DUTCH JOURNALIST Mara Hvistendahl comes to the conclusion in her book Unnatural Selection that mankind today is missing 160 million women. Most of these missing females are not victims of neglect. Choosing boys over girls was a conscious choice that deprived girls of their right to life in their mothers' wombs. They were selected out of existence by ultrasound technology and abortion.
I am talking mainly about the developing countries of Asia, but they are not the only ones. In many societies, sons are the guarantors of a higher social status, whereby not necessarily among poor people. In India, as Ms. Hvistendahl writes, it was families of well-educated city-dwellers who initially gave preference to boys. Developed countries regarded this gender selection with approval - after all, the fewer the women, the smaller the population in those very places where its growth is so alarming.
As we know, extremes meet. And the author depicts an unlikely alliance between Republican cold warriors worried that population growth would fuel the spread of Communism and left-wing scientists and activists who believed that abortion was necessary for both "the needs of women" and "the future prosperity - or perhaps survival - of mankind." On the whole, the West has been seriously accused of female genocide, much to the displeasure of many foreign bloggers. As is often the case, without reading the book themselves, they began making evaluations based on incorrectly formulated annotations. Here are some typical statements: "Asians have always wanted to have more men than women. And China in particular...," "We should not only blame technology, but cultures where women are denigrated," "It is the same as blaming Europe forJapan's Fukusima. Because it was European scientists who thought up nuclear reactors..."
The statement about China is probably correct. Deng Xiaoping personally pursued a strict policy aimed at limiting the size of the Chinese family, although not without the influence of a government advisor, a certain Song Jiang. At that time, the advisor had close contacts with Dutch scientist Geert Jan Olsder, a well-known games theoretician, and before long set forth his views in special recommendations to the government. Nevertheless, as America's International Herald Tribune, a more informed source than bloggers, writes in an editorial, "Western governments and philanthropic institutions have their fingerprints all over the story of the world's missing women. From the 1950s onward, Asian countries that legalized and then promoted abortion did so with vocal, deep-pocketed American support."
American journalist Ross Douthat believes that "the American establishment helped create the problem, but now it's metastasizing on its own: the population-control movement is a shadow of its former self, yet sex selection has spread inexorably with access to abortion, and sex ratios are out of balance from Central Asia to the Balkans to Asian-American communities in the United States." However, it is difficult to agree that we are dealing with an ideology and practice that go back into the past. On the contrary, these elements are acquiring increasingly clear signs of an offensive and extremely aggressive policy. In so doing, the latest climatic cataclysms serve as a convenient cover for declaring the most incredible conclusions.
John Holdren, advisor to the U.S. President for Science and Technology, said, "The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births." His predecessor, Paul Ehrlich, expressed himself in more aphoristic terms, "Each person we add now disproportionately impacts on the environment and life-support systems of the planet." Rockefeller agrees with him, saying, "The negative
impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident." Bill Gates, creator of Microsoft, thinks that "if we do a really great job on new vaccines... we [can] lower [the size of the population] by perhaps 10 or 15 percent." CNN Founder Ted Turner declares, "A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal." Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, states, "If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." Thomas Ferguson, former official in the U.S. State Department Office of Population Affairs, argues, "Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it...." And finally, Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger says, "Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race." That's just great... These people are part of the world elite, they are influential and have the means to bring their maniacal belief that "man is a planet-destroying species, sort of like a planetary cancer" to life (or rather, death).
It is no accident that the UN Population Fund and the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which, incidentally, has a branch in Russia, and numerous other funds and organizations are setting themselves the task of applying the latest technology to all the women of the world capable of giving birth. This, in any case, is the goal executive director of the UN Population Fund Dr. Osotimehin set forth in his program speech on March 3 of this year. I think that the day is not far away when the International Monetary Fund will allot financial assistance to countries not only for reducing their social spending, but also for unconditionally fulfilling the planned indices for population sterilization. I assure you there is nothing fantastical in this...
What is amazing is something else: neither the past nor the present of the "mad sanity" Hvistendahl is sharing with the world have been evaluated from the perspective of international law. It is difficult not to agree with Ross Douthat who believes that further study of the problem of the "missing 160 million women" raises the issue of some enormous crime against humanity. "The scale of that number evokes the genocidal horrors of the 20th century." The silence of international law institutions, the International Criminal Court in particular (it has finally arrived to the conclusion that Qaddafi is world criminal No.l), is all the more incomprehensible given that there is already a judicial precedent for classifying this kind of act.
The thing is that contemporary ideology and methods of birth controlcoincide surprisingly well with the policy Hitler pursued in the occupied territories. One of the documents of the Nuremburg Trial states the following, "The press, radio, cinema, as well as brochures, booklets, and lectures should be used to spread the idea among the Russian population that it is disadvantageous to have several children. They should be shown how expensive it is to raise a child and the useful things that could be bought for that money instead. It should be indicated that childbirth is detrimental to women's health... A widespread campaign should be launched in favor of contraception... Voluntary sterilization should be propagandized."
If Hitler had contemporary means of birth control, he would certainly have used them to "refine" the implementation of his racial hygiene theory. But 160 million women of "inferior" races taken out without a single shot being fired... This is something beyond the limits of even his inflamed imagination.