August 3, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

It is difficult to find a better introduction to the issues addressed in this Facebook album on Justice for Men than the following YouTube video (7 minutes, 37,468 views as of 2011 08 03) http://www.youtube.com/wat​ch?v=57EWApOypIQ&feature=p​layer_embedded

Regardless of whether you are a woman or a man, whether you have or are a husband, father, brother, son, uncle or granddad, you need to watch the video.

From the introduction to the YouTube video: “…Societal forces like chivalry, misandry and the onerous male sex role of provide and protect have been having the unfortunate consequence of obscuring the needs of men. This short video will give you an introductory glimpse of some men’s issues.”

Men’s Issues

www.youtube.com

What are men’s issues? Watch this short flash video to get a beginning idea. Societal forces like chivalry, misandry and the onerous male sex role of provide…

Posted in Paternal Rights, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Suicides, Media Bias, Civil Rights, Judiciary, Single-Parent, Marriage, Books & Films, Men and Women Work, Abortion, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed, Child Abduction, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child-Custody Awards, Divorce, Health, Men's Issues, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

May 28, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Orphans in the USSR

Do not be surprised at the prevalence of abortions in communist- vs. feminist-dominated nations. Both live by the same doctrines, the planned destruction of the family and women’s liberation as to the burden of child bearing and child raising.

What that means with respect to abortions is that if unwanted children will be aborted, then through that deadly process of elimination, ostensibly, every child carried to term is a wanted child.

That goes one step farther, and the solution to the perceived problem applies equally in feminist as in communist regimes. If children are born outside of wedlock, they are illegitimate children. We cannot have illegitimate children in either a class-less or egalitarian society, because their very existence would be discriminatory. It is not the fault of the children that they are born with that label. It is the fault of a system that labels anything outside of moral norms or standards either illegal, objectionable or illegitimate. The solution to that is to abolish the moral or social standards that cause such illegitimacy to come about.

Therefore, in the minds of communist and feminist social engineers alike (remember that both use the same “bible”) it is merely necessary to eliminate all families, and all illegitimate children will have vanished. That is what both promptly called for and set out to bring about.

That had unintended consequences in the USSR, under Lenin.

It also had unintended consequences in the “free” West, under feminism.  More about that at the end of this posting.

I do not have statistics that summarize the orphan problem in the USSR, either in total or as a trend over time. There were millions of orphans.

Already under Lenin, the USSR suffered serious consequences on account of the policies of “free love” (a.k.a. “sexual freedom”) that Marx and Engels had called for. While later, under the quota system of eliminating unwanted sectors of the population, orphans were sent in large numbers to Siberia; and they were even executed by the tens of thousands (provided they were of the age of 14 or older). [You can find more about that in “The Soviet Story”, a DVD obtainable through amazon.com.]

Igor Shafarevich states in “The Socialist Phenomenon”:

At the end of the preceding chapter we sketched the “ideal” socialist society as it appears in the classical writings of socialism. Of the features enumerated, we shall consider only one: state upbringing of children from infancy so that they do not know their parents. It is natural to begin with this aspect of the socialist ideal, if only because it would be the first thing that an individual born into this society would face. This measure is suggested with striking consistency from Plato to Liadov, a leading Soviet theoretician of the 1920s. In the 1970s, the Japanese police arrested members of the “Red Army,” a Trotskyite organization, which was responsible for a number of murders. Although this group numbered only a few dozen people, it had all the attributes of a real socialist party–theoreticians, a split on the question of whether revolution should occur in one country or in the entire world at once, terror against dissidents. The group established itself in a lonely mountain region. And the same trait surfaced here: they took newborn children away from their mothers, entrusted them to other women for upbringing and fed them on powdered milk, despite difficulties in obtaining it.

Let us quote from a book by the modern ethologist Eibl-Eibesfeldt, which will help us evaluate the biological significance of this measure:

“It is especially in the second half of the first year of life that a child establishes personal ties with its mother or a person substituting for her (a nurse, a matron). This contact is the precondition for the development of “primary trust” (E. H. Erikson), the basis for the attitude toward oneself and the world. The child learns to trust his partner, and this positive basic orientation is the foundation of a healthy personality. If these contacts are broken, “primary distrust” develops. A prolonged stay in the hospital during the child’s second year may, for example, lead to such results. Though the child will try even there to establish close contact with a mother substitute, no nurse will be able to devote herself intensively enough to an infant for a close personal tie to be established. Nurses constantly change, and so the contacts that arise are constantly broken. The child, deceived in his expectations of contact, falls into a state of apathy after a brief outburst of protest. During the first month of his stay in the hospital he whines and clings to anyone available. During the second month he usually cries and loses weight. During the third month such children only weep quietly and finally become thoroughly apathetic. If after three to four months’ separation they are taken home, they return to normal. But if they stay in the hospital longer, the trauma becomes irreversible.. ..In one orphanage where R. Spitz studied ninety-one children who had been separated from their mothers in the third month of their lives, thirty-four died before they reached the age of two. The level of development of the survivors was only 45 percent of normal and the children were almost like idiots. Many of them could neither walk nor stand nor speak at age four. (148: p.234) “

[Source: “The Socialist Phenomenon”, by Igor Shafarevich, pp. 270, 271, http://robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevich/001SocialistPhenomenon.html ]

The following contains more information on orphans in the USSR, but that document is not in text form and cannot be searched. Quoting text from it is too laborious.

“Victims of the Soviet Penal System in the Pre-War Years:
A First Approach on the Basis of Archival Evidence”
By J. Arch Getty, Gabor T. Rittersporn and Victor N. Zemskow
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/GTY-Penal_System.pdf (4.2 MB, PDF file)

No spectacle in Soviet cities more troubled Russian and foreign observers during the first postrevolutionary decade than the millions of orphaned and abandoned children known as besprizornye.[1] Whether portrayed as pitiable victims of war and famine or as devious wolf-children preying on the surrounding population to support cocaine and gambling habits, they haunted the works of journalists, travelers, and Party members alike. “Every visitor sees it first,” noted an American correspondent, “and is so shocked by the sight that the most widely known Russian youth are the…homeless children flapping along the main streets of cities and the main routes of travel like ragged flocks of animated scarecrows.”[2] Averell Harriman recalled them as “a particular tragedy of the time…, begging or stealing and living as wild animals unconnected with the normal community life.”[3] The very fact that no one could remain indifferent to their travail made them tempting ammunition in the ideological charges and countercharges exchanged in these years. On one side of the battle lines, critics of the Bolsheviks featured the children as “proof” that the new regime had failed even to care for its own young. In reply, Soviet officials pointed to the problem’s origin in disasters largely beyond their control and insisted that the Party had assigned far higher priority to rehabilitating homeless juveniles than “bourgeois” governments allocated to the care of their own downtrodden….

We will focus primarily on youths who spent all, or at least most, of their time in the street. Our gaze thus takes in juveniles who drifted out of families, as well as the more obvious millions orphaned, discarded, or otherwise separated involuntarily from parents. Those who remained at home will not be included, regardless of the abuse or neglect they may have experienced there….

The homeless wave crested during the famine of 1921–1922, with estimates ranging typically from four to seven and a half million orphaned and forsaken youths.[69]

Source: Ball, Alan M. And Now My Soul Is Hardened: Abandoned Children in Soviet Russia, 1918-1930. Berkeley: University of California Press, c1994 1994. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft700007p9/

Do a “Find in Page” at that URL for terms such as “orphan”, “children”, “deported” or “execution”.
There is another source of information on orphans in the USSR, that is “The Gulag Archipelago” by Aleksandr I Solzhenitsyn, http://www.amazon.ca/s?_encoding=UTF8&search-alias=books-ca&field-author=Aleksandr+I+Solzhenitsyn

I read the volumes of “The Gulag Archipelago” and and should have copies but can’t find them. I do recall orphans being mentioned. I don’t know where those books went. Maybe they got lent out, but I seem to recall some numbers and a subject index relating to orphans.

In one of the volumes there was a chapter that described the problem of orphans in the labour camps. If I remember right, Solzhenitsyn considered the orphans to be one of the biggest problems faced by the other inmates, as the orphans had no rules or standards to live by. They had no civility.
Free love, as the early communists called it, is today called sexual freedom.
See The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage, The Atlantic Monthly, July 1926   (See also a more exhaustive history of the evolution and destructive social impact of Soviet divorce laws) [More at http://blog.fathersforlife.org/2010/09/06/dont-marry ]

Semi-orphans, a big part of the absurd legacy of feminism

Experiments in Living: The Fatherless Family
By Rebecca O’Neill; Sept. 2002, CIVITAS

For the best part of thirty years we have been conducting a vast experiment with the family, and now the results are in: the decline of the two-parent, married-couple family has resulted in poverty, ill-health, educational failure, unhappiness, anti-social behaviour, isolation and social exclusion for thousands of women, men and children.

— Rebecca O’Neill

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Civil Rights, Books & Films, Child Abuse, Abortion, Health, Feminism, Family, Child Murder, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

November 8, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

LifeSiteNews.com
Nov. 8, 2010By Hilary White

Young Pro-Life Father Nearly Lost Son to Abortion: Says Fathers Have No Legal Rights

DUBLIN, November 8, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Joseph Lee, who serves as the development officer for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children in Scotland, is the father of a four-year-old boy. But he almost lost his son just over four years ago, thanks to the fact that Britain’s abortion laws do not allow men to be taken into account in abortion decisions….(Full Story)

Joseph Lee and his girlfriend are to be congratulated that their son is alive and apparently well, but the story at LifeSiteNews.com states absolutely nothing about whether Joseph Lee is a part of the life of his son or whether his son has been condemned, like millions of other children, to grow up fatherless, without the presence of his father in his life.

The article focuses entirely on the fact that Lee prayed for his unborn son’s life, how it came about that the expecting mother decided not to go through with “her” abortion, and that the boy is now alive.  The story does not even let us know whether the boy is in the custody of his mother.

It could be that both Joseph Lee and his girlfriend live happily together, raising the son they conceived through their act of love.  It could be that the boy was given up for adoption.  The article doesn’t say.

Mind you, after having stated that Joseph Lee “pointed out that “it’s very rare” to see anything written about the rights of the father in the abortion debate.” he is quoted as having said,

“Even in pro-life circles … abortion lobbyists are focused on women’s rights,” he said. “Pro-lifers tend to rightly focus on the child. Most counselors focus on the woman, but there’s nothing really that focuses on the father.”

Ironically, even in a pro-life article by LifeSiteNews.com that highlights that curiously blinkered view of fathers’ rights and how even pro-lifers cannot force themselves to remove their blinkers, the vital bond between a boy and his father is being ignored.  One cannot help but feel that such ignorance is no accident but either a powerful compulsion or perhaps and quite possibly deliberate.

Sorry to have to say it to LifeSiteNews.com, “You will not have much success with having those who wish to abort children about to be born stop their actions and instead respect the life they are about to snuff, unless you also respect and promote the rights of fathers to be within and not without their families and children.

Do that, or else the lives you help save will only find themselves in the fatherless society you help to create.”

A copy of this comment was sent to LifeSiteNews.com as a letter to the editor.  Stay tuned to see what happens next.

Posted in Abortion, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Censorship, Men's Issues, The New World Order, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Women's Violence | Print | 6 Comments »

February 6, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

smh.com.au
Sidney Morning Herald, Australia

Go ahead, Grandpa, make my grey day

Miranda Devine
February 7, 2009

My GP says every second patient he sees is 90 and they all have the following ailments: “Every joint is gone; all have heart disease, insomnia, bladder problems, incontinence, cancer.” They are “wearing out”. A lot are on 20 different pills and no one really knows how they interact. Some patients shuffle into his office and say they are simply tired of living….(Full Story)

_____________
F4L: Miranda Devine review of the movie “Gran Torino” gives full credit to the feat by Clint Eastwood, who made the movie “Gran Torino” in 32 days and turned it in a #1 box office hit that is even now, after running almost two months, still in number three position.

It is hard to deny success like that, but success in the box office does not mean a tidal change in social attitudes towards the elderly.

Miranda Devine recounts how Walter Kowalski (played by Clint Eastwood, age 78) saves “a young South-East Asian neighbour from local gang members. Like Eastwood’s Dirty Harry, Walt has some memorable one-liners, such as: “Get off my lawn!” - said with a rifle in his hands. Walt sits on his verandah drinking beer and muttering racial slurs at the immigrants who have taken over his Detroit suburb….”

I have not seen the movie yet, but I have seen a fair bit of life.  Unlike what is insinuated in the movie, namely that a 78-year-old Grandpa can succeed in saving his neighbourhood, in real life it is far more likely that he would be neutralized.

He would be neutralized as surely as the sun rises in the East, not by the neigbourhood gangs but by the local SWAT team of the police. A 78-year-old man with a rifle is no match for a SWAT team with body armor, armed and trained for urban warfare.

In real life the end of the story would have come fairly early on, right after Walt Kowalski delivered the Dirty-Harry-like one-liner, “Get off my lawn” - rifle in hand.

Miranda Devine closes her review of “Gran Torino” with:

Why, if old age is all insomnia, worn-out organs and crippling medical costs, does society bother with it? Alford cites an old African saying, “the death of an old person is like the burning of a library”. Old guys remind us there are other ways of being human.

That, too, is a wishful thought, but it is no more influential than to celebrate emerging life at the other end of the range.

Such celebrations are necessary to make the pruning of life at both ends of the age range less acceptable, but for now it is quite alright to kill children not yet born at the rate of about 50 million each year in the world.  The day does not seem far off when the killing in such numbers of those about to die of old age will bother no one any more than the killing of children about to continue life outside their mothers’ wombs does.

Humanity declared children to be a luxury, a luxury we can’t afford and must therefore kill.  Children grow out of being unproductive.  Still, it is doubtful that it is wise to kill children regardless of an age-limit for culling them.  The children we cull don’t fight back.  They are not only innocent but powerless as well.

There are far more compelling reasons for the killing of the elderly.  The elderly are not likely to regain their productivity once they have lost it due to any health reason, even if it is nothing more than the feebleness that comes with old age.  Still, they can, just as Clint Eastwood did in “Gran Torino”, pretend that they have enough power to resist whatever is being done to them. It may make them feel better.

Posted in Civil Rights, Abortion, Health, Child Murder, The New World Order | Print | 1 Comment »

January 25, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

OneNews.com
2009 01 24

Obama condemned for expanding taxpayer funded abortions
Matthew Lee and Liz Sidoti - Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON - As he promised during the election campaign, Barack Obama on Friday struck down a ban against taxpayer funded abortions abroad.

Obama’s move was warmly welcomed by liberal groups and denounced by defenders of unborn children.

The ban has been a political football between Democratic and Republican administrations since GOP President Ronald Reagan first adopted it 1984. Democrat Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office….(Full Story)

_________________
F4L: There are in the order of about 55 million abortions a year in the whole world.  Roughly 70 million unborn children, conceived but not yet born, are being permitted to live, to be carried to term and to be born in the world each year.

The consequence of that is that in all of the developed nations and in ever more of the developing ones there are now declining populations that add up to as much as 30 percent reductions with every generation.

Barack Obama in essence resumed the exporting of a culture of death.

The web page Abortions - Deadly Politics contains more information and detailed statistics that illustrate the history, extent, development and the impact of the culture of death - an American export intended to safeguard the continued existence of the USA but that is in effect one of the reasons why the world market for goods manufactured in the USA falters.

Posted in Social-Destruction Enterprise, Abortion, The New World Order, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 14, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

The Australian - Blog
14 January 2009

Rights charter is from 2009 BC
By Janet Albrechtsen

Here I am in Canada again. And once again I am receiving a few free lessons about a charter of rights. Just about every time I am in this otherwise great country, its Charter of Rights and Freedoms is making headlines for all the wrong reasons. Reasons that Australians should be digesting as the push for an Australian charter of rights unfolds this year.

This time in Canada it’s a cracker of a story about a preacher man who has had 26 wives and more than 106 children. Clearly a sucker for punishment, 52-year-old Winston Blackmore, from the aptly named town of Bountiful in British Columbia, was arrested last Wednesday amid much media hoopla and charged with breaching BC’s criminal prohibition on polygamy.

Not taking a backward step, Blackmore says his fundamentalist Mormon beliefs on polygamy are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that the charter overrides BC’s criminal code….(Full Story)

______________

F4L:  Polygamy has been illegal in Canada since many years before Pierre Elliot Trudeau “brought the Constitution home” in 1982.  That no cases prosecuting polygamy by some in a few Mormon communities were ever brought to bear is for a good reason.  The authorities wanting to launch such an action always feared that they would run the risk that they would lose such a case.

The time is now ripe to bring such a case against polygamy into the court system, where it will most likely make it up to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), whereupon it stands a good chance to be lost and for polygamy to become legal, as that appears to fit in with the agenda for social engineering that the SCC actively promoted since 1982.

SCC justices had always had large powers to engage in social engineering, but they did not have the legal power to do so and to be necessarily successful in trying.  Since 1982 they assumed the legal power to usurp the power to legislate (that is, the power to make laws) from our lawfully elected legislators (lawgivers) in provincial and federal elected bodies of government.  Since 1982 there has also been a great escalation of rulings by the SCC that illustrate what its agenda for social engineering is and will be.

Since 1982 the SCC justices assumed the power to overrule, by hook and by crook, the wishes of our elected representatives.  Ted Byfield, the publisher of the now defunct news magazine, The Report, extensively commented on the growth over the powers of the SCC justices over the years and was given to call the SCC justices “judicial activists” and the “nine kings in purple robes.”

There is absolutely no doubt in the mind of anyone in Canada holding conservative opinions that the SCC is out to re-engineer Canadian society, so as to extinguish and replace the set of moral standards we once held sacred and adhered to.  Going by the evidence of the SCC’s decisions since shortly after 1982, the SCC’s agenda promotes: world government; socialism; equality of outcomes; income equalization regardless of the merits earned by achievements; the abolition of the traditional nuclear family; Atheism; Paganism; the abrogation of individual rights for men; supremacy for women, homosexuals and ethnic minorities; the abrogation of traditional moral standards based on the code of ethics of Christian churches, and of the right of men to own and enjoy property and to be able to be the fathers and teachers of their children.

In short, the SCC is the major force driving the conversion of Canada to a socialist state that is to be incorporated into the global socialist world regime.  Igor Shafarevich, a Russian and world-renowned mathematician who became a historian in the absence of the historians that were exterminated through the purges that took place in the USSR, summed up the agenda of socialism as follows:

It seems to us quite legitimate to conclude that socialism does exist as a unified historical phenomenon. Its basic principles have been indicated above. They are:

• Abolition of private property.
• Abolition of the family.
• Abolition of religion.
• Equality, abolition of hierarchies in society.

The manifold embodiments of these principles are linked organically by a common spirit, by an identity of specific details and, frequently, by a clearly discernible overall thrust. (Igor Shafarevich, in The Socialist Phenomenon, p. 200)

In writing that, he aptly described the goals for the agenda of our SCC justices.

Our Supreme Court of Canada justices do not consider our Constitution to be a set of laws that they must live by, administer, interpret and apply, but that the Constitution is a living document to be changed as required so that it can be used as the tool by which to implement their agenda for social engineering. Seeing that most of our Supreme Court justices promote judicial advocacy for social changes such as those indicated above, one is forced to ask: By what law did the SCC justices assume the right to become judicial activists and to impose their world view on the Canadian people? (E. g.: SCC Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin’s speeches identified below.)

1. The [Canadian] Charter — a judicial coup d’etat
   By Joanne Byfield, 2003 03 03
   If voters don’t support change, government can pay to take it to court

2. Speech by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, “UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES: What is Going On?” (Dec. 1, 2005, NZ), in which she argues that the rights of judges must transcend common law, constitutions (it follows that the principles to be overcome by judicial advocacy also include the supremacy of God) and parliamentary principles.
3. Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C.
   Chief Justice of Canada:  Reaction and Pro-action: Bringing Family Law Advocacy Into the 21st Century (Family Law Dinner, Ontario Bar Association, Toronto, Ontario, Thursday, January 24, 2002)

Beverley McLachlin is by no means the only SCC justice who promoted the role of SCC justices as being the purveyor of radical social change in Canada, with the aim to impose socialism.  Nevertheless, neither the people nor their elected representatives ever gave the SCC justices such powers.  Our Constitution most certainly never gave them those powers; other than that the SCC justices busily engaged themselves in writing the consequences of their judicial activism into the Constitution.

Given that the SCC justices of Canada are re-writing our Constitution, thereby turning it, step by step and cut by cut, into something the Constitution was not meant to be, the conclusion appears to be unavoidable that our SCC justices are revolutionaries and traitors to our country.  They are captives and apostles of the ideology they promote and are no longer the servants of our country but made themselves its masters and tyrants.

Posted in Abortion, Divorce, Civil Rights, Judiciary, Child Support, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards, Feminism, The New World Order, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, Gay issues, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 10, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

 ”Golden years are looking grim” was the title of a January 7, 2009 article in the Edmonton Journal (A13).  The subtitle of that article in the Journal was, “Countries around the globe face massive social upheaval and financial hardship as their populations are slowly, but surely, getting older”

That article was a copy of an article that was published Jan. 4, 2009 in the Washington Post, under the title: “The World Won’t Be Aging Gracefully. Just the Opposite.”

The title that the Edmonton Journal gave that article is somewhat misleading.  The fate of the elderly population sector is an important part of the discussion on the consequences of the culture of death with the deliberate goal of shrinking the world population down to between 500 million to a billion people.  The important aspect of that is not so much the shrinking of the resources for the elderly as is the cause of that problem symptom, the rapidly shrinking size of the working population sector.  That population sector will reach the point where it must and will decide whether the elderly can be allowed to live.

Yes, you understood that correctly, compulsory euthanasia is just a few years off.  It is either that we do it in an orderly fashion or that we let the elderly live in squalor and have them starve to death without adequate health care services.

That is not stressed in the article.  Other things in the article are assumptions based on pure speculation and not on an objective evaluation of alternatives.  For instance, Neil Howe and Richard Jackson state in their article that “In 2030, young people will have the future on their side. Elders will have the votes on theirs. Bold new investments in education, the environment or foreign assistance will be highly unlikely,” and that “With each new birth cohort smaller than the last, the typical workplace will be top-heavy with graybeards.”

It seems quite likely that in a market in which demand is falling due to rising taxes for those who work and due to seniors not being as eager or able to pay for what they don’t need, as working people are forced to pay ever higher taxes to support the elderly, while the size of their work force is shrinking due to falling birth rates as well as increasing unemployment rates, the workers supporting the retirees could easily come to actively resent the controlling voting power of the elderly as well as seeing them as robbing younger people of jobs.  Working people could easily begin to feel that they are serfs and indentured to non-productive elderly parasites.

After all, the inconceivable, abortion - the deliberate killing of children about to be born, was made to become acceptable, desirable, legal, then government-funded and even compulsory through peer pressure and government decree.  It is a logical progression that, if children about to be born are seen as an inconvenience and preferably killed, the killing of the old and feeble at the other end of the age range will appear to be a desirable solution to an ever more oppressive tax burden and a declining standard of living.

But the article does address a large variety of other issues that will become just as important as time goes by.

Washington Post

The World Won’t Be Aging Gracefully. Just the Opposite.

Sunday, January 4, 2009; Page B01

» Links to this article

By Neil Howe and Richard Jackson
The world is in crisis. A financial crash and a deepening recession are afflicting rich and poor countries alike. The threat of weapons of mass destruction looms ever larger. A bipartisan congressional panel announced last month that the odds of a nuclear or biological terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the year 2014 are better than 50-50. It looks as though we’ll be grappling with these economic and geopolitical challenges well into the 2010s.

But if you think that things couldn’t get any worse, wait till the 2020s. The economic and geopolitical climate could become even more threatening by then — and this time the reason will be demographics.

Yes, demographics, that relentless maker and breaker of civilizations. From the fall of the Roman and the Mayan empires to the Black Death to the colonization of the New World and the youth-driven revolutions of the 20th century, demographic trends have played a decisive role in precipitating many of the great invasions, political upheavals, migrations and environmental catastrophes of history. By the 2020s, an ominous new conjuncture of these trends will once again threaten massive disruption. We’re talking about global aging, which is likely to have a profound effect on economic growth, living standards and the shape of the world order.

For the world’s wealthy nations, the 2020s are set to be a decade of hyperaging and population decline. Many countries will experience fiscal crisis, economic stagnation and ugly political battles over entitlements and immigration. Meanwhile, poor countries will be buffeted by their own demographic storms. Some will be overwhelmed by massive age waves that they can’t afford, while others will be whipsawed by new explosions of youth whose aspirations they cannot satisfy. The risk of social and political upheaval and military aggression will grow throughout the developing world — even as the developed world’s capacity to deal with these threats weakens….(Full Story)

______________
F4L: Still, although the article by Howe and Jackson discusses many important and worrying issues, it does not cover enough of those (e. g.: the article brings up China’s one-child policy, but the far more important influence of US National Security Study Memorandum 200 is not mentioned at all).  The most important omission in the article is that it does not mention that the calamity of the world-population reduction is not a natural and inevitable process.  It is the consequence of a very deliberate plan for systematically depopulating the world by 80 percent or more.

For more on that check:

The Demographics of Death, or, The Decline & Fall of the Human Empire

World Population Control — U.S. Strategy and UN Policy Program

An overview compiled from various sources, based on various opinions relating to the consequences of the U.S.-promoted culture of death resulting from National Security Study Memorandum 200, by Henry A. Kissinger, National Security Council, Washington, D.C. 20506, April 24, 1974.

U.N. projects a significant population shift by 2050 (2001 article)

United Nations Population Information Network (POPIN), UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, with support from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA)

Population Trends: Rapid Growth in Less Developed Regions (2008, UNFPA)

(The preceding links are from Patriarchy — Was there ever such a thing?)

Still, there is one more issue that the article by Neil Howe and Richard Jackson does not address adequately.  Their article closes with,

All told, population trends point inexorably toward a more dominant U.S. role in a world that will need us more, not less. For the past several years, the U.N. has published a table ranking the world’s 12 most populous countries over time. In 1950, six of the top 12 were developed countries. In 2000, only three were. By 2050, only one developed country will remain — the United States, still in third place. By then, it will be the only country among the top 12 with a historical commitment to democracy, free markets and civil liberties.

Abraham Lincoln once called this country “the world’s last best hope.” Demography suggests that this will remain true for some time to come.

Yes, the region presently occupied by the USA experiences population increases.  However, the optimism expressed over that by the authors of the article may not be justified.  The USA relies for its population growth on the fertility of its Hispanic population sector, while the Black and Caucasian population sectors are experiencing fatal and accelerating decline.  That means that at the very least the nature of the USA will by 2050 no longer resemble much of its present character, just as a predominantly Muslim Europe no longer will resemble much of anything that Europe had become accustomed to by the 1950s.

There is another consideration that is even more important when contemplating the future of the USA in 2050.  If the USA will still exist then, it will quite likely be that its name will stand for something like the United Socialist Aggregation.  That is of course a little awkward and it will more likely be called something like USSA, for United Socialist States of America.

Moreover, the USA is an empire, very much split along the lines of ethnic aspirations.  Given the rapid growth of the population of Hispanic origin and background (much along the lines of the former Spanish colonies that existed not all that long ago (the southern and western states that were usurped from Mexico), the chances that the empire of the USA will still be in existence by 2050 are little better now than those of the former USSR were in the 1950s that it would still be whole by 1990.

No, it is a distinct possibility that by 2050 the name of the most populous developed nation on Earth will be that of the empire of the predominantly Islamic European Union, with the much expanded empire of the predominantly Catholic EUN (Estados Unidos Norteamérica) being a close second and the shrunken and still shrinking empire of the predominantly Atheist USSA (United Socialist States of America) being third.

A related article looks at some of those issues within the context of the deaths and the dying of rural communities in Canada.

Posted in Civil Rights, Abortion, Health, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

December 19, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Obama planning billion-dollar ‘bailout’ for abortion industry
Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 12/18/2008

Money 2A pro-life group in Washington has launched a campaign to oppose what it calls president-elect Barack Obama’s planned $1.5 billion “bailout” of the abortion industry.

Last week, the Obama-Biden Transition Project posted a report on its website that calls for dramatic policy reversals on abortion, including $1 billion in taxpayer money for international abortion groups like Planned Parenthood. The report, titled “Advancing Reproductive Rights and Health in a New Administration,” also calls for a 133-percent increase in funding for the Title X program, which funds Planned Parenthood clinics across the country….(Full Story)

Posted in Abortion, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

December 17, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

RenewAmerica

December 16, 2008

Hillary Clinton, feminist-at-large
By Carey Roberts

Remember Whack-a-Mole? The theme park game that features insouciant plastic rodents popping out of the hole — Whack! Here comes another one — WHACK!

That’s the image that comes to mind as I ponder Hillary Clinton’s controversial career: Staunch defender of a wayward Commander-in-Chief. Achievement-free senator from New York. Once-inevitable presidential candidate.

And just when you think the drama has thankfully drawn to a close, the curtain rises on yet another act….(Full Story)

Posted in Civil Rights, Abortion, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

December 15, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

OneNewsNow.com

2008 12 15

Planned Parenthood protecting child rapist … again

By Charlie Butts

….”Counselors in Washington, DC, encountered a 13-year-old girl going into a Planned Parenthood in the downtown DC area [who] was accompanied by her mother and her aunt,” Walker explains. According to the pro-life activist, following the abortion the aunt shared some information with sidewalk counselors outside the clinic.

“[S]he informs them that this little girl has been raped by the mother’s boyfriend, and the mother wants to keep the boyfriend,” says Walker….(Full Story)
_____________
F4L: Where was and is the natural father of the girl?  Just as important, what will that girl be like when she becomes an adult?

Posted in Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Abortion, Men's Issues, Family, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »