The Origin of the 500 million depopulation goal?

Have you ever wondered how depopulationists could have arrived at their 500 million ceiling? sure, it's a round number, but no reasons were ever given and it seems as if these people are talkative (or manipulative) enough to write such plans out in stone, as witnessed in the Georgia Guidestones , which are frequently mentioned on this forum.

given a recent thread about a very plausible shadow economy and fake markets in the Meltdown forum:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

my proposed explanation is very obvious: 500 million is the worldwide number of people who are currently part of the system and have a role assigned already.

all the rest of us do not matter to them and i'm actually leaning towards an explanation of 'slow' extermination, in which avenues of life are gradually restricted to the point of extinction and if a few people tell it like it is, they will be branded sore losers of globalisation, or whatever scarecrow they can come up with and works best. to this end, the shadow exonomy is ideally suited, because it allows the perpetrators to flourish while completing their goals without attracting undue attention through open violence.

iow, you won't see the camps, unless something goes very wrong (backup plan) today's economic warfare is more than enough to kill off any dissidents and the uninitiated will always attach blame where it's easy. if and when the effect is too weak, Gang Stalking or other covert means can be very effective at destroying the remnants - in 'civilized' ie. core countries.

It cannot be emphasised enough, that a shadow economy is essentially reuired for slarge scale activities such as gang stalking as these, almost by definition, employ huge amounts of minions to carry out the dirty work, who need to be paid, somehow and without attracting too much attention. Speaking of which, media complicity is a given and hundreds of thousands of people are thereby involved from the get-go. Wherever you look, the black government & economy are the missing piece of the puzzle, include it and the rest falls neatly into place. Using this seemingly irrelevant yet persistent tidbit (500 million max. tolerated population), i think we could, with a bit of patience, determine the number of people who are currently working for the NWO at least with some accuracy.

do i need to go on?

PS: the rest of their arsenal has of course been talked about to death, war, famine, disease with frequent intervention to maintain the turmoil, so i won't go there in any detail, these topics have been done to death. It's clear, however, that should we succed, we well be facing Plan B in full, so the violent aspects of the NWO cannot be ignored at all.

The Georgia Guide Stones

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

The real mystery is who in the world built those things?

Do I agree with 500m pff NO! Whoever agrees with that imo is nuts, there's way more room on this planet than that. 500m... what a lonely planet that would be.

Interesting.

6 billion people is a lot to get rid of. Initially some "natural" disaster (bird flu spray down, trigger earthquakes, volcanos, bring the jet stream down to ground level and keep it there until it flattens whole towns and cities, other tricks they have up their sleeves in weather wars through HAARP.

With the ensuing confusion and destruction and death and disaster, start rounding people up to the camps, where you can kill a lot, or most of them.

Eventually there will be some people still alive, back at their homes, raising food, trying to get along.

These are the ones you refer to as to knock off by the hit squads?

500 million is about right. It depends on the part of the world, really.

When Africa was resource rich, it was better for there to be more Africans to mine those resources for the civilized world. Now that the area is more or less mined bone dry, there are clearly too many Africans running around.

Population control is essential to creating the kind of world we want to create. Too many people stretch all resources entirely too thin.

500 million is not arbitrary, but the more slumbering, unskilled people we have to contend with, the fewer the resources for the rest of us.

Consider the case of Santo Domingo during the era of Bonaparte/Toussaint. 100k free citizens and 500k slaves (I am pulling these numbers from my memory of Henry Adams' work, they are at least in the ballpark and the point is you can't have that huge a difference in number between the aristocracy and the rabble).When the slaves finally revolted, not even Bonaparte could keep order and the revolutionaries ruined the island.

When you have a limited number of people who are Awake and who are really contributing the to the Culture, then it's imperative to keep the population small and under control. There is just no way around it.

It makes sense when you start buying into advanced technological progress. Eventually things could persist to the point of a technological singularity, whereby, technology becomes advanced enough to do away with most of today's culture and way of doing things. Google it sometime.

Think of the movie iRobot. Do you think there would be all those people and all those robots working together? No. There would be a small number of people and robots would be doing all the labor jobs. So, if the robots are doing the labor jobs, where would that put all the people who do those jobs today? Out in the cold. They all can't be rocket scientists or any other high skill job. Feeders and breeders would have to go, to be blunt about it.

Eventually, the majority would have to be culled. Like it or not.

Originally posted by manganesejolt
500 million is about right. It depends on the part of the world, really.

No. Not at all. What we need is better management of our resources. Better distribution.

This planet has PLENTY of room and resources to give us all what we need ten times over. But because of money interests, and dark agendas (like eliminating 6 billion!), we have never taken control and worked out production and distribution for the abundance we could bring forth.

How do I know this?

If you gave 1/4 arce of land in Australia to every one of the 6.5+ billion of us, you would still have a chunk of Australia left over. Now some of the land in Australia is not suited to support a human, but then... We have the rest of the world to work with.

If you took the combined volume of all of us and put it into one of the small side canyons of the Grand Canyon, you would not fill that small canyon.

IF we took control, we could be living in abundance, ALL of us.

I propose how we could do this within the framework of my fictional book. (Linked in my sig.)

Enjoy the first two chapters, and immerse yourself in that future, and hang on for The diary in Chapter Three.

Thank you to all who choose to read my book cover to cover.



[edit on 3/1/2009 by Amaterasu]

reply to post by Long Lance



"Globalization" is their bad cop word. Their good cop word is "international participation/cooperation/trade/whatever," although the phrase "global economy" is used a lot by feminists, as double-speak.

Putting people to kill one another has never worked, so depopulationists probably have no choice except to starve people to death. Because of technological advances, even those about natural living, it is no longer enough just to prevent people from participating in the economy. Instead, people must be brainwashed to eat and wear the poison, and scared from living in the wilderness.

I believe that there will always be a portion of dissenters. The hegemony shames outsiders as one of many ways to validate its own existence. When there are no longer outsiders, any pre-existing internal disagreements will become exacerbated. The only way to achieve 100% cooperation is to take away the willpower and ego expression of individuals. This has been attempted through philosophical appeals (like discouraging individualism itself), as well as mind control.

In the US, mind control is achieved through the idiot box (Gossip Girls, MTV Cribs, crappy music videos), the Internet (MySpace, Facebook, Yahoo), as well as political extremism (both "left" and "right").


[edit on 1-3-2009 by vcwxvwligen]

reply to post by Amaterasu


Totally agree with you,redistribution of wealth is key not the population size.I cant believe how many people i talk to who say the population needs to be reduced etc thats just code talk for people wanting to waste as much as they do now and not changing their life style.And i can assure you most of them would want the population cull to be poor countries in africa and asia rather than europe or America..its quite sickening how many people believe we need to de populate the world.

reply to post by manganesejolt



It's easy to control a large population -- just get the people to check one another, and make them believe that their physical strength is best used towards wasteful ends. Negative reinforcement that seems unusual causes people to seperate themselves, and that's why government has been increasingly deceptive.

Blacks make up 12% of the US population as a whole, but they can compose 60-70% of the population in areas which contain multiple generations.

reply to post by Amaterasu



The earth's population is expected to double in a few decades. The biggest concerns about overpopulation are probably maintaining arable land, and waste/pollution management.

Originally posted by Salt of the Earth


Eventually there will be some people still alive, back at their homes, raising food, trying to get along.

These are the ones you refer to as to knock off by the hit squads?

yes, that's one facet of the (physically) violent sideshow. kill those who would become too independent, by force, give the rest the chance to submit or marginalize them out of existence. is it a coincidence that 'human resource' departments make people jump through the hoops nowadays, demanding lots of opaque tests, so they can toss people out at will? what about drug tests? who cares if the guy smokes weed once a month, a real employer really wouldn't. how come all of this crept up on us simultaneously around the world and throughout all types of business? doesn't that require an awful lot of planning and coordination? all in secret, now what's the definition of the C word again??

this is social engineering. it is designed to make people dependant, first and foremost, because that will allow them to trap the sheople into the kind of abusive relationship which the NWO seems to be designed around. once they've achieved that they can do and demand anything, literally. sterilisation, maybe? mating choice by council? can the Law&Order people now understand why one wouldn't want to survive a successful NWO takeover? ok, that memo got lost, i see...



both, physical as well as structural violnece are required, of course but the right ratio is paramount. when things go wrong, bandaids will be applied and quickly and in ways you wouldn't suspect at first.

consider Waco, an obvious hit on people who had chosen to leave society and nobody really cared and, although there was much luck involved on their part, they did work hard and sought every opportunity to make it surreal, probably as a form of damage control. F-ex. was it really necessary to explosively burn the entire building to the ground, live on TV? if you can't keep a low profile, go for exaggeration, it'll looklike a scene from Terminator II - like entertainment, which will be fed through the very same channel and therefore trigger the same emotional 'gut' response.

if people did think about what they're fed via TV, they would toss the box or limit exposure, but what can you expect after decades of lobotomy box abuse.

have you noticed that in the most recent >sect< type standoff, it was all no longer about MG'ing them in their beds, but about taking their children? needless to say, the allegations proved baseless, but these peoples' children are gone, the cord severed and therefore the objectives were met.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

===============================================


i noticed a few posts seem to agree with the culling philosophy....

i have but one question, how did you arrive at that particular number. explain it, calculate something about land and energy use, but justify it, then SHARE it with us for everyone to see.

of course not one argument posted here holds water, irrigation vs. killing? tough choice, no? biofuel or food? again, what's that about? smaller societies are easier to control?

are you in control? how is that desirable? the concepts of life and evolution have a mighty different ring to me. maybe i'm not the only one.

[edit on 2009.3.1 by Long Lance]

Well hopefully some of the 500 million of the selected will read this. If 6 billion people on this planet die/starve to death then the remaining 500 million will as well. The amount of disease from the rotting bodies will destroy the rest of life on this planet, to the point that nothing will grow and the 500 million will die along with the rest of us... You see the people behind this idea are stupid, because no matter how much money or power they have, they too will die and when they do, the lord will send them to hell for eternity. So you say they don't believe in God and that he doesn't exist but I say to you the following:

1. If I believe in God and he is real then I go to heaven when I die
2. If I don't believe in God and he is real then I go to Hell when I die
3. If I do believe in God and he is not real then I push up daisy's
4. If I don't believe in God and he is not real then I push up daisy's

Either way the Christian is always equal or comes out ahead and these people planning all of this cannot come out ahead no matter what... Satan's cruelist joke was to make man believe he would live forever.. There's a warm spot in hell for those who plan this crap and I along with billions of others will watch them suffer in hell for eternity. All their power and money will get them nothing as they too will meet their maker, just a short time later.. Mutually assured destruction because of complete stupidity! So all you NWO folks, guess what? You can get me today, but tomorrow your turn will come, and no matter what, you can't stop it... So bring it on.. What will you say to your maker when your time comes knowing that no matter what you do, your time is coming...

BTW, if God didn't exist then man would know the bounds of the universe, but we don't and never will. God and the Universe are infinite and therefore perfect and given infinite time no man shall ever be perfect.

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
reply to post by Long Lance

 

"Globalization" is their bad cop word. Their good cop word is "international participation/cooperation/trade/whatever," although the phrase "global economy" is used a lot by feminists, as double-speak.

Putting people to kill one another has never worked, so depopulationists probably have no choice except to starve people to death. Because of technological advances, even those about natural living, it is no longer enough just to prevent people from participating in the economy. Instead, people must be brainwashed to eat and wear the poison, and scared from living in the wilderness.

I believe that there will always be a portion of dissenters. The hegemony shames outsiders as one of many ways to validate its own existence. When there are no longer outsiders, any pre-existing internal disagreements will become exacerbated. The only way to achieve 100% cooperation is to take away the willpower and ego expression of individuals. This has been attempted through philosophical appeals (like discouraging individualism itself), as well as mind control.

In the US, mind control is achieved through the idiot box (Gossip Girls, MTV Cribs, crappy music videos), the Internet (MySpace, Facebook, Yahoo), as well as political extremism (both "left" and "right").


[edit on 1-3-2009 by vcwxvwligen]

[edit on 1-3-2009 by GrndLkNatv]

[edit on 1-3-2009 by GrndLkNatv]

[edit on 1-3-2009 by GrndLkNatv]

it's gonna be done in waves, fallowed by gradual depopulation declines until they have enough control to have a steady expedient decline , 2050 i think is the goal. I think the depop programs have been n full swing picking up pace for 30 years

An interesting article by Erin Brokovich:

Human Reproduction is 0 starting from the year 2045.

www.theguardian.com...

The world's population pyramid in 2045 is:

www.populationpyramid.net...

If average people dies reaching 60-65 years of natural causes (not including pandemics, wars,etc):

Then in the years of 2105-2110, the world poulation that remain alive on earth is:

300 to 500 million people only. (only the human born between 2040-2045)

Human reproduction could be achieved only via Artificial Insemination.

Kill anyone with an IQ below 120 or has any history of the big 5 or 6 killers in their genes... win win...

a reply to: Long Lance

The 500 million number is arbitrary and has no basis in science. The Truth that a lot of these people don't like to admit is that the Earth has more than enough resources for its current population, and that depopulating it would mean fewer people to harvest and process the resources. Which would lead to famine and war.

The world's problem is population density, not population numbers. There are too many people crammed close together in big cities. Which is putting strain on the local environment.

People are suing too much water, producing too much sewage, and are over farming land.

Yet there are vast tracts of the world that have little or no population. There are resources that are not being used. Fertile fields, mineral resources, and plenty of water. Huge tracts of land in places like central and Eastern Europe used to have large populations, but people left them for more industrialized areas leaving entire towns all but deserted.

It's the same in Asia. Huge tracts of land in central China have essentially been drained of their population by the big cities on the southern and eastern coasts.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

It's the same in Asia. Huge tracts of land in central China have essentially been drained of their population by the big cities on the southern and eastern coasts.

I mean look how big America is....Pretty empty throughout most of it. It is calculated that 11 billion is the max that the human race will expand too, and most of that growth is Africa.

1. The Americas, 1 billion and in 2100 it will still be 1 billion.
2. EU, 1 billion and in 2100 it will still be 1 billion
3. Asia 4 Billion and in 2100 it will be 5 billion
4. Africa 1 billion and in 2100 it will be 3 billion
5. Life expectancy increased so in 2100 1 billion

Population growth is all about economics as in when populations enter middle class kids stop being an asset to the family and become a liability. The US, EU, Japan, China etc all have negative population growth and with America and EU only immigration is increasing it, but both continents are at 1 billion each with no further increases from the population within, and could see continued negative growth rates.

Asia still has areas with very poor people so they will still have some growth, but Africa will see the biggest growth, as most countries are still at the extreme poverty level where more kids is good to support the family.