The hidden agenda

Our Representatives who are being convinced to support the proposed Reproductive Health and Population Management bill and the public in general should be well informed of how this reproductive rights movement started and where it can lead. They can find this vital information in a recently published book written by Columbia University historian Matthew Connelly entitled “Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population” extensively discussed in an article by Ms. Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D (Friday Fax, C-Fam) which I find so informative and worth sharing.

The key word in Mr. Connelly’s expose, seldom used and least understood, is “eugenics”. The word is derived from the Greek term “eugenia” which means “well born”. It is a biological science founded by British biologist Sir Francis Galton in 1885 and defined as the “study of the agencies under social control which may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations physically and mentally” (British Encyclopedia Vol. 8 p. 806).

Mr. Connelly explains in his book how eugenics united some of the richest and most powerful elites of the twentieth century into a movement “to remake humanity by controlling the population of the world answering to no one and bringing untold misery upon the world’s poor”.

What would become the modern population control establishment started at a secret, invitation-only meeting in Colonial Williamsburg called by John D. Rockefeller III in 1952 where the heads of the US Atomic Energy Commission, National Academy of Sciences and top scientists from embryology to economics including past and present Nobel Prize winners attended and set the agenda for the following decades.

In one of the subsequent meetings entitled “Conference on Population Problems”, Mr. Connelly found from the transcripts that: “what drove them were the questions of how many people the world could hold along with whether industrial development should be withheld from poor, agrarian countries like India. By decreasing mortality and encouraging breeding, development would increase inferior population and further degrade the genetic quality of the human race”. So they decided radical measures to reduce birth rates “would be justified in order to save western Civilization from being dragged down by the growing humanitarian demands of the Third World countries”.

Thus, according to Mr. Connelly, from a countless number of such meetings was born the Population Council which would in turn become the nexus of the entire population control movement, going on to coordinate the work of the United Nations, the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), the world’s largest provider of abortion andbirth control services — founded by Margaret Sanger, a strong advocate of the science of Eugenics — as well as major pharmaceutical firms.

The book also related how Sanger selected psychologist C.P. Blacker as IPPF’s first director general who called for a strategy seeking to fulfill the aims of eugenics “without disclosing what you are really aiming at and without mentioning the word” (unlike Hitler who propagated it openly). They found a willing government when Nehru presented India’s first population policy in December 1952, that allowed them to start experimenting on its people to find a cheap contraceptive “to be used in poverty stricken slums, jungles and among the most ignorant people”, as Sanger puts it. Years later IPPF brought the experiment back into the poor neighborhoods of the US because Sanger believes that “there should be national sterilization for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them”.

Connelly also shows how the population control movement created “future projections as evidence of overpopulation” and “invented new theories”, through the founding members of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) returning from the Vietnam War, who transferred the counter insurgency tactic of population control to USAID’s strategy. Hence Chinese missile scientist Jian Son used computer generated modeling to create the appearance of precise forecast of disaster for China if the government did not limit women to bearing one child. Africa, along with India, was also the target of many contrived scenarios even though according to Connelly, “the continent was a net food exporter and featured some of the lowest rate of growth in the world”. They also ignored the fact that fertility was already falling in China and in other target countries, and the “accumulating body of evidence showing that high fertility was not, after all, correlated with poverty”. He demonstrates that fertility rates fell in developing countries between 1950 and 2000 whether or not they were subjected to population assistance programs.

According to Connelly the movement’s tactics became increasingly coercive in the late 1960’s due to the zeal and connections of people like US Army General William Draper and John D. Rockefeller who helped convinced President Johnson to include population control in the 1965 “war on poverty”. So Johnson tied humanitarian aid to developing nations’ achieving fertility benchmarks set by the UN and USAID, even vetoing food aid shipments to India in the midst of its dire famines. Other coercive methods included such “shock attacks” as setting quotas for millions of shoddy vasectomies and IUD insertions without follow-up care, public humiliation of poor families with three or more children and knowingly unloading defective IUDs that crippled poor women. All these coercive methods are then justified as “casualties” in the war on population.

The funding for USAID population programs reached unprecedented levels between 1967 and 1971 when Draper who founded the Population Crisis Committee (today’s Population Action International) that stirred an American sense of urgency by tapping into their fears, was able to convince US Congress together with former Defense Secretary and World Bank President Robert McNamara to earmark so much money for the program. With the IPPF officials not knowing how to spend so much money along with the growing skepticism in the third world of the US backing, Draper thought of creating a fund centered at the UN which would “sanitize” US funding, give the appearance of international consensus, and circumvent national governments. The initiative became the UN Population Fund (UNFPA).

All these historical events appear to be happening in our country now. In fact this same UNFPA has provided our Department of Education with modules on sex education in the classrooms and has been aggressively pushing for certain “Millennium Development Goals” on population control using as tools local government officials and some of our national legislators. I hope these officials, and the others who are still being “convinced”, would be finally awakened by these shocking realities and their dire consequences.  

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.

*      *      *

E-mail at: [email protected]