Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UN WARNS OF UNDERPOPULATION WOES IN DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
LifeSite ^ | August 20, 2002 | LifeSite

Posted on 08/20/2002 6:58:02 PM PDT by Polycarp

LifeSite Daily News

Tuesday August 20, 2002

UN WARNS OF UNDERPOPULATION WOES IN DEVELOPED COUNTRIES

NEW YORK, August 20, 2002 (LSN.ca) - The New York Times issued warnings from United Nations Statistics chief Dr. Joseph Chamie today noting the soon-to-be-felt high toll of the low birth rate in developed countries. The paper described the current situation of low births and growing elderly populations as dynamics which "cause havoc" in retirement systems such as those in place throughout most of the developed world.

The paper reports that in countries such as Italy with a fertility rate of 1.2 children per woman, contributions of workers into the social security system can be as high as 40 percent of their salaries. Dr. Chamie and other experts warn of drastic changes that will be required to cope with the effects of underpopulation.

"The age of retirement will have to increase. The benefits to the elderly will probably decrease. Taxation for the workers will probably increase," said Dr. Chamie. Another expert Dr. Paul Samuelson spoke about mandating saving for retirement, "voluntarily or coercively, in our working years in order to be able, given our numbers, to pay for our longer years of retirement."."

While noting the disastrous effect of radical population control in the developed world, the United Nations nevertheless suggests poor countries maintain strict population control. While the UN suggests population control in the developing world will serve to better economies other studies have suggested the opposite.

In fact, the U.S. National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200), written by Henry Kissinger was designed to counter growing populations in developing nations so that they would not threaten U.S. economic superiority. NSSM 200, subtitled "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests," warned that increasing populations in developing countries threatened U.S. strategic, economic, and military interests. It suggested that competition from new world powers would rise when developing nations had sufficient populations to utilize their national resources to their full potential.

See more LifeSite coverage on NSSM 200: http://216.122.249.80/waronfamily/nssm200/index.html

See the NYT coverage: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/20/science/earth/20ECON.html


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: catholiclist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
http://www.lifesite.net/interim/july98/20nssm.html

NSSM 2000: blueprint for de-population

by Jean Guilfoyle

The population-control ideology and the means to achieve it can be found in a U.S. executive-level government document entitled National security study memorandum 200: Implications of worldwide population growth for U.S. security and overseas interests (NSSM 200), published in 1974 and declassified in 1989. Although this plan of action was to be activated in developing countries, it was designed as a two-edged sword that could be swung with equal determination in both developed and developing countries alike. The document was signed by Henry Kissinger and directed to the secretaries of defense, agriculture and central intelligence, the deputy secretary of state, and the administrator of the Agency for International Development, with a copy to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The focus of the study was the "international political and economic implications of population growth."

The study identified 13 "key countries" in which "special U.S. political and strategic interests" existed. The targeted nations were: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia.

Security interests

U.S. security interests were seen as threatened by demographic and political realities in lesser-developed countries (LDCs), and the age structure of high-fertility nations with large numbers of young people. Young people were considered a potential threat to multi-national corporations. Revolutionary actions and counter-revolutionary coups in countries with large populations were viewed as posing the danger of expropriation of foreign investments, and creating political or national security problems for the U.S. Also mentioned were racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious factors, where "differential rates of population growth (exists) among these groups."

A major U.S. security interest concerned access to "reserves of higher-grade ores of most minerals," and the terms for exploration and exploitation of those resources. The study advised that civil disturbances affecting the "smooth flow of needed materials" would be less likely to occur "under conditions of slow or zero population growth."

The expression of resistance to global population strategies at the World Population Conference in Bucharest, in August, 1974, created a need to "persuade" LDC leaders to assist in population reduction within the targeted countries. Those objections came from countries wanting to ensure that any "new international economic order" would respect national sovereignty. In addition, "There was general consternation ... when at the beginning of the conference the (World Population Plan of Action) was subjected to a slashing, five-pronged attack led by Algeria, with the backing of several African countries; Argentina, supported by Uruguay, Brazil, Peru, and ... some other Latin American countries; the Eastern European group, less Romania; the PRC and the Holy See" (86-87).

World-wide propaganda

The attack led eventually to a worldwide propaganda effort to "create demand" for population-control technologies, and extol the benefits of population reduction within the nations: "Development of a worldwide political and popular commitment to population stabilization is fundamental to any effective strategy. This requires the support and commitment of key LDC leaders. This will only take place if they clearly see the negative impact of unrestricted population growth and believe it is possible to deal with this question through governmental action" (100).

Sensitive to the charge of interference in the internal policies of nations, the document said, "We must take care that our activities should not give the appearance ... of an industrialized country policy directed against the LDCs." In light of this, the document called for "integrating population factors in national plans, particularly (within) health services, education, agricultural resources and development" while relating "population policies and family-planning programs to major sectors of development: health, nutrition, agriculture, education, social services, organized labor, women's activities, and community development" (21-2).

Sharpening this protective camouflage, the document recommended the integration of family planning with health programs: "Finally, providing integrated family planning and health services on a broad basis would help the U.S. contend with the ideological charge that the U.S. is more interested in curbing the numbers of LDC people than it is in their future and well-being" (117).

In the establishment of American-funded public policy, NSSM 200 suggested that population factors and population policies should be considered in all "Country Assistance Strategy Papers and Development Assistance Program multi-year papers.... Since population growth is a major determinant of increases in food demand," the document continued, "the allocation of scarce PL480 (food) resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production."

Again, a cautionary warning accompanied the recommendation: "In these sensitive relationships, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion" (106-107). It was also recommended that other organizations, agencies, multilateral institutions and embassies participate in the establishment of population initiatives where resistance was prevalent. The use of satellite communications for propaganda was also recommended: "Beyond seeking to reach and influence national leaders, improved worldwide support for population-related efforts should be sought through increased emphasis on mass media and other population education and motivation programs by the UN, USIA (U.S. Information Agency) and USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development). We should give higher priorities in our information programs worldwide for this area and consider expansion of collaborative arrangements with multilateral institutions in population education programs" (117).

The role of the Department of State and USAID in the formation of "the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) to generate a multilateral effort in population as complement to the bilateral actions of AID and other donor countries" was described (121). Acting through the UNFPA gave the additional benefit of avoiding "the danger that some LDC leaders will see developed-country pressures for family planning as a form of economic or racial imperialism; this could well create a serious backlash."

Imperialist motivation

"The U.S. can help to minimize charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with: (a) the right of the individual to determine freely and responsibly their number and spacing of children ... and (b) the fundamental social and economic development of poor countries" (114-5).

Finally, an "alternative" view was presented, which maintained that "mandatory programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now." Here, it was asked whether food would be considered "an instrument of national power" (118-120).

NSSM 200 was a statement composed after the fact. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the U.S. had worked diligently behind the scenes to advance the population-control agenda at the United Nations, contributing the initial funding of $1 million.

A Department of State telegram, dated July 1969, reported the support of John D. Rockefeller III, among others, for the appointment of Rafael Salas of the Philippines as senior officer to co-ordinate and administer the UN population program. The administrator of the UN Development Program reported confidentially that he preferred someone such as Salas who had the "advantage of color, religion (Catholic) and conviction."

Why should this be a matter of interest to other countries? For two reasons. First, NSSM 200 describes the ideology and the methods for instituting population policies within sovereign nations. Second, in order to recognize the forceful determination of the program's propagators.

But there is another reason: look at us and learn. The people most seriously damaged by such a program will always be the people of the advocate nation itself. Former under-secretary for global affairs Timothy Wirth, when asked about the abortion issue by a reporter, responded lightly, "It's just another technology."

The U.S. has lost over 36 million children to abortion since 1973. It would be impossible to calculate the numbers lost through abortifacient drugs and devices. This much we do know: over 30 per cent of our youth between the ages of 15 and 25 are gone.

1 posted on 08/20/2002 6:58:02 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: patent; Siobhan; sitetest; JMJ333; narses; Catholicguy; *Catholic_list; Notwithstanding; ...
pop-con ping
2 posted on 08/20/2002 6:59:24 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
The New York Times issued warnings from United Nations Statistics chief Dr. Joseph Chamie today noting the soon-to-be-felt high toll of the low birth rate in developed countries. The paper described the current situation of low births and growing elderly populations as dynamics which "cause havoc" in retirement systems such as those in place throughout most of the developed world.

They're getting worried about exactly WHO is going to pay the bills, eh?

3 posted on 08/20/2002 6:59:47 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
In other words, there will not be enough taxpayers to glut for the UN pets?
4 posted on 08/20/2002 7:00:51 PM PDT by Selara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
I thought these were the same people who just a few years ago were screaming about over population! We were crowding the planet according to them!
5 posted on 08/20/2002 7:02:37 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Selara
to glut for the UN pets

Add a war into the equation, with its necessary privation, and you get what they're worried about. Euthanasia.

6 posted on 08/20/2002 7:02:38 PM PDT by Pistias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Another UN mess ping.
7 posted on 08/20/2002 7:02:44 PM PDT by Selara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
I seem to remember the UN warning us about "overpopulation" some decades ago. Oh well, that must have gone down the memory hole. I guess we've always bee at war with East Asia...
8 posted on 08/20/2002 7:03:43 PM PDT by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I think this is known as the law of unintended consequences. I read somewhere a while ago that Germany is actually paying women to have children now.
9 posted on 08/20/2002 7:03:57 PM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
I would be willing go to these countries and help them recover, but usually they only have unattractive women.
10 posted on 08/20/2002 7:05:36 PM PDT by Wooly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl
Abortion + radical feminism = declining births = illegal immigration.

It all seems to move as a piece, doesn't it? The Roman writer Polybius wrote in his 'Histories' that the decline and fall of the Greek civilization was directly tied to abortion and infanticide. The Romans, as well, had few children.

Not good examples to follow.

11 posted on 08/20/2002 7:16:01 PM PDT by HumanaeVitae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Middle classes are also declining for other reasons not just lower birth rates. Too many indigent people have high birth rates but aren't becoming middle class for various reasons. We need the middle class to grow.
12 posted on 08/20/2002 7:22:45 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
I've read that the fertility rate is at 1.7 per woman in developed countries and 6 children per woman in Muslim countries. Isn't that surprising that it's so much higher?
13 posted on 08/20/2002 7:34:18 PM PDT by patriot5186
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
The New York Times issued warnings from United Nations Statistics chief Dr. Joseph Chamie today noting the soon-to-be-felt high toll of the low birth rate in developed countries.

Warnings?

Low birth rate in developed countries is good news as far as I'm concerned.

Now if only we would turn away all those immigrants.

And since the UN and the Times thinks population growth is good, I am confirmed in my opinion that no population growth is better.

14 posted on 08/20/2002 8:12:41 PM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
I thought the UN was the same group that not-so long ago were on a soap box proclaiming a global overpopulation problem.....

Did I miss something? The global population is still rising.
15 posted on 08/20/2002 8:28:29 PM PDT by TheBattman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
Oh, there's a UN-overpopulation thread that started yesterday. (They're simply revising their predictions of doom to a few years later.) The interesting thing about this thread is that they are decrying overpopulations THERE, and underpopulations HERE... making it VERY clear that they will be in the population redistribution business just as soon as they can get away with it.
16 posted on 08/20/2002 9:02:12 PM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason
Low birth rate in developed countries is good news as far as I'm concerned.

If high birth rate alone was good then places like Mexico and Latin America and the Middle East should have excellent economies. The US would have a better future if it's high population growth rate was in the middle class but it's the indigent class that's growing rapidly in numbers instead, which is why third world immigration will harm us.

17 posted on 08/20/2002 9:18:01 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl
I read somewhere a while ago that Germany is actually paying women to have children now.

So are we, I'm sad to say. So are we.

18 posted on 08/20/2002 9:19:01 PM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
The U.S. hardly has any "underpopulation" problem - not when it has so many downsized people lacking jobs at any given time.

We hardly need aliens for some imagined shortage of people - not when underemployment is the norm in America and has been for the past two decades.

19 posted on 08/20/2002 9:29:32 PM PDT by glc1173@aol.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman
Did I miss something? The global population is still rising.

It actually is rising now at a slower rate than in the past.

Population issues are very complex. Remember that Niger has the lowest population per square mile, but is one of the poorest nations in the world. Hong Kong (taken independently of China) has the highest population density on Earth, yet is one of the most prosperous cities as well.

20 posted on 08/20/2002 10:33:13 PM PDT by Clemenza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson