Since the middle of the 20th century, under the banner of the “overpopulation crisis”, the world has been undergoing a global propaganda campaign aimed at drastically reducing the birth rate and reducing the population. In most developed countries, the birth rate has already fallen significantly below the level of simple reproduction of the population, and the number of elderly people is equal to the number of children or even exceeds it. Marriage increasingly ends in divorce and is replaced by cohabitation. Extramarital affairs, homosexuality and transgender phenomena have gained priority status. Depopulation, not mythical "overpopulation" became the new reality of the world.

The founder of the idea of ​​birth control in the world was Thomas Malthus, who expressed it in his 1798 work, "Essay on the Law of Population." According to the doctrine of Malthus, population is growing exponentially, and livelihoods are growing arithmetically, so sooner or later people will not have enough food, and according to the director of the World Bank - and water ^[1]. According to Malthus, the smaller the population, the higher the standard of living.

Malthusian ideas were picked up by the feminist Margaret Sanger (Sanger), who generously seasoned them with eugenics, creates in the 1921 year the “Birth Control League”, whose task was to provide abortions and “pull out the chaff of humanity” - “inferior, mentally retarded and mentally retarded and ". The latter included blacks, Slavs, Jews, Italians - a total of 70% of the world population. “The most immoral practice of our time is to encourage the creation of large families that harm not only the members of these families, but the whole society. The most merciful thing a large family can do with one of their babies is to kill him. ”- wrote Sanger ^[2].

Soon, under the guise of grants for scientific activities, the League begins to receive sponsorship from Rockefeller, Ford and Mallon. In an 1932 League magazine in an article entitled “Peace Plan”, Sanger stated that for the sake of peace on Earth, “inferior human material” should be force-sterilized and segregated by being placed in concentration camps.

“By concentrating this huge part of our population for reasons of health rather than punishment, it is safe to say that fifteen or twenty million of our population will become defensive warriors, protecting unborn children from their own defects ... Then an attempt will be made to slow population growth in accordance with at a fixed pace in order to adapt the growing population to the best social and economic conditions"^[3].

Ernst Rydin, a member of the Nazi party, who worked in the League as a consultant and subsequently put her ideas into practice in Third Reich demographic programs such as Genetic Sterilization and Racial Hygiene, was published in the same journal. In 1942, at the height of the war with Hitler, Sanger, in order to avoid uncomfortable associations, renames the “Birth Control League” as the “planned parenthood”, which then becomes the International Federation - IPPF (also translated as IFES), which later received the status of a charitable organization, which allowed it to accept donations without paying taxes.

Sanger enjoyed the support of such celebrities as Julian Huxley, Albert Einstein, Indian Prime Minister Nehru, Japanese Emperor Hirohito, Henry Ford, Presidents Truman, Eisenhower and many others ^[4]... The neo-Malthusian politics she promotes is gaining a global scale.

In 1954, the Hugh Moore Foundation published a widely distributed pamphlet, The Bomb of the Population, which inflated the threat of high population growth in developing countries and emphasized the urgent need to reduce fertility. At 1958, the UN begins to fund IPPF programs in Third World countries and the World Bank will soon join it. In 1959, the US State Department issued a report on global population trends that concluded that rapid growth threatens international stability. A few years later, the actions of Neo-Malthusians spread to America itself: the US Congress allocated the first 50 million dollars for “family planning” inside the country and increased taxes for families with two or more children, while unmarried and childless received tax relief ^[5].

As explained by this step, the author of the later bestseller Population Bomb, ecologist Paul Erlich: “To convince other nations to lower their birth rate, we must be able to say "do as we"And not "do as ordered"». Another reason is the increased impact of US population growth on the depletion of global resources. Despite the fact that in 1966 in the USA about 6% of the world population lived, this country consumed 34% of world energy production, 29% of all steel production and 17% of all deforestation. These numbers lead to the justification that every American birth makes a much greater contribution to the depletion of world reserves - “25 times more than, say, Indian birth” Biologist Wayne Davis says^[6].

In 1964, the United States established the "Sexual and Educational Counsel" (SIECUS). Its executive director Mary Calderon was closely associated with the IPPF and supported the ideas of the humanist Rudolf Dreikurs, among which were:
• fusion or reversal of floors and sex roles; 
• release of children from their families; 
• the abolition of the family as we know it^[7].

In 1968, an American lawyer Albert Blausteinwho participated in the creation of the constitutions of many countries, indicatesthat to limit population growth, it is necessary to revise many laws, including on marriage, family support, age of consent, and homosexuality.

Kingsley Davis, one of the central figures in the development of birth control policies, criticized “planners” for abandoning such “voluntary” birth control measures, such as encouraging sterilization, abortion и “Unnatural forms of sexual intercourse”... According to him words, "Even the most primitive peoples know how to limit the number of children through interruption of intercourse, extravaginal intercourse, homosexual contact, abortion and infanticide." In addition, he insisted that without a change in the social structure and economy, a targeted reduction in the birth rate could not be achieved.

“The issues of sterilization and unnatural forms of intercourse are usually met with silence or disapproval, although no one doubts the effectiveness of these measures in preventing conception ... The main changes needed to influence the motivation to have children should be changes in family structure, the position of women and sexual mores … The economic system largely determines who will work, what can be bought, how much it will cost to raise children, how much a person can spend. Schools define family roles and interests related to career and leisure choices. They can, as needed, redefine sexual roles, develop interests beyond the home, and impart realistic (as opposed to moralistic) knowledge about marriage, sexual behavior, and population issues. Seen in this light, it is clear that the Ministries of Economy and Education, and not the Ministry of Health, should be the source of population policy.”^[8].

Davis Wife, Sociologist Judith Blake proposed abolishing tax and housing benefits encouraging childbearing and removing legal and social sanctions against homosexuality ^[9].

The remarks of this respectable family couple were not left unattended, and in 1969 the IPPF Vice-President Frederic Jaffe issues a memorandum describing methods of birth control, which included abortion, sterilization, over-the-counter contraception, forcing women to go to work, reducing paid maternity leave and child benefits; and encouraging the growth of homosexuality. Jaffe instructs the chairman of the Rockefeller organization Population Council, the behavioral scientist Bernard Berelson, to conduct research on the impact of social, housing and economic factors on childbearing, and to select the most suitable ones.

Short extract from the memorandum:

“The full employment of the population is accompanied by inflation and therefore relatively high unemployment rates should be allowed as necessary. Nevertheless, the connection between women's employment and low fertility has been proved, in connection with which it is necessary to establish what level of inflation can or should be risked to achieve a lower birth rate. It is necessary to change the image of an ideal family, including three or more children, which will lead to an unacceptable rate of population growth. In order to avoid a coercive population policy, it is necessary to create a society in which voluntary contraception will be effective. There is no doubt that most of the measures proposed as alternatives to family planning will not have the same impact on different segments of the population. The attached table attempts to present a primary sorting of the main measures discussed according to their universality or selectivity. It is obvious that economic methods of influence will not have an equal impact on the behavior of families of the rich / middle class and the low-income population. Research will show what methods we will need and how soon.”^[10].

In the same year, speaking to Congress, President Nixon call population growth "One of the most serious challenges for the fate of humanity". He proposed expanding family planning services in the US and setting up a commission to study the impact of population growth on the welfare of the nation. ^[11]. After two years of research, Commission Chairman John D. Rockefeller 3 told the President that further population growth is not practical:

“After two years of concentrated efforts, we have come to the conclusion that in the long term there will be no significant benefits from further growth in the population of the nation, and the gradual stabilization of our population by voluntary methods will make a significant contribution to the ability of the nation to solve its problems. We searched, but did not find, a convincing economic argument for continued population growth. Neither the well-being of our country, nor the viability of business, nor the well-being of the average citizen depend on this.” ^[12].

Scientific Advisor to President Nixon, Dr. Dubridge Urged “All public institutions - schools, universities, church, family, government and international agencies - to establish zero population growth as their first priority” [⁶].

Nobel Prize Laureate Dr. Shockley proposed such a plan: 
The public will vote for the desired rate of annual population growth (he recommends 0.3%), after which the Census Bureau will determine how many children each woman is allowed to have. All girls will be implanted contraceptive capsule... Upon reaching the age of majority, each girl will receive 22 deci-certificates per child. A married couple will be able to use 10 of these to remove the capsule until the baby is born, after which the capsule will be returned. After the birth of two children, the couple will either be able to sell the remaining 2 certificates, or buy 8 more on the free market in order to give birth to their third child. Those who do not want children will be able to sell their certificates at any time [13].

Preston Cloud, chairman of the Natural Resources Committee at the National Academy of Sciences, called for zero population growth by the end of the century and demanded intensification “By any feasible means” population control in the USA and the world. In his speech, he invited, among other things, Congress and the President to formally state that all American couples should have no more than two children, that abortions on request will be legalized and accessible to everyone, even free of charge, and that legal restrictions on homosexual unions will be lifted ^[6].

Concept author demographic transition Frank Notestein, speaking at the National War College to senior officers, noted that "homosexuality is defended on the basis that it helps to reduce population growth" ^[9].

There were those who bluntly called heterosexuality "the root cause of the world's overpopulation dilemma":

It will take just a few years for lobbyists to normalize homosexuality to convince the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the list of psychosexual disorders. “We will no longer insist on labeling the disease to individuals claiming to be healthy,” APA said. This change in the position of medicine regarding the diagnosis of homosexuality occurred without providing any scientific arguments and clinical evidence to justify such a step. More details: https://pro-lgbt.ru/295/

In the 2001 Encyclopedia of Birth Control, published specifically for family planning organizations, homosexuality is already openly listed as a legitimate birth control method:

“Since intercourse between members of the same sex cannot lead to pregnancy, tolerating or encouraging homosexuality and lesbianism can be seen as a method of population control, if not birth control. Almost all people have bisexual potential, and how much it is allowed to manifest itself affects, at least in theory, the number of children conceived. "

In 2004, British Medical Journal (BMJ) editor Imre Lefler wrote the following in its column:

“The value of homosexuality for the survival of mankind lies in its effect on population growth. Anyone concerned about environmental degradation caused by population growth should promote homosexuality. Indeed, it would be desirable for the majority of humans to become homosexual, with only a select few of each recognizable subgroup satisfying the modest reproductive needs of the species...
The ideal social organization of humanity in this overpopulated world would be one in which the majority would live in homosexual monogamy. If homosexuality were to become the norm, the population would drop dramatically...
Prejudice against homosexual marriage will diminish as soon as people realize that this newly created institution is the guarantor of a “natural” population policy.”

In 1972 year for Club of Rome a report was published "Growth limits", In which 12 possible scenarios of human development were presented. All favorable scenarios required political and social changes, including tight birth control at the rate of natural decline.

In 1974, Nixon instructs Kissinger to study the impact of world population growth on the political and economic interests of the United States and propose specific measures of action. This is how the document “NSSM-1990”, classified up to the 200, appeared, compiled by the National Security Council, which spoke about the urgent need to reduce the birth rate on a global scale. The main goal of the document was to achieve the replacement level of fertility by the 2000 year (an average of 2 children per family) and to keep the maximum population level within 8 billion people. The distribution of foreign aid to developing countries will depend on their willingness to adopt anti-natal programs. So, when Nigeria refused to introduce radical sex-enlightenment programs promoting promiscuous sex and homosexuality, Western countries threatened her termination of external assistance. 13 countries were identified in which population control should be applied first.

“…the main focus should be on the largest and fastest growing developing countries that are of particular political and strategic interest to the United States. These countries include India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia. Together they account for 47% of the current population growth.”^[15].

Document suggests “Concentrate on education and indoctrination [sic] the younger generation regarding the desirability of a smaller family ” and notes the need for abortion to reduce fertility.

In 1975, by order of President Ford, NSSM-200 became a guide to action in the field of American foreign policy. Thus, what was previously mainly a private adventure of the elitists, has now become a state program implemented at the expense of taxpayers. There is currently no evidence that the application of the NSSM-200 directives has ceased to be official United States policy.

Currently, the birth rate in the United States is below the level necessary for the natural reproduction of the population. According to the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), the smallest number of babies were born in the United States in 2017 over the last 30 years. The fertility rate at the same time was the lowest for the entire time of observation (that is, in more than a hundred years), and the average number of births per woman fell to a minimum since 1978 - 1,76 ^[16].

At the UN World Conference on Population held in 1974 in Bucharest, 137 countries (all except the Vatican) made commitments aimed at reducing fertility, after which the world population growth rate went down.

Of application documents UN:

“WHO, as well as UNFPA and UNAIDS, fully support the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) Statute of Sexual and Reproductive Rights ... and call on ministries of health to: ...
• Respect sexual and reproductive rights and, if necessary, revise relevant laws, especially regarding abortion and homosexuality ” ^[17].

In Russia, neo-Malthusian ideology was, among other things, reflected in the creation of the LGBT movement; subcultures Childfreepromoting childlessness and sterilization; Campaign “Squeeze”, aimed at discrediting the mother’s image; the introduction of “juvenile technologies” and the creation of numerous branches of the IPPF — first the notorious RAPS, and then the Russian Academy of Sciences. At school lessons "sex lumen»Children are promoted to have early sexual intercourse, promiscuity and the normality of homosexuality. Currently, various NGOs are engaged in this. disguised as HIV prevention. According to a survey conducted by the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion in December 2017, the proportion of Russians who consciously refused to continue the family for 12 years grew from zero to six percent ^[18].

The problem lies in the fact that more and more people not only do not want, but also can not have children. The frequency of fruitless marriages in Russia is 15 – 20%. According to WHO, the 15% indicator is critical, in which infertility can be considered as a factor that significantly affects the demographic indicators in the country and represents a serious state problem. The most important causes of infertility are abortions and diseases that are transmitted primarily through sexual contact. ^[19].

The idea of ​​the need for birth control in Russia was proposed in 1987 Baranov A.A., but it was rejected by the CPSU, as the country needed human resources. With the collapse of the USSR in December 1991, the IPPF, under the auspices of Raisa Gorbacheva, infiltrated Russia and is still operating in it. Birth control was also occupied by her husband Mikhail Gorbachev, who even hosted an international conference in 1995 on the need to control the world population, at which the idea of ​​reducing the population by 90% was voiced:

“Religious institutions are primarily responsible for the population explosion. We need to speak much more clearly about sexuality, about contraception, about abortion, about the values ​​that control the population, because the demographic crisis is an ecological crisis. If you reduce the population by 90 percent, then there will be no one to cause noticeable environmental damage. ”^[20].

In a similar vein, Russian politician Anatoly Chubais led his speech in 2011. Speaking about the need to reduce the population, he spoke about the establishment of a trend that will help reduce the world's population to 2.5 – 1.5 billions by the end of the 21st century.

“In the 21 century, the extension of the trends of 20 is unthinkable. The scenario of continued growth is excluded. Humanity now faces qualitatively new challenges of an unprecedented scale. Our country is capable of making a real contribution to solving these unprecedented challenges. ” ^[21]

Under lobbying, EF Lakhova, who, among other things, proposed a law on forced sterilization of the “unworthy”, in Russia, one after another, various programs of “family planning” were adopted. The slogan “Let it be one child, but healthy and desirable” was replicated. Under the auspices of the Ministry of Health, hundreds of centers have opened in the country that conduct anti-reproductive propaganda at the expense of the state budget, which has made a significant contribution to the demographic crisis in Russia. Sexual “upbringing” of children began, as a result of which STI infections increased tenfold ^[22].  

The public was told that sex education and contraception for adolescents was caused by the need to reduce unwanted pregnancies, but the results were reversed. Paradoxically, free access to contraception leads to an increase in pregnancies and the number of abortions. They spread rapidly, acquiring new and more virulent forms, such as STDs, such as herpes and AIDS. Cervical cancer, previously almost unknown in young women, is now reaching epidemic proportions, often associated with numerous sexual partners. ^[23]... This picture is universal:

Calculating the potential population of Russia, if the birth rate and mortality remained at the 1990 level of the year, then in the 2002 year in Russia there would be 9.4 million more people than at the beginning of the 90 ^[24]. Between 2000 and 2010 the natural population decline was 7.3 million people, while its peak occurred in the early years of the zero - about a million people annually. From 1995 to the present day, with the exception of 2013 – 2015, mortality in Russia exceeds the birth rate ^[25].

Despite its recognition as a foreign agent in 2015, the Russian Academy of Science and Research is still actively working with the population, and the State Duma Committees, the Ministry of Health, the State Committee for Youth Policy, the Ministry of Education and many other state and public institutions continue to cooperate with it (full list).

Although according to official statistics there is a tendency towards a decrease in the absolute number of abortions, its main factor is a decrease in the number of pregnancies. The relative values ​​remain unchanged: seven out of ten pregnancies still end in abortion, which continues to be perceived as a normal medical procedure. ^[16]. According to expert estimates, the actual number of abortions exceeds the official statistics by several times and reaches from 3.5 million abortions per year to 5 – 8 million ^[26, 27]. The head physician of the State Clinical Hospital No. 2 of the city of Orenburg said at a meeting of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation that he had a plan-order for abortion. 

“I get 20 million rubles a year for abortions, but not a penny for their prevention. Health care benefits us from abortion. Until this system changes, you should not wait for something. ” ^[28]

Although IPPF claims neutrality regarding abortion, its former president Fredrik Say, in his speech in 1993, made it clear that organizations that are not ready to support abortion in practice or in theory cannot rely on membership in IPPF. ^[29]. Former IPPF Medical Director Malcolm Potz argued that it was not possible to start and implement any family planning program without widespread abortion. He also said that the restrictive laws of abortion are outdated and do not correspond to the modern world, and therefore can and must be violated ^[30]. This worldview is officially enshrined in the IPPF directives: 

“Family planning associations and other public organizations should not use the legislative vacuum or the presence of laws unfavorable for us as a reason for inaction. Action beyond the law, and even against the law, is part of the process of driving change. ” ^[31]

After the death of Margaret Sanger in 1966, all subsequent IPPF presidents declared their commitment to the Sanger line. Currently, the IPPF, with an annual budget of 1 billion dollars ^[32], under the guise of good intentions, conducts its hateful activities in more than 190 countries. None of declared goals Federations - reproductive health care, maternity protection, strengthening the prestige of the family, prevention of STDs, etc. - have not been achieved. But the true goal has been achieved - the birth rate has significantly decreased.

At present, the growing “climate movement” has included a reduction in childbearing on its agenda. Its members also initiated motion No Future No Children, which pledges not to have children until governments take serious action on "man-made climate change." German teacher gained fame after the publication of a book in which she urges Germans not to give birth to children. According to her, every unborn child saves the world from 9 441 tons of carbon dioxide.

Having removed the screen of empty rhetoric to protect “woman’s health” and “human rights”, we will see neo-Malthusianism as it is — rebelling against human life, tradition and progress, exploiting the idea of ​​protecting children and destroying the family.

SOURCES

1. The other Crisis (1998)
2. Woman and the New Race (1920)
3. Plan for Piece (1932)
4. The Angel of Death: A Biography of Margaret Zanger, Founder of IFPS (1995)
5. A. Carlson: Society, Family, Personality (2003)
6. US Population Growth and Family Planning (1970)
7. The SIECUS circle: a humanist revolution (1973)
8. Kingsley Davis, Population Policy: Will Current Programs Succeed? (1967)
9. Matthew Connelly, Population Control is History: New Perspectives on the International Campaign to Limit Population Growth (2003)
10. FS Jaffe: Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the United States (1969)
11. Richard Nixon, Special Message to the Congress on Problems of Population Growth. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project
12. Rockfeller commission on Population Growth and the American Future (1972)
13. The Free Lance – Star, Dec 19, 1967: Shokely Explains Baby Plan.
14. ALEC's Report on Alfred Kinsey
15. National Security Study Memorandum 200, Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For US Security and Overseas Interests, 1974
16. The number of newborns in the United States fell to a minimum over 30 years
17. WHO: Family Planning and Reproductive Health in CEE and the NIS (2000) page 2
18. Poll: Russians deliberately refuse to have children
19. Demographic security of Russia: regional indicators, assessment of results
20. Sustainable development conference speaker called for 90% reduction in world population
21. Conference RusNanoTech, 2011
22. Syphilis incidence in Russia 1985 – 2001
23. Valerie Riches: Sex And Social Engineering
24. 90 cost Russia almost 10 million lives: a demographic study
25. Rosstat: fertility, mortality and natural population growth 1950 – 2016
26. AIF: In figures and facts: 3,5 million abortions per year are made by women in Russia
27. The concept of state family policy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025
28. Recognition of the head physician: I receive from the state 20 millions to have abortions
29. Unsafe Abortion Must Be Tackled Now (1993)
30. Malcolm Potts (1970, 1979)
31. IPPF: The human right to family planning (1984)
32. AIF: How can we save the people?

Additional Information:

Group: Science for the truth

Demographic consequences of non-traditional sexual behavior