businessmen holding globes

U.S. Government Population Control

The United States National Security Council is the highest decision-making body on foreign policy in the United States. On December 10, 1974, it promulgated a top secret document entitled National Security Study Memorandum or NSSM-200, also called The Kissinger Report. Its subject was “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, published shortly after the first major international population conference in Bucharest, was the result of collaboration among the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Departments of State, Defense and Agriculture.

The Kissinger Report was made public when it was declassified and was transferred to the U.S. National Archives in 1990.

Although the United States government has issued hundreds of policy papers dealing with various aspects of American national security since 1974, The Kissinger Report continues to be the foundational document on U.S. government population control. It therefore continues to represent official United States policy on government population control, and is posted on the USAID website.

NSSM-200 is critically important to pro-life workers all over the world, because it completely exposes the unsavory and unethical motivations and methods of the population control movement.

The Purpose of The Kissinger Report

The primary purpose of U.S. government population control efforts is to maintain access to the mineral resources of less-developed countries, or LDCs. The Kissinger Report states:

The U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.

In order to protect U.S. commercial interests, NSSM-200 cited a number of factors that could interrupt the smooth flow of materials from LDCs to the United States, including a large population of anti-imperialist youth, whose numbers must be limited by government population control. The document identified 13 nations by name that would be the primary targets of U.S. government population control efforts. Under the heading of “Concentration on key countries” we find:

Assistance for population moderation should give primary emphasis to the largest and fastest growing developing countries where there is special U.S. political and strategic interest. Those countries are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Columbia [sic]. … At the same time, the U.S. will look to the multilateral agencies, especially the U.N. Fund for Population Activities which already has projects in over 80 countries to increase population assistance on a broader basis with increased U.S. contributions. This is desirable in terms of U.S. interests and necessary in political terms in the United Nations.

According to The Kissinger Report, elements of the implementation of government population control programs could include:

  • the legalization of abortion;
  • financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates;
  • indoctrination of children; and
  • mandatory population control and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs.

The Kissinger Report also specifically declared that the United States was to cover up government population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations—specifically the Pathfinder Fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) and the Population Council—to do its dirty work.

Massive Human Rights Violations

The document has directly and inevitably encouraged atrocities on an enormous scale in dozens of the world’s nations. Just four examples are shown below.

Image result for elderly chinese

China. For many years, the United States government funded the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). In April 2017, the Trump Administration finally took the step of ending UNFPA funding. Why? One of the main targets of UNFPA money is the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The State Department grounded the change of policy the fact the agency “supports, or participates in the management of, a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization” in China. While the UNFPA denies it, according to its own documents the UNFPA has donated more than $100 million to China’s population control program; financed a $12 million computer complex specifically to monitor the population program; provided the technical expertise and personnel that trained thousands of Chinese population control officials; and presented China with a United Nations award for the “most outstanding population control program.” Those unfamiliar with the countless abuses perpetrated under this program might consider reading material from 2015-present at the links for the  U.S. Congressional Hearing on China and Population Research Institute (PRI) for evidence. As the PRI article states, “More children were aborted under the one-child policy than the entire population of the United States.”

Peru. During the years 1995 to 1997, over a quarter of a million Peruvian women were sterilized as part of a program to fulfill then-president Alberto Fujimori’s family planning goals. Although this campaign was called the “Voluntary Surgical Contraception Campaign,” many of these procedures were obviously coerced. In fact, women whose underweight children were on government food programs were threatened with the withholding of this food if they refused to be sterilized, and others were kidnapped from their families and forcibly sterilized.

Uganda. Uganda became the first African country to roll back its adult HIV infection rate, from 21% in 1991 to about 6% in 2004, a 70% decrease. The nation accomplished this amazing feat by discouraging condom use and by changing the behavior of the people. The population control groups could not allow this success to interfere with their inflexible template, so they aggressively undermined President Yoweri Museveni’s program. Timothy Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, called this highly effective program “gross negligence toward humanity.” The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Population Services International, CARE International, and others have been pushing condoms as hard as they can in Uganda. Rates rose over seven percent, which Edward Greene, former senior research scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health, ascribes to riskier behavior and less fear of HIV as a death sentence. Recently rates have declined back to 6.2% again.  Nevertheless, Uganda’s initial success rate is perhaps the most egregious example of population control ideology trumping the science of proven HIV prevention programs.


India. In 2014 there was renewed international attention on India’s continuing forced sterilization program after dozens of women were killed and many more harmed due to the assembly line procedures being done in grotesquely unsanitary conditions. Female sterilization is still India’s primary method of “contraception.” According to the New York Times, as of 2016 four million tubal ligations are still done annually.  This continues to be financed by the US and other Western governments and foundations. As of 2017 there are no plans to stop sterilizations, but the Indian government is introducing free injectable contraceptives, which will also have major negative health impacts on women.

Outline of the Population Control Strategy in The Kissinger Report

The Kissinger Report explicitly lays out the detailed strategy by which the United States government aggressively promotes population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries.

People walking along an open sewer in a slum in Africa

The following outline shows the elements of this plan, with actual supporting quotes from NSSM-200:

  • The United States needs widespread access to the mineral resources of less-developed nations (quote shown above).
  • The smooth flow of resources to the United States could be jeopardized by LDC government action, labor conflicts, sabotage, or civil disturbances, which are much more likely if population pressure is a factor: “These types of frustrations are much less likely under conditions of slow or zero population growth.”
  • Young people are much more likely to challenge imperialism and the world’s power structures, so their numbers should be kept down as much as possible: “These young people can more readily be persuaded to attack the legal institutions of the government or real property of the ‘establishment,’ ‘imperialists,’ multinational corporations, or other—often foreign—influences blamed for their troubles.”
  • Therefore, the United States must develop a commitment to government population control among key LDC leaders, while bypassing the will of their people: “The U.S. should encourage LDC leaders to take the lead in advancing family planning and population stabilization both within multilateral organizations and through bilateral contacts with other LDCs.”
  • The critical elements of government population control implementation include:
    • Identifying the primary targets: “Those countries are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia.”
      Enlisting the aid of as many multilateral population control organizations as possible in this worldwide project, in order to deflect criticism and charges of imperialism: “The U.S. will look to the multilateral agencies, especially the U.N. Fund for Population Activities which already has projects in over 80 countries to increase population assistance on a broader basis with increased U.S. contributions.”
    • Recognizing that “No country has reduced its population growth without resorting to abortion.”
    • Designing programs with financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates: “Pay women in the LDCs to have abortions as a method of family planning. … Similarly, there have been some controversial, but remarkably successful, experiments in India in which financial incentives, along with other motivational devices, were used to get large numbers of men to accept vasectomies.”
    • Concentrating on “indoctrinating” [NSSM-200’s language] the children of LDCs with anti-natalist propaganda: “Without diminishing in any way the effort to reach these adults, the obvious increased focus of attention should be to change the attitudes of the next generation, those who are now in elementary school or younger.”
    • Designing and instigating propaganda programs and sex-education curricula intended to convince couples to have smaller families, regardless of social or cultural considerations: “The following areas appear to contain significant promise in effecting fertility declines, and are discussed in subsequent sections … concentrating on the education and indoctrination of the rising generation of children regarding the desirability of smaller family size.”
    • Investigating the desirability of mandatory [NSSM-200’s language] population control programs: “The conclusion of this view is that mandatory programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now.”
    • Considering using coercion in other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless a targeted LDC implements population control programs: “On what basis should such food resources then be provided? Would food be considered an instrument of national power? Will we be forced to make choices as to whom we can reasonably assist, and if so, should population efforts be a criterion for such assistance?

Throughout the implementation process, the United States must hide its tracks and disguise its government population control programs as altruistic:

“There is also 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. … 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:

The right of the individual couple to determine freely and responsibly the number and spacing of children and to have information, education, and means to do so; and
The fundamental social and economic development of poor countries in which rapid population growth is both a contributing cause and a consequence of widespread poverty.”

Is Government Population Control Necessary?

There is growing awareness that the world “population explosion” is over or, indeed, that it never actually materialized. When the population scare began in the late 1960s, the world population was increasing at a rate of more than 2% per year. It is now increasing at less than one percent per year, and this rate is expected to continue to drop due to continuing population control activities.

The Kissinger Report predicted that the population of the world would stabilize at about 10 to 13 billion, with some demographers predicting that the world population would balloon to as high as 22 billion people. Now it is estimated that by 2050 population will level out at around 9.7 billion.

The worldwide application of the strategies recommended in The Kissinger Report has resulted in regional population growth rates decelerating so fast that they are already causing severe economic and social problems in Europe, the former Soviet Union, Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong. Many developing nations are now aging even more rapidly than the developed world, which foretells even more severe problems for their relatively underdeveloped economies. The developed nations had the opportunity to become rich before they became old; if a nation becomes old first, it will never become rich.

From the very beginning, the concept of a “population explosion” was an ideologically motivated false alarm specifically designed to allow rich nations to pillage the resources of the poorer nations. The resulting push for population control in LDCs has borne absolutely no positive fruit in its decades of implementation. In fact, population control ideologies and programs make it even more difficult to respond to the impending grave crisis looming in the form of a disastrous worldwide “population implosion.” It is time to begin urging families to have more children, not fewer, if we are to avoid a worldwide demographic catastrophe.

The first step in such a massive change in policy is, of course, to change our vision and our values. In order to do this, we must repudiate old ways of thinking and outmoded ways of accomplishing our objectives.

NSSM-200 represents the worst aspect of the “advanced” nations meddling in the most intimate affairs of less-developed nations. It reinforces the image of the “ugly American.” It advocates violating the most precious freedoms and autonomy of the individual through coercive family planning programs.

The Kissinger Report purports to show concern for the rights or welfare of individuals and of nations, but it was conceived from the idea of the “right” of the United States to have unfettered access to the natural resources of developing nations. The United States and the other nations of the developed world, as well as ideologically-motivated population control NGOs, should be supporting and guiding authentic economic development that allows the people of each nation to use their resources for their own benefit, thereby leading to an enhancement of human rights worldwide and healthier economies for all.

No human relationships are closer or more intimate than those found in the family. Yet the “developed” world has spent more than 137 billion dollars just since 1990 attempting to control the number of children born to families in developing nations through the widespread imposition of abortion, sterilization and birth control under the umbrella terms “family planning services” and “reproductive health.”

All that the tens of billions of dollars of government population control expenditures have accomplished is to make hundreds of millions of large poor families into small poor families. It is unfortunately left to our imagination to wonder what might have happened if these resources had been invested in health and educational infrastructure, and in research dedicated to finding peaceful strategies to transition nations from corrupt governance to truly representative and accountable courts and public service sectors.

Children are not an obstacle to development, they are the hope for the future of any society. People are not the problem, they are the solution.


  1. Jason John James Gomez on July 15, 2016 at 10:13 PM

    Well its states in our constitution those that have the ability (Government or Elite) have the responsibility to take action. Now what are the responsibility well population control could be one. China should be down sized by all means nesessary in my book not the united states at about 500,000.000. All women in the world should hav there tubes tied at the age of 10 so they can live there lives with out getting pregnat by force by under age by wrong choice in there lives an cant get pregnat til the age of 25 if they chose to do so. That way they can live free from the fear of bringing in babies to a world were there lives are not addiquit. No why not snip the male. Now the women would say well once a man is snip there is no coming back as a women can get un-tied an then can have kids but only 2 kids. With the man she marries if she is to divorce the man she with she will get her tubes tied an can never have kids with no other man same goes for the man he has kids an divorces his wife he gets snip an is not allow to have kids with other women that alone should stop both sides from having kids with everybody they get in volve with. Is it crule an over controling not in my book it is comon sense to help keep the population down an help the planet as well an force the people to stay together which if they do they will be allowed to have 2 more children after 20yrs of being together if they are up to it. No ofcourse this New World Law will be implimented by the vote of all the people an government to try to understand that we need to do this for the World sake not just our own feelings. This J.J.J.G of Spanish decent born as an American. . .

    • joe on September 26, 2017 at 9:58 AM

      Some people WISH they could make everyone on the planet do what they say, as if they are gods to be obeyed. As if the lies (bogus science) that they shroud themselves in is a regal cloak. Not going to work. They can keep lying and keep failing. The satanic new world order types are destined for destruction, and sooner than you think. And even prior to that, no reasonable, free people are going to subject their bodies to government dissection and domination like the poor, subservient chinese. It is curious to see the money printing and government bribing “elite” pretend to be the guardians of the human race. The are only the masters of fools, those too braindead to see through their lies.

    • Wendy on March 20, 2020 at 12:16 PM


    • Java on February 8, 2021 at 12:56 AM

      Stop messing with the laws of nature! God said ‘Increase and multiply’. Leave things alone, God is in control!

    • Christopher Quero on March 17, 2021 at 8:53 PM

      Wow. This world is not over populated maybe the city but the world . people come and go so we need more people and more ppl to farm locally.. He we dont grow our own food then at home or a public gardens to people to grow and buy food.. They want control that why they want to kill off people but it going to back fire. Only a hand full of people want the world to burn and the other 99 percent dont they just mislead untill god so him self. No one really want to be bad it what situation we in.. God will when that why they rushing it but if this happen it going to happen as a ww3 ….

    • John Doran on April 19, 2021 at 8:31 AM

      Read Merchants Of Despair, by nuclear PhD engineer Robert Zubrin.
      This book proves that population destruction also destroys prosperity.
      It also exposes the global warming/climate change fraud.
      Nuclear power is compared to oil & coal power also.
      A grim expose of our grim reality, it’s well referenced & indexed.
      Population growth is shown to force progress & prosperity,
      citing heavily the brilliant economist Julian L. Simon & his great book:
      The Ultimate Resource 2, looking back at data covering the last 500 years.

    • But dart Dave on May 9, 2021 at 10:28 AM

      Spoken like a true sociopath! I bet your a liberal Democrat. Lol

  2. […] of little surprise to those who understand that parts of our government have considered disease as population control in the […]

  3. U.S. Aid: What's the Catch? - Altermidya on October 18, 2016 at 7:08 PM

    […] Philippines. In 1974, the USAID and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), among others, produced the “Kissinger Report”. It said that population growth threatens US access to the natural resources of poor countries. A […]

  4. Jack B. on October 28, 2016 at 7:41 PM

    Who is identified with the Global Climate Agenda? Could they be connected to the “Global Population Control Agenda”? Connection or not the vast majority of scientist say our planet is under siege and stressed. Some naysayers utter that the planet goes through climate change every 10K years or so. That is true. However, during this cycle one thing is different… Mother Earth is supporting, feeding and disposing of waste for 8 billion humans and 10s of billions of other forms of life. Scientists say that Mother earth is under stress. With all his knowledge on the subject presidential candidate Donald Trump calls global climate message a “hoax”. Needless to say he will not get our vote. Is there further evidence?
    The Artic and Greenland ice shelves are melting, seas have risen and there is evidence of a threat to costal communities. Moreover, human activity and encroachment into formerly pristine regions plays havoc on the ecology. Today “Papa” Hemmingway would not be able to write his novel “The Snows of Kilimanjaro” because the mountain’s snow cap is all but gone.

    Then, look at our food producers. For strictly economic reasons they are injecting and spraying lethal substances into our food in order to speed maturity.

    God save the planet.

  5. […] at the time being headed by Henry Kissinger, US secretary of state and security advisor, proposed to reduce world population. This was followed through by the UN-population conference in Cairo […]

  6. Piedmont Jim on January 27, 2017 at 11:12 AM

    Good article, Dr. Clowes.

    Any perceived need for global population control is no reason to do so using unethical means. That said, we know that Machiavellians are out there and will justify some distorted system of ethics in order to accomplish killing a significant number of people for the hope of the survival of their own progeny.

    It occurred to me that many of the questionable if not downright evil policies we face today are geared toward lowering the birth rate or generating death. Aside from abortion, for example, take the whole homosexuality and transgender issue. What better way to keep people from having babies and getting them to willfully submit to sterilization? Also, I had not known about the Ugandan tactic. It would be interesting to see the statistics on STDs in countries that provide condoms to their people versus countries that don’t. Another example may be the intentional arming of radical Islam. What better way than war to get people killed off.

    On the other side of it, genetic research is moving along by leaps and bounds. The reason, I suspect, is that eugenics is the other side of the coin. For those that remain, they want to ensure that all the genetic diseases are eradicated. It’s another reason for pushing prenatal testing with an eye toward aborting defective children.

    • Carl P. Davis on November 23, 2017 at 8:58 AM

      Two World Wars as well as the great influenza outbreak after the First World War, etc. etc. haven’t made a dent in our world’s population as we have gone from 1 billion to 7.6 billion people in less than three centuries. Quite obviously drastic measures need to be taken such as no food aid to impoverished countries. Look whats happened to Haiti as an example of the microcosm to the macrocosm. mass sterilization should be implemented to countries that won’t comply with willing population control, no more than 2 children per family for example. I agree with the eugenics and also prenatal testing with the abortion of problematic fetuses.

  7. Robert Siena on March 28, 2017 at 6:53 AM

    “None Dare call it a Conspiracy” by Gary Allen, 1971 book and youtube speech. The new world order explained. Rockefellers established Population Council in 1950s and still exists today. Wikipedia. The long-lasting (4 years) birth control implants Nexplanon etc. PC developed for 3rd world illiterates is now implanted in US girls. Etonogestral/Nexplanon Lawsuits: this drug can kill or sterilize. Implants are pushed onto career-minded women.

  8. […] and external policies, through an ultra-secret document that would come to be known as the “Kissinger Report,” in reference to Henry Kissinger, author of the book “World Order” and the main […]

  9. Fungshway on November 11, 2017 at 7:47 PM

    Excellent read just what i was looking for!

  10. Carl P. Davis on November 23, 2017 at 8:48 AM

    Please correct me if my information is incorrect but unless I’m mistaken the global population growth was only around 1 billion just a few centuries ago and now today despite two World Wars and numerous other factors that have killed millions of people we have a global population growth of 7 and a half billion people. Today that 7.6 billion mark is the “new- 1 billion” and so quite obviously global “over-population” is already here and heading exponentially higher.

  11. […] interna y externa, mediante un documento ultra-secreto que llegaría a conocerse como el “Reporte Kissinger”, en alusión a Henry Kissinger, autor del libro “Orden Mundial” y su principal […]

  12. Brent Schatz on December 23, 2017 at 12:09 PM

    The global population has doubled in the last 40 years and is projected to double again in the next 36 years. Sooner or later we will reach a point where we need a death lottery (not in our lifetime).
    With technology of today, we are saving more and more lives. More and more children are being born. Our government pays or credits people for having more and more children. Our government is pushing for bigger families.
    Why do all the bleeding hearts in the USA want to continue to let people into the US? Legal or illegal our population is exploding.
    California has a water shortage, they take water from other states, yet, they keep promoting population growth through letting people into the country. I live in Texas and I am noticing more and more people moving here from California because of population, lack of employment and other various reasons.

  13. ConcernedEuropean on December 30, 2017 at 10:53 AM

    China had a 1 child policy (I believe Kissinger played a role in that?).
    They have moved to a 2 child policy, but some of the damage is done.
    I think if they can level off, they will be fine.

    Europe (especially the Central, East and Southeast) parts are having so little kids its actually worrying me. Similar with Taiwan, Japan, Singapore and all those type nations.

    The areas where I fear problems is India and Bangadesh. They are still quite poor.
    They have toilet problems, they are one of the more packed populations.

    And finally Africa. the UN projections show their population will be growing greatly.
    They can probably handle double the population, but can they handle triple or more people?

    I imagine the “globalist” types will want to keep the low fertility rates and importing more and more from the third world. Europe, North America, Australia will look completely different.

    I have seen fertility rates fall from 3.5-2.5 in white nations to 1.5.
    So how to stop these extremists in positions of power?

  14. F. on September 8, 2018 at 7:39 AM

    I don’t know which is scarier: that our government is involved in a worldwide conspiracy or that nobody can bloody compose a paragraph anymore without capitalization, misspellings, and a total lack of grammar. Here’s an example: the united states sould knot have enybodi snipped, sow there aint problems cause i tink thats a reel poblem

  15. Mark on September 23, 2018 at 2:30 AM

    Look up the worlds 100 most populated cities, add up their population numbers, double it for folks living in the country around those cities. Its a ballpark figure, granted. But you may be surprised at the number, and maybe even question how in the heck can there be 7 billion people in the world. It doesn’t even come close.

  16. Richard Fellowes on October 14, 2018 at 12:21 AM

    The author of this article is in la-la land, if he thinks the planet isn’t ALREADY overpopulated. Never mind arguments that population could be sustainable in years to come.

    It might be true that if everyone lived a modest lifestyle, the numbers are okay. But unless everyone suddenly becomes Armish, this isn’t going to happen. Consumerism is deeply entrenched.

    Competition for non-essentials breeds enough discord in society, e.g. having a bigger house than your neighbour. Imagine, once ESSENTIALS are in short supply. Water, for example.

    I expect an increase in conflict.

    Look at the unbelievably cruel atrocities committed in some of the major conflicts: WWI, WWII, Vietnam. And this is before we began stretching the earth to breaking point.

    More people brings more suffering. Because there are more people to suffer. And fewer resources for each of those people.

    This site seems motivated by archaic religious teachings that are frankly dangerous in today’s world. I, myself, am religious. I spend much time in daily prayer and believe I have a relationship with God.

    But I do not believe that all teachings of the Bible are to be taken literally. And some that were, are not suitable for today. Because, plainly, people need to stop breeding. I was brought up in a family hostile to homosexuality, and when younger, this stained my opinions on homosexual relationships. But now I am conscious of our effects on the planet, I say, thank God for homosexuality.

    As for sterilisation…if only the UK had a financial incentive for males, like the Indian scheme cited here. I am considering paying myself.

    I’m certainly not preachy to friends about this. But for me, no children seems *absolutely* the right thing.

  17. Don on January 16, 2019 at 10:35 AM

    To get the big picture, here are the simple facts most of us will agree on:
    1. World population is increasing. It has been increasing more rapidly in the last 200 years than in previous recorded history.
    2. Human-caused environmental problems are obvious to anyone who has the vaguest consciousness of what is happening in the world, and the rate of their increase correlates closely with population growth.
    3. If the present population were sustainable, number two would not be true.
    4. Any major social change will have some unfavorable consequences in the short term.
    5. Population explosions are always limited by resource exhaustion, starvation, or other environmental pressures which reverse them, usually rapidly. If population growth reversal and shorter term environmental preservation efforts are unsuccessful, nature will take care of it. Which of the possible scenarios seems less conducive to human misery?

    • Stan on April 20, 2020 at 3:54 PM

      Prosperity has the effect of population mitigation. Where populations realise that infant mortality rates are low they tend to have less children. The whole basis behind population control as cited in this article is the greed of the wealthy elites and their lust for the resources of others. It’s disgusting and evil.

    • allen on June 2, 2020 at 2:47 PM

      If nobody knows pain will everyone be painless? let Mother Nature do it ! no more vaccines. stop and think “just because we can should we”

  18. Lynne W. on May 4, 2019 at 1:06 AM

    If only what you say were true, insofar as US gov’t attempts to control human population are concerned. You are clearly not a “pro-life” organization, you are just a pro human organization! This planet has a sustainable human population of about 1-1/2 billion, yet it currently suffers under about 7-1/2 billion people! Our numbers are the source of every environmental problem we face: ALL forms of pollution, war, hunger, resource depletion – especially clean drinkable water, and -most tragically of all, the scourge of the extinction of other species, which we did not create, and have absolutely no right to exterminate for our own benefit. Your article reads like it is the usual drivel from certain religious organizations, revealing the primary argument against most organized religion! What complete and utter nonsense! What needs to hapoen is the elimination of the income tax exemption for any more than 2 children per household in the US, and the linking of all foreign aid to an amount allocated on the basis of 2 children per family at most – 1 in the world’s most over-populated countries.

    • HLI Staff on May 16, 2019 at 1:27 PM

      There is no difference to being pro-life and pro-human. Man is made in the image of God, and as such is imbued with natural dignity. You are worried about extermination of animals, which is a worthy cause, but what about the extermination of humans? In India alone 15 million children are aborted every year. And this has not solved their pollution, hunger, etc. one iota. Money is being ideologically allocated by the United Nations for population control that could have paid for electricity to thousands of villages, built thousands of clinics, brought them clean water, etc. These policies are also racist, because they are directed at areas like Asia and Africa and Latin America – population across the West has long been shrinking.

      Please see attached link. Regarding 2-child family policies, we would advise you to look at the drastic horrors this has produced in China, with forced abortions and sterilizations, infanticide, etc. and not enough children to even care or pay for the older generation. Even China is now encouraging more children. To limit a couple’s right to children is a gross violation of human rights. And as for elimination of taxes, well, you know the saying: “Nothing is certain except death and taxes.” If this is not enough data, we would also urge you to look to “The Population Bomb,” which has been so widely discredited that no one takes this seriously. (see page 28 reference)

      • allen on June 2, 2020 at 2:49 PM

        what about HUMAN EXTINCTION ??

    • Rocio Herbert on July 22, 2019 at 8:31 PM

      Lynne, I totally agree with you, except – I do not read this article as pro human… running out of fresh drinking water is not pro human. This article is pro-human-suffering. If more people were the answer, why is it we are having all these environmental issues with almost 8 Billion people on the earth. We have the power to change to smaller families and then IF and WHEN it is needed, we can change to larger families. Why can we not recognize the sign of the times, we are over running the Earth. It is finite. Christians are ‘supposed to be’ stewards of the Earth… “When we see the world as a gift from God, we will do our best to take care of it and use it wisely, instead of poisoning or destroying it.”

      The impending climate catastrophe is clear to most people by now, with intense wildfires, hurricanes, and falling agricultural production.
      “A new study suggests that 40 percent of insect species are in decline. Why is this important? If we don’t stop it, entire ecosystems will collapse due to starvation.” Our survival depends on the ecosystems’ health.

      • Dan Daugherty on June 20, 2021 at 2:14 PM

        It’s not the CDC or the WHO or the globally infecting Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex or any other deifically self-projecting alphabet super-agency in charge, instead, right below our planet’s pyramid-tip oligarchy junta is the corporate money master. The only practical way “progressive” human civilization can, with at least minimal stability, enhance its population is by developing and culturally imposing an all-encompassing and ever-expanding economic hegemony.

        When the value of “money” loses all trust, civilizations implode and large populations self-annihilate. In the end, only the annihilation-masters may survive.


    • Geoffrey on August 18, 2019 at 2:16 PM

      Wonderful reply to Lynne W !

    • Gregory A McCaulley on January 23, 2020 at 1:12 AM

      Well said.

  19. David Simpson on June 9, 2019 at 9:33 PM

    Much of this is false , incorrect and taken out of context. The fact is in 2050 when we reach a population of 10 billion plus, we will be at the limits of the earths capacity to support the human population. I personally believe by then we would have already exhausted out safe drinking water supply, there fore forcing large civil conflicts and mass war. War between governments, between governments and civilian populations, as well as wars between the classes. Corporations and the CEO’s of those corporations will assume control of the world as a whole. The corporation that is first to fully develop AI is the winner/ruler/owner of the worlds resources.
    As for the population boom, the author of this does not consider doubling the population a boom. It took from the beginning of man until 1900 to reach 3 billion, and from 1900 – 1950 to exceed 6 billion. You don’t consider THAT to be a population boom? Population control is necessary. If human kind did not alter the natural flo of things then nature would itself maintain a proper balance thru disease, natural disasters, food shortages, ice ages, droughts and such as it always did, but mankind now has inter feared with these natural controls, there by assuming the responsibility of maintaining control, unless nature decides it wants to keep the crown as ultimate ruler, in that case it will strike down our advanced sciences and abilities to influence disease, food production and climate control.

    • HLI Staff on June 17, 2019 at 1:48 PM

      Thanks for your comments, David. Since “The Population Bomb” was published, many have adhered to the idea the human population would run out of resources already. This theory has been widely discredited. We have statistics showing that in all the West and many other countries – China included – population is way below replacement level. This will have dramatic repercussions which are already harmful, such as shortages of women in Asian countries where female children die of abortion or infanticide because males are preferred. If you wish to cite your source we can certainly have our researcher point you actual numbers.

      • Mbachu, Ikechukwu on April 23, 2020 at 7:02 PM

        Could President Donald Trump be said to be one of the greatest things that has happened to humanity in this century? Cos recent events, prevailing circumstances and, history all seem to reveal his policies as poised to nip most of the diabolic agenda of the US and most of the west. No wonder he seems also to have more internal enemies than any former president of the United States.

        • Town Square on March 17, 2021 at 1:35 PM

          Mbachu, Good observation. President Trump ended up showing how deep and wide the swamp is and was on the road to cleaning it up. However, the swamp is pervasive in scope which is why he is no longer our president. But all is not lost as more and more becomes exposed. That’s what we need, continued exposure of the diabolical nature of what we face. You will see that there are none volunteering to emasculate themselves and/or their children to ensure they are no longer part of the presumed problem. It’s easy for them to offer their thoughts, but harder to be part of the presumed solution.

    • Dan Daugherty on June 20, 2021 at 2:31 PM

      The human species is technology super-charged. As a single organism, the fundamentally unmitigated, environmentally disruptive poisons industrially produced for each human exceeds what would be produced by a herd of radioactive elephants. While our planet is large, it is still also finite. We still — in our billions — feed off of it. When the food source dies, so do we.


  20. victor edward carrillo on November 30, 2019 at 3:09 PM

    does population control have a limit??

  21. Dennis Letkeman on April 18, 2020 at 10:24 AM

    those are all temporary measures the only way is a massive kill off with a world wide pandemic which is what they are testing right now

  22. Jaded Flower on May 18, 2020 at 12:19 AM

    It’s not the middle class and their McMansions which pose the greatest threat but the crony-capitalist, mega-corporations polluting with bio-accumulative poisons. They would rather blame the folks wanting a child and make them feel guilty so Big Pharma/Food/War etc. can go on trashing the place to make billions. Pollution is the clear and present danger not climate change. This is about the oligarchs having their organic, grass-fed, sirloin while everyone else scratches insecticided, mutant bugs from the dirt they’ve poisoned.

  23. Susan Biddle on September 7, 2020 at 8:27 AM

    There is a very simple solution to the issue of lack of resources which does not include population control. Wealth limits! If the most wealthy 1% on our planet gave up 50% of their wealth to to feed impoverished nations, there would be no lack whatsoever. If instead of investing in population control, they chose to invest in sustainable farms in impoverished areas, hunger would no longer exist. The population level is going to level off naturally, with or without their intervention.
    I feel like most people are missing the point. Population control is not about sustainability or improving lives of common people. It is about control, greed, and keeping less advantaged populations weak so that the ultra wealthy can maintain their gluttony and greed.

  24. Adam Baum on September 28, 2020 at 2:32 AM

    You mention “agriculture” in the opening paragraph but then it doesnt come up again. I want to share with you and all the readers the part about “agriculture.”

    Herbicides and pesticides are carelessly used on crops that will be consumed by the masses of poor, mostly non-white people, while white people dodge the bullet and eat organic.

    GMO Corn (corn syrup, cattle feed, chicken feed, etc.) is used in almost every kind of cheaper food and permeates everything. GMO corn is sprayed with herbicides and pesticides that make it easier to farm. The chemicals remain on the corn after harvest. The chemicals are then consumed by humans and livestock (which are then consumed by humans). Trace amounts of herbicides and pesticides in our food cause partial or complete sterility among males. Today, the average male is half as fertile as his grandfather, and the trend is picking up steam. In a laboratory study, male mice that consumed glyphosate had lineages that were completely sterile after 4 generations. We will see similar results in human males. This is why middle and upper class people, especially white people, eat mostly organic food. They are constantly alerted of the dangers of GMO food in Ivy Leavue and higher institutions, while the masses that are the targets of the population control program are left with Bill Gates touting the benefits of GMO to the high heavens, with little or no warning of the danger.

  25. Alan on October 6, 2020 at 11:45 AM

    Everyone who believes and thinks population control is a good idea with all your rationalizations – Here is how I suggest we implement the program. You go first!

  26. Drew on October 28, 2020 at 10:45 PM

    Fact: the growth rate in the world’s population was 1.08% in 2019,
    Fact: at the current rate, the world’s population would double every 64 years.

    Expert Opinion: In 50 years, the UN projects the world population will be somewhere between 9.5-12.5 billion people with a 95% confidence ratio.

    My Opinion: the population growth is a problem for humanity. The bigger problem may be our inability to recognize it, let alone do something humane about it. We can argue all day long about the agendas behind this and politics. I do see some merit in the argument that the US may have been a culprit in population control efforts in the past. As a first mover in a lot of things we make the first mistakes. Nonetheless, we’d better get REAL about the fact we have a big problem on our hands. If you have children (which I do) I am both a part of a problem and have a vested interest in solving it.

  27. Anders Tallberg on January 2, 2021 at 4:06 PM

    Just as for all primates and for most mammals, human mothers are infertile while breastfeeding in a natural pattern (at demand), due to lactational amenorrhea. Prior to the introduction of infant formula the average breastfeeding period in most non industrialized countries was between 4 to 5 years, resulting in a normal reproduction rate of about 5 to 6 years. However, when infant formula was introduced in these markets (for India at about 1910 as far as I can recall) it was heavily subsidized, and commonly given for free to mothers during their first period after birth. In a matter of a few years the reproduction rate in these markets was close to one year, resulting in an extreme increase in the population growth, something which clearly can be seen in the population statistics of that time.

    The reason why this is not commonly known is that estimates of population growth which lists numerous relevant factors, like access to preservatives, family planning (abortion clinics), healthcare, general sanitation, nutrition etc., “forgets” lactational amenorrhea – hiding the fact that infant formula acts like a “chemical fertilizer” in traditional societies. Still western countries subsidize infant formula and profit is just one of the reasons.

  28. Dan Daugherty on June 20, 2021 at 2:55 PM

    It’s a zero-sum paradigm. To evolve a ten-billion, technology-enhanced human population, a specific volume of refined resources must dynamically be sustained and stored against most seasonally common decay. After the Reset Dieoff, humanity’s remaining fifty million surviving harvesters will “popularly” be managed by a genetically distinct oligarchy of self-perpetuating masters.

    A ten thousand year golden-age begins … .


Leave a Comment