Evil WEF Leader Caught Celebrating Depopulation: ‘Population Collapse Is Good For The Planet’

Fact checked

Remember when the mainstream media was insisting that “depopulation” was a right-wing conspiracy theory? Times have changed, and now the World Economic Forum are openly celebrating “depopulation” and instructing the mainstream media to send the message that “population collapse is good for the planet.”

The Telegraph picked the perfect messenger to communicate the new way we should think about population declines. A high-level WEF adviser tells us:

Oxford Professor Sarah Harper is a very important person in elite globalist circles. The Telegraph article listing her credentials conveniently forgot to mention that she serves on the Global Agenda Council on Ageing Societies of the World Economic Forum.

Daily Skeptic report: Professor Harper and her colleagues at the WEF are thrilled about recent declines in fertility:

She told the Telegraph: “I think it’s a good thing that the high-income, high-consuming countries of the world are reducing the number of children that they’re having. I’m quite positive about that.”

The academic said declining fertility in rich countries would help to address the “general overconsumption that we have at the moment”, which has a negative impact on the planet.

Most importantly, declines in births will bring about reductions in CO2 emissions from wealthy nations, Professor Harper points out:

“Research has found that wealthy nations tend to have much larger carbon footprints than poorer countries, as rich people can afford to buy more goods, travel more and do other activities that generate emissions.

“Carbon emissions from high-income countries were 29 times larger than low-income countries on a per capita basis in 2020, World Bank figures show.”

Population Declines or Population Replacement?

Here’s the strange part: If the leadership of the World Economic Forum wanted to reduce emissions from wealthy countries, I could understand how they would hope that population reductions would lead to a decline in economic output. Aside from moral implications, it is simple math that fewer people means fewer cars on the road, less food consumed and so on.

However, something entirely different is going on! While the population of local-born natives is no longer reproducing at the levels needed to maintain the population, new immigration picks up. It accounts for a larger and larger share of births!

While the number of births in Britain is declining, the share of children born to parents who immigrated from outside Britain has hit a record high.

Almost one in three children born last year were delivered by mothers born outside of the U.K. The number of births by women born outside the U.K. rose 3,600 year-on-year to account for 30.3% of all births. The previous peak was 29.3% in 2020.

When including the father, more than one in three children born last year had at least one foreign-born parent. In London, the figure was two thirds.

This development is inconsistent with wanting to reduce the populations of high-consumption countries. It seems self-defeating to celebrate birth reductions while simultaneously amping up the arrivals of new immigrants who work hard to live well, consume a lot, have many children and realise the ‘British dream’.

Please do not interpret me pointing out the above inconsistency as my hostility towards immigrants: I immigrated to the United States, worked hard to have a good life and am blessed with a beautiful family and two grown children. I am immensely thankful for the opportunity to live in this wonderful land of the free – and I am sure that most other immigrants want to live well and work hard, just as I did.

However, even though I am equally sympathetic towards immigrants, just as I am towards the natives, I cannot shake the feeling that Prof Harper and the WEF have an inconsistency between stated goals and actions that I cannot explain easily.

This inconsistency is not something I can quite understand: New immigrants want to consume just as much as native residents. Why encourage immigration from poor countries to rich countries if the goal is a reduction of carbon and other emissions that would occur due to declines in the population of rich countries?

Help me understand this puzzle! Are we missing something? What do they really want?

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry is a writer at The People's Voice. He covers politics, business and entertainment. Speaking truth to power since he learned to talk, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one. Live without fear.
Email: baxter@thepeoplesvoice.tv
Baxter Dmitry


    • Why can’t you? Go on sweet pie honey bunch mass murderer yourself deny that humanity has wrecked this planet, has been the WORST most destructive species of all. A species that have genocides not just humans such as Tasmanias and attemptedcgenocufscif others and killed BILLIONS in wars and tortures and ABORTED millions of innocents Millions and millions in just 50 years Have decimated forests polluted rivers and lakes destroyed air quality damaged the atmosphere dropped tens of thousands of nuclear weapons everywhere created plagues pandemics spread filth and vice greed and narcissistic psychopathic murderous satanic demons and demonology everywhere and raised generations of copy cat idiots as if creating angels in their hypocrisy.Little kids who are already wanting to have guns and knifes and wanting to kill everything that’s not like them. Wanting to eat everything they can cut down trees everywhere chase away horrible ants and insects and kill weeds and poison everywhere so it looks nice

        • No The stupid humans did it of their own free will. And God tells you in plain language that rwve fe is His and if any f you creatures ever dare think you have the right to judge the Jews then you better be prepared to receive his wrath unleashed in a fury upon yourself. You don’t listen . Too filled with hatred and murder

      • I doubt it’s humans at all, it’s psychopaths at the top causing all those problems out of greed and they are the same reasons all working solutions get silenced for profit power. The normal people neurotypicals are not genocidal maniacs. Without psychopathic people at the top, we could solve all problems. But if you believe anything gets better if all neurotypicals becoming psychopathic good night. They are the problem, as they worship demonic things i wouldn’t call them human at all, pure evil.

        • No Stupid normal ordinary bitches stand their cans of ant poison and their insect poisons and their stupid husbands go shooting the dangerous bears and the dingoes and the rabbits and the pesty squirrels and rhe annoying antelopes and the tasty deer and their stupid kids ho and steal the hawks and the 3agles and emus and ostriches eggs and then they go fishing. After they’ve cleared the back pasture of that horrible forest so they can put the old grey mare out there too die. They don’t want the birds to have nests in those trees .

  1. There’s absolutely zero doubt that the world, not you, the world its wildlife forests vegetation animals birds insects fish etc etc etc and it’s rivers its lifeline or blood supply its oxygen everything would be better off without vermin all over it. People do nothing but vandalise and destroy Nature and are if no practical benefit as anything except blood and bone.

  2. Well, another day and another thread filled with the brain dead ramblings of Anonymous the Aussie pedophile.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.