Depopulation – The Main Goal of Those In Power

Spread the love

by Jacob Nordangård

October 10, 2023

from ThePharosChronicle Website

also HERE and HERE

Image from SHTFplan

Club of Rome

and their mission to create

a Scientific Dictatorship

to prevent ‘dangerous’

human activities…

In my last article I wrote about the history and aim of the Club of Rome.

I mentioned that,

they now are one of the leading advocates for declaring a “Planetary Emergency”. This will most likely be the trigger for the setup of a scientific dictatorship…

The idea of declaring an emergency was first proposed to Club of Rome by British consultant and psychotherapist David Wasdell in 2005.

David Wasdell

Wasdell, with training from Tavistock Institute, had written a paper called Global Warning that was circulated during the G8 summit in Gleneagles in 2005, with the mission of getting the climate issue higher up on the political agenda.

We have a narrow remaining window to engage global strategic planning and mobilization, followed by a maximum of fifty years to achieve the transition, to scale down resource usage, to terminate inequitable capital accumulation, and to stabilize and begin the long term reduction of global population.

Wasdell was then invited by the Club of Rome president Prince El Hassan bin Talal to make a speech at their annual conference in Norfolk, Virginia.

In order to achieve the desired impact, Wasdell advised them to:

  • Recognize that there now exist a state of global emergency
  • Declare excess CO2 to be an ‘eco-toxin‘ [!] with potentially catastrophic impact on the global biosphere
  • Develop and operationalize an emergency strategy to move our global society towards a zero or negative carbon economy within the shortest possible timescale
  • Develop and operationalize the most effective institutional instruments to manage the transition…

Wasdell, who became an adviser to Al Gore, was also working closely with the Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research (PIK) and its director and Club of Rome-member Hans Joachim Schellnhuber to develop the concept of Tipping Points in the climate system. 1

This concept was incorporated into the Planetary Boundaries framework, which was developed under the leadership of Johan Rockström at the Stockholm Resilience Centre and introduced in the article “A safe operating space for humanity” in 2009.

This was done in cooperation with Schellnhuber and PIK. 2

Planetary Boundaries is a framework to,

“describe limits to the impacts of human activities on the Earth system”…:

Planetary boundaries – Wikipedia

If left unchecked, it is said to trigger cascading tipping points leading to,

“large-scale abrupt or irreversible environmental changes”.

To prevent this potential scenario, a top-down population control is considered necessary:

Rockström, a Swedish agronomist, had in 2004 been headhunted by the first IPCC chairman Bert Bolin to serve as director of Stockholm Environment Institute and became the first director of Stockholm Resilience Centre in 2007.

The latter institute, located at Stockholm University, had been set up by the Swedish foundation for strategic environmental research (MISTRA) with the task of developing strategies for sustainable governance and stewardship of ecological and social systems.

Rockström later succeeded Hans Joachim Schellnhuber as joint director of PIK in 2018.

The Planetary Boundaries framework was presented by Rockström at Club of Rome’s Global Assembly in Amsterdam in October 2009, with attendance from their royal patron Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and honorary member Mikhail Gorbachev.

Sponsors were,

Philips, Royal Dutch Shell and KLM… 3

The framework was included in the Club of Rome-report Bankrupting Nature, authored by Johan Rockström and former Club of Rome-president Anders Wijkman, and became a part of Club of Rome’s and PIK’s The Planetary Emergency Plan in 2019.

One year later their Planetary Emergency Partnership was launched with over 300 partners all over the world.

The Club of Rome on X:

“The #PlanetaryEmergencyPlan 2.0,

updated to include insights from the global pandemic,

makes the case that we are unequivocally

in the midst of a planetary emergency.


These plans have now come into fruition.

A few weeks ago, a statement was made by The Climate Governance Commission at the UN General Assembly High-Level Week & Climate Week. 4

The commission, which includes the current president of the Club of Rome, Sandrine Dixson-Declève, and Johan Rockström, paints a bleak picture of the future… unless we take decisive action.

The world faces a deepening planetary emergency – and is on a reckless path toward ‘catastrophic’ climate change (aka Global Warming) – having already over-stepped six of nine scientifically-identified planetary boundaries.

A continued failure to address the underlying causes of this emergency, such as,

  • fossil fuel-based economies
  • resource waste/overconsumption
  • the destruction of nature,

…will have further devastating effects for all of humanity, triggering potentially ‘irreversible’ tipping points, with ‘dangerous’ consequences for planetary stability, both social and ecological.

A system-wide approach to solving the ‘climate crisis’ is required now, ensuring reliable climate and planetary boundary governance for the Earth as a whole.

Due to these alleged ‘crises,’ the commission recommends,

“bold and concrete steps to catalyze a shift in global governance“,

…in their forthcoming report Governing Our Planetary Emergency, which will be released in conjunction with the climate summit in Dubai (COP28) in November 2023.

The Climate Governance Commission was founded by the Swedish Global Challenges Foundation at the United Nations 75 Global Governance Forum, September 16 and 17 2020, and is led by,

  • former Irish President Mary Robinson from The Elders and Club of Madrid
  • Johan Rockström and the former President of the UN General Assembly María Fernanda Espinosa as co-chairs…

Supporters include,

  • Club of Madrid
  • Stimson Center
  • The Rockefeller Foundation

The former president of Club of Rome that intervened trying to prevent my dissertation from being approved is a “contributing expert”.

They CGC (Climate Governance Commission) state that the,

“global governance system is ill-equipped to deal with our planetary emergency, which now encompasses the ‘polycrisis’ including, for example, international conflict, financial instability, global inequality, and pandemic risk and recovery.”

The new term “polycrisis” was frequently used in discussions at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2023. 5

Strengthening the International Response

to Complex Global Shocks – An Emergency Platform.

Our Common Agenda Policy Brief 2 – Diplo Resource

To handle this “polycrisis”, CGC calls for “competent” crisis leadership.

Empowered with new authorities, current and new international governance institutions must exert competent crisis leadership, developing and deploying emergency plans and a new generation of effective policies while pursuing a more equitable allocation of resources.

Further, scientific boundaries are not negotiable, but must drive and fundamentally inform our collective action and management systems.

To set these “new authorities and capabilities” in motion the commission proposes that the UN General Assembly declares a planetary emergency at the Summit of the Future in September 22-23 next year.

The UN General Assembly should declare a global planetary emergency at the 2024 Summit of the Future, reinforced in similar statements by UN Agencies, regional bodies, and national and local governments.

The commission then suggests to elaborate on the UN Secretary-General’s proposed Emergency Platform,

“to design and convene an inter-agency, intergovernmental Planetary Emergency Platform to bring together fragmented international institutional structures, and to develop a Planetary Emergency Plan for urgent, coordinated action, with linked national emergency plans.”

I describe the Emergency Platform here.

This Platform, consisting of intergovernmental, State and non-State actors, would,

“plan for and cooperate on urgent action at all levels of governance, including a global decarbonizing package”.

The commission point out that over-stepping the planetary boundaries has to come with consequences.

Global security norms should be broadened to reflect the grave implications of over-stepping climate/planetary boundaries, including UN Security Council practices to better reflect the climate policy challenges and priorities of the Global South and of all peoples…

They are because of this calling for,

“courageous ‘top down’ leadership within all levels of government, combined with generalized ‘bottom up’ citizen pressure and engagement, to catalyze fundamental transformations.”

Some of the other suggestions in the statement includes:

  • A Global Environment Agency
  • An International Court for the Environment
  • Institutional Reform of the Global Financial System

Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Global Commons Alliance

Planetary Boundaries

and the Rise of Non-State Global Governance

In the background, another closely related initiative has been developed to execute the prescribed transformation.

In 2019 the Global Commons Alliance was launched in Singapore by Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors with the mission,

“to mobilize citizens, companies, cities and countries to accelerate systems change, and become better guardians of the global commons”. 6

Their strategic priorities are,

to change minds, actions and systems in order to safeguard the global commons and “regaining planetary stability”…

They are ready to act swiftly when an emergency is declared.

By 2025, the true magnitude of the multifaceted transformations we need to safeguard the global commons will be well understood.

Key actors will know what they need to do, where things are most urgent, and be taking action that sparks and sustains transformational change in order to protect the global commons…

Their philosophy is all based on Rockström’s Planetary Boundaries Framework.

The 70+ partners include Club of Rome, PIK, WEF, and WRI, with support from an “Investor Collaborative” consisting of among others,

  • Swiss MAVA Foundation
  • Dutch foundation Porticus
  • United Nations Global Environment Facility

Rockström is a member of the steering committee of the Global Commons Alliance and leads the “Alliance Component” The Earth Commission with the mission to define,

“safe and just boundaries for people and the planet”.

This is a graph from my book The Digital World Brain (under translation to English), illustrating their formula for “systems transformation”.

It is a recipe for a Scientific Dictatorship…!

To quote the “tenth commandment” on the now demolished Georgia Guidestones:

Be not a cancer on the Earth – Leave room for nature – Leave room for nature…

It also reminds me of a document from the Secretariat of World Order that George Hunt uncovered during a,

“UNA Environment and Development Conference to provide broad public debate and support for United Nations Earth Summit” in Des Moines, September 22 1991. 7

The security council of the UN, led by the Anglo-Saxon Major Nation Powers, will decree that henceforth,

the Security Council will inform all nations that its sufferance on population has ended, that all nations have quotas for REDUCTION on a yearly basis, which will be enforced by the Security Council’ by selective or total embargo of credit, items of trade including food and medicine, or by military force, when required…

This has now been rebranded as “carbon footprint reduction“…:

I will delve more into the Global Commons Alliance in a coming article.

I also mention their influence in my presentation “Shaping the Future Agenda – The Digital World Brain” from Stavanger:



[2] Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472–475 (2009).






by Brandon Turbeville

May 3, 2012
ActivistPost Website

Clearly in the tradition of Malthus and Ehrlich, a recent report released by the Royal Society predicts a “downward spiral of economic and environmental ills” if the world’s population is not soon drastically curbed.

The study, entitled, “People And The Planet,” openly calls for Western deindustrialization, increased “family planning” (particularly in the Third World), implementation of Agenda 21, and a solidification of the current claims that population increases are directly related to environmental degradation within the public discourse.

The report, whose alleged goal was to evaluate the state of humanity for the next 100 years and provide recommendations for its improvement, calls for the issues of population and consumption be pushed to the top of the global political and economic agendas.

The report begins by stating that,

“The number of people living on the planet has never been higher, their levels of consumption are unprecedented and vast changes are taking place in the environment.”

This statement, of course, is true.

Yet the number of people on the planet, as it currently stands, is not responsible for these changes. This much has been repeatedly demonstrated.

Nevertheless, the report establishes two issues that it claims are absolutely critical to the health and wellbeing of the planet as well as “future generations” – population growth and the consumption economy.

The report states:

The annual rate of global population growth has slowed from its peak at above 2.0% in the mid 1960s; fertility rates have fallen so that in 2010 almost 48% of world population had a total fertility of less than 2.1 children per woman (UN 2011a).

However, rapid population growth continues in some parts of the world. The upward population trend will not reach its peak for another 40 years or more because present day children and the unborn have yet to have children themselves.

In relation to the consumption issue, it says:

The second major issue facing the planet is that, taken as a whole, per capita consumption is increasing. Total consumption will continue to increase as the population gets larger, as more people on the planet means more mouths to feed and more goods to satisfy their aspirations.

People depend on their natural environment for meeting many of those needs and desires but overconsumption of material resources is eroding this natural capital.

Access to sufficient food, water and fuel for everybody is already a problem (UNDP 2011).

After a great deal of discourse regarding the state of the world’s poor and the increasing level of environmental degradation, “People And The Planet” finally arrives at the familiar conclusion deduced by population reductionists of every generation – that human population growth is currently at a state that will soon outstrip the resources available.

In other words, as posited by Thomas Malthus, Paul Ehrlich, and Ted Turnerindefinite growth is not possible in a finite world.

Early eugenicists such as Thomas Malthus have long been proven wrong. Those more recent myth purveyors such as Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren have also been exposed as nothing more than anti-human propagandists serving a much higher agenda than that which is presented to the public.

Now, even after the failures of these theories and predictions, the Royal Society, itself entirely overtaken by the eugenics movement many years ago, has produced “People And The Planet,” another piece of apocalyptic propaganda that will no doubt be proven false just as its predecessors have been in the past.

But the report is not only a critique of the population “boom.”

In fact, the Royal Society researchers are forced to admit that there is no population boom due to the fact that there has been a drastic reduction in fertility of the average person, with the notable exception of much of the Third World.

It states,

“While the average annual rate of population change peaked in the 1960s at 2% and now stands at 1.1% per year, the absolute rate of growth peaked at 89 million per annum in 1988 and now stands at 78 million…”

That being said, the report does offer nine recommendations as to how to combat what it claims is an inevitable disaster so long as humans continue to reproduce.

These recommendations are familiar to anyone who has been following the eugenics/population reduction/eco-fascist agenda for any length of time.

They are as follows:

  1. The international community must bring the 1.3 billion people living on less than $1.25 per day out of absolute poverty, and reduce the inequality that persists in the world today. This will require focused efforts in key policy areas including economic development, education, family planning and health.
  2. The most developed and the emerging economies must stabilize and then reduce material consumption levels through: dramatic improvements in resource use efficiency, including: reducing waste; investment in sustainable resources, technologies and infrastructures; and systematically decoupling economic activity from environmental impact.
  3. Reproductive health and voluntary family planning programs urgently require political leadership and financial commitment, both nationally and internationally. This is needed to continue the downward trajectory of fertility rates, especially in countries where the unmet need for contraception is high.
  4. Population and the environment should not be considered as two separate issues. Demographic changes, and the influences on them, should be factored into economic and environmental debate and planning at international meetings, such as the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development and subsequent meetings.
  5. Governments should realize the potential of urbanization to reduce material consumption and environmental impact through efficiency measures. The well planned provision of water supply, waste disposal, power and other services will avoid slum conditions and increase the welfare of inhabitants.
  6. In order to meet previously agreed goals for universal education, policy makers in countries with low school attendance need to work with international funders and organizations, such as UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, IMF, World Bank and Education For All. Financial and non-financial barriers must be overcome to achieve high-quality primary and secondary education for all the world’s young, ensuring equal opportunities for girls and boys.
  7. Natural and social scientists need to increase their research efforts on the interaction between consumption, demographic change and environmental impact. They have a unique and vital role in developing a fuller picture of the problems, the uncertainties found in all such analyses, the efficacy of potential solutions, and providing an open, trusted source of information for policy makers and the public.
  8. National Governments should accelerate the development of comprehensive wealth measures. This should include reforms to the system of national accounts, and improvement in natural asset accounting.
  9. Collaboration between National Governments is needed to develop socio-economic systems and institutions that are not dependent on continued material consumption growth. This will inform the development and implementation of policies that allow both people and the planet to flourish.

In all fairness, not all of these solutions, at least on their face, are sinister.

No one can seriously argue that consumerism is a healthy lifestyle, environmentally friendly, or sustainable. However, we must be careful not to let flowery language and small areas of bleed-over agreement deceive us into believing that the solutions offered by the writers of this report are anything but a plan to reduce the population of what they see as the unfit, useless eaters.

What was once expressed in direct, contemptuous language now requires shadowy coded terminology in order to convey the same concept and, most importantly, to convince the masses that it is for their own best interest for their herd to be culled. Indeed, such wordplay is also necessary so those who are more geared toward self-preservation are not inclined to suspect the threats they must preserve themselves against.

For instance, the term “family planning” is merely another less politically-charged name for abortion and sterilization. Similarly, the UN-based term “sustainable development” represents the removal of humans from rural areas and a return of the average citizen’s living standards to that of the days of feudalism.

Thus, one sees a preponderance of these terms listed in the report’s recommendations.

Yet, although much of the language of the report is couched, the authors are still blatant enough to openly state that one of their goals is the continuance “of the downward trajectory of fertility rates.”

While one may be tempted to believe that the term “family planning” repeated ad nauseam in “People And The Planet” merely refers to “sexual education” programs and the distribution of contraceptives, when one reads the report further, it becomes clear that it is, in fact, abortion and various sterilization methods which are favored.

This is because, while the former might be cheaper, the latter is much more effective.

In addition, while the authors continuously claim that these population reduction methods must be voluntary, it is also apparent that the opposite will actually be the case. Indeed, the very fact that there is an oligarchy of “experts” guiding the acceptable amount of human beings allowed on the planet by methods involving coercion and/or deceit goes against the very nature of volunteerism.

One should likewise be aware of the treachery contained within the terms,

  • “efficiency”
  • “reducing consumption”
  • “sustainable development”
  • “urbanization”

All of these terms used in the context of this report refer to the ultimate goal of herding a drastically reduced population of humans into a few major cities under strict guidelines of rationing food and other necessities.

This precisely what is meant when the authors of this report refer to,

“the potential of urbanization to reduce material consumption and environmental impact through efficiency measures” as well as the “well planned provision of water supply, waste disposal, power and other services.”

All of these recommendations are being implemented currently under plans such as Agenda 21.

What is not being implemented at the international level via treaties and agreements between nations is being implemented at the state or even the local level. This local implementation of Agenda 21 is precisely what I discussed in “South Carolina Moves To Implement Agenda 21 Guidelines.”

Because of the cloaked and stealthy nature of these guidelines and, unfortunately, the misguided aims of decent, well-meaning people as well as the duplicity of ill-intentioned ones, it is often exceptionally difficult to convince the average person of the dangers of plans such as Agenda 21 and those proposed in “People And The Planet.”

However, it is imperative that we do just that as time is fast running out.

For all the increase in propaganda coming from organizations associated with the United Nations and various well-funded Foundations, there has also been an increase in the level of awareness of these sinister plans by the general public.

Just recently, Texas and Tennessee have taken steps to expose and oppose anti-human programs such as Agenda 21. Arizona has also considered legislation against the proposals.

There are numerous sources from a variety of different backgrounds that discuss the dangers of Agenda 21, and there is never a better time than the present to take advantage of these sources to educate your friends, family, and fellow citizens as to the gradual extinction and mechanization that faces us all.

Don’t be fooled by reports like “People And The Planet.”

As one delves deeper into the true motivation behind the implementation of its recommendations, it becomes clear that the army of “experts” expected to guide society into the future truly care about neither the people nor the planet.

Leave a Reply