say they are the new gods, a long time ago there was a warning about an antichrist taking over, the antichrist is multiple as in antichrists, there is 3000 monsters at the top controlling this reset, they are the antichrists, replacing a good god, with satan.
The nazis used the same line.
Some 100 years before the Nazis rose to power, German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) ominously wrote that “we owe the animals not mercy but justice, and the debt often remains unpaid in Europe, the continent that is permeated with Jews it is obviously high time in Europe that Jewish views on nature were brought to an end … the unconscionable treatment of the animal world must, on account of its immorality, be expelled from Europe.”
That such words became prophetic under the umbrella of a secular religion of nature that was Nazi Germany colored by an environmental totalitarian views during the 1930s and 40s, is a historical truth that has been underappreciated for too long a time.For Schopenhauer, this was Jewish animal cruelty.
Furthermore, that Adolf Hitler could quote Schopenhauer verbatim from the top of his head is no coincidence, and neither is the fact that the Jews would find themselves shoved into cattle cars and sent to concentration camps set up like stockyards where they would often be treated like experimental animals. Hitler made sure that the Jews would pay for their animal cruelty by subjecting them to the same punishment that he assumed they were guilty of. …
Unbeknownst to many, the highway to modern environmentalism passed through Nazi Germany.
NOTE: By 1935, the Third Reich was the greenest regime on the planet.
gates and globalist/communists are pushing the co2 lies. now they say there is global warming because of the useless eaters creating co2, destroying animals, nature and the whole planet, so the useless eaters must be culled….cue the extermination injection..
Many scholars have rightly focused on Nazi racism over the years, but have often failed to notice that German Social Darwinism was rooted in ecology. What the Nazis derogatively labeled “the Eternal Jew,” the Jews who tried to overcome nature through international commercialism and cosmopolitanism, was specifically targeted.
Now the useless eaters are an invasive species creating CO2 and killing the animals, so they must be exterminated.