![[Дxponential F♠] CIA & Pentagon: Arithmetic, Population & Energy Exponents Economics 101 Crash Course](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbCOO1PP_3pOLtUkHMjAej6zQSY15RJUVvr0fkWKuiAKZTtF_Az2PxpQx974GR6X8D5YTCRwOMtBe5b4Awu1Hgp8tqbp9aq4cs44K8NsmOUWMMH_JwdB1PCMZpopd3-NrXf2EBCfjk9VQ/s400/FertilityStimulus.jpg)
What are we and they to understand as the connection between population and security? Population is a central element in nearly any concept of national security.
And in many regions the potential for conflict arising from simple overpopulation and starvation is large and growing. There is, of course, nothing simple about these problems; those who feel inclined to dismiss the seriousness of this potential should consider the question: "How does one say `Lebensraum' in Chinese?"
~ US Army War College: People Wars: Ruminations on Population and Security: How Does One Say 'Lebensraum' in Chinese? ~
______________________________________________________________
The Philosophy of the ‘Useless Eaters’
Mike Smith - Global Politician
10/10/2007It is for normal people sometimes difficult to understand the wrongs in society. We see politicians messing up. We see uncontrollable illegal immigration into our countries. We see wars happening. We see genocides in Africa, Yugoslavia and South East Asia while the world debates how many deaths constitute genocide and does nothing to stop it.
We question out of control AIDS and the policies to curb it in Sub Saharan Africa.
We see idiotic policies created such as the Montréal and Kyoto Protocols and we do not understand. We see Westernized, sovereign and Christian nations such as Rhodesia, Namibia and South Africa handed over to Communist terrorist through the scheming of Western Nations on the one hand and the backing by Communists on the other....and we do not understand. We ask ourselves, "Has the world gone mad?"
The answer is no. We just do not understand the philosophy of those controlling the world. Now I am no conspiracy theorist, just a keen observer and a student of history; sometimes a philosopher.
The Philosophy of world leadersThere is a philosophy amongst world string pullers that the average man will find just too horrible to comprehend, yet it exists and it shapes our modern world. There is no official version of this philosophy and I don't think it is taught anywhere at universities. Students seem to arrive at it through a natural path. Hegelianism it is not, neither is it pure Utilitarianism. The Nazi’s called it "Life unworthy of life". Let me simply call it "The Philosophy of the Useless Eaters".
It is difficult to determine where this philosophy came from. Thomas Malthus wrote in 1798 that there will always be more people in the world than can be fed, hence the need for wars and diseases. We know that people like the British imperialist Cecil John Rhodes, birth control founder Margaret Sanger, Stalin and Adolf Hitler were practitioners of this philosophy, but the man who stands out as the biggest practitioner has to be "Red Terror" Felix Dzerzhinsky. Most Westerners have never heard of him, but he is a Communist god and they have erected a huge statue in his honour (torn down, but soon to be re-erected) in Moscow.
Felix D. was a Polish aristocrat, Bolshevik and creator of the "Cheka" or "Secret Police" during the Russian revolution. He killed thousands of "counter revolutionaries" and all he needed was a confession to do so. Trials were therefore short and executions summarily. One of his tactics was to pose as a counter revolutionary and even bomb police stations to lure opponents of the revolution to believe that a counter revolution has started and then kill them off.
Felix D. regarded mankind as being slightly above the level of cattle. He once told British agent Sydney Reilly, while the two were on a drinking binge that, "Man is of no importance. Look at what happens when you starve him. He begins to eat his dead companions to stay alive. Man is only interested in his own survival. That is all that counts. All the Spinoza stuff is a lot of rubbish."
This philosophy is a mixture of Freud, Plato, Aristotle, Darwin, Marx and many others. The way it was explained to me was basically like this:
Man has no natural enemies so he breeds uncontrollably. The artificially created, industrialized world has developed to the stage where it can support the meek of society; cripples, chronically sick, blind and deaf people, etc. Further these people are allowed to breed more cripples, chronically sick, blind and deaf "Useless Eaters" who would have died out in a natural environment and because of this situation, the human race is systematically weakened through enlarging numbers of useless eaters across the world. It has therefore become necessary to control the numbers of the so called "useless eaters" in order for the human race to remain strong and survive. It is important to note that one finds "Useless Eaters" amongst all nations. Race and nationality is of little importance here.
To these string pullers, nature must take its course. Human life has very little value. Soldiers who die in war died, because they were too stupid to stay alive. Genocide is a major bonus to them; culling of mass amounts of "useless eaters" who were too stupid to escape and therefore deserved to be killed. Old people on farms in South Africa being violently killed and tortured to death deserved it, because they should have taken steps to safeguard themselves. If they get killed it is because of their own stupidity. In this world there is only space for the strongest and cleverest genes. The useless eaters have to die. That is why they did nothing to stop the six million Jews being killed in WW2. That is why the world did nothing to stop Pol Pot in Cambodia or the genocide in Rwanda. They were all just "useless eaters".
Further, industrialization and Western Technology helps to keep "useless eaters" alive and therefore needs to be halted. That is the real reason behind the Ozone depletion and Warm earth theories.
Cecil John Rhodes was a great visionary for their cause. He was an arch racist who wanted to rid Africa of all the "useless eaters" and then claim its riches for Great Britain. This man has more than fifty biographies written about him, two countries were named after him as well as a university in South Africa. Beneficiaries of his Scholarship trust were amongst others, Bill Clinton, writer Alain Locke, singer/actor, Kris Kristofferson, diplomat Strobe Talbott (Yugoslavia peace negotiator 1999) and many others. This scholarship allows them to study for two years at Oxford University. A great monument was erected to Rhodes at the foot of Table Mountain in Cape Town. So why did he not succeed?
See Rhodes ran into some good Christian Whites called Afrikaners up north, who did not understand or agree with his vision. These Afrikaner farmers called "Boers" halted his visionary plans in the most expensive war Britain has ever fought and they would never be forgiven for it. Imagine if Rhodes befriended the Boers and shared his vision with them. Blacks would have only existed in History books today. Africa from Cape to Cairo would have been white.
Nevertheless, it was not to be. Eventually these Afrikaners rose to power and ruled South Africa. At first the Rhodes disciples thought that the Afrikaners would finish the job and exterminate the "useless eaters" in Africa as it happened in Australia, America, etc, but no. These Afrikaners were good Christian folk who built schools and universities for the useless eaters. They built houses, hospitals and employed the useless eaters. Under Afrikaners the useless eater population of South Africa increased four fold and the white countries of Rhodesia, South Africa and Namibia were feeding the rest of Africa. This was obviously a disaster for the "useless eater" proponents. Therefore the Afrikaners had to go.
In South Africa it is very important that we understand this philosophy in order for us to understand why the world sits with folded arms and watch Zimbabwe collapse and whites systematically slaughtered in South Africa.
Wonder no more why the world does nothing to stop Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Wonder no more why a statue of a terrorist such as Mandela is erected in London. Wonder no more why the world does not condemn Mbeki's AIDS policy or the crime in South Africa.
Whites need to leave, because the white doctors, engineers and farmers are keeping the "Useless Eaters" alive.
Communism in Africa is just a vehicle to depopulate the continent in such a way that the ignorant masses do not realize what is going on and will go along with it thinking they are "free".
Survival of whites on this continent depends on how well they understand their position and role in the global population control of the "useless eaters". If whites leave South Africa it would be ideal for the global cause, but if they stay they should not help the useless eaters. Whites should form their own little country and should not treat useless eaters in hospitals, feed them or clothe them. Whites should isolate themselves and let the useless eaters die off naturally. Whites should stop crying about crime and start fighting back. If they get killed because of crime, then they did not listen to sound advice and deserved to be killed. It strengthens the nation if idiots are killed off.
So who are these string pullers?
Think about an eagle. It is the symbol of many countries such as the USA , Germany and Hungary. An eagle has two wings, left and right, yet they are attached to the same body and controlled by the same brain. The same goes for the claws. There is nothing wrong with this and in fact, it is vital for survival of the eagle. For the eagle to fly, catch its prey and survive it is essential that it controls both the left wing and the right wing.
It is important to notice that these world scholars who believe in the "useless eater" philosophy are neither right nor left. They will use both Fascism and Communism, as long as they can control the population of the earth. Anyone who supports their goals is richly rewarded, but beware the one who stands in their way.
Contrary to what most conspiracy theorist think, it is not one group (Illuminati, Free masons, Club of Rome, etc), but rather the four hundred odd "Think Tanks" across the world with their learned academics, financiers, religious leaders and politicians who eventually draw up these policies who are responsible for it. These "Think Tanks" are the bodies to which both the left and right wings are attached…but who or what is the brain?
One of these "Think tanks" is the Catholic military order known as the Jesuits. Their leader is Peter Hans Kolvenbach, a Dutchman, also known as "The most powerful man on earth" or "The 'Black' Pope". Chances are you have never heard of him. The Jesuit order played a big role in "Liberation Theology" in South America and Africa where communists took over and killed millions of ‘useless eaters’.
Recently we have seen the movie 300 about the Spartans at the battle of Thermopylae (who saved the Western world), but what about the other 300 warriors few know of. I am talking about Gideon's men we read about in Judges 7 and 8 in the Bible. We also read in Chronicles about King Solomon who made 300 shields from the gold the queen of Sheba gave him.
What if 300 was just a symbolic number? What if, through the ages, a Committee of 300 of the world's most prominent scholars are really controlling world events and pulling strings behind the scene? You better believe it.
Once one understands this philosophy it is not so difficult to understand how George Bush can send thousands of soldiers to their deaths and not lose a single minute’s sleep over it. One can also understand how their own leaders, who received a Nobel peace prize for it, could betray the Afrikaners.
Unless Afrikaners understand their position in the global game of population control and how the "Philosophy of the Useless Eaters" affects them, they are doomed. Fact is, four million whites in South Africa is nothing in the bigger scheme of things. World leaders are not going to rush to the aid of whites in South Africa when they face extermination and no one is going to send in the cavalry. It is time for Afrikaners to forget about Siener van Rensburg’s prophecies and start working towards a strategy of survival. It might even be too late already.
The only way for the Afrikaners is to become increasingly assertive. It is time for the Afrikaners to become ruthless and either fight for their position on the dung heap or fade away into history where no-one will care in a few years time that they ever ruled South Africa. No-one has ever achieved anything great in history by sitting around with folded arms. History is made by the ones who are willing to be ruthless. The Afrikaners should understand that there can be no more playing nice. That attitude has brought them nothing. History shows us that the ones who achieved greatness, were the ones who were willing to TAKE, not BEG; the ones who were willing to fight, not negotiate. There is no place for sissies in this world and if the Afrikaners wants to behave as such, they deserve to die. These words might sound cruel, but it is the truth. It is reality; not some washed out prophecy.
Jer. 8:9: "Since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what kind of wisdom do they have?"
Col. 2:8-10: "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form. and you hove been given fullness in Christ, Who is the head over every power and authority."
Political References For Further Reading
Depopulation of a Planet: Culling the 'Useless Eaters'
The Tavistock institute, considered to be America's "Best kept secret".
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_tavistock01.htm#The%20Best%20Kept%20Secret%20In%20America
One of the best books on the subject is that of Dr. John Coleman, an ex MI6 agent called, "The story of the Committee of 300".
Conspirator's Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300, by Dr. John Coleman
To see the aims of this group, read here:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_illuminati_12c.htmSource: Global Politician______________________________________________________________
Why There is Nothing Wrong with Being a Racist
[Originally titled: A Cordial Reply to Our Detractors]
Monday, March 30th, 2009 at 12:51 pm 
Every now and then, commentors appear declaring they are ’shocked, shocked!’ that a ‘hate’ site like SAS exists and that anyone in the world is stupid enough to believe in ‘racism’ anymore. This is generally followed by a bunch of ‘inbred stupid redneck’ insults and predictions that our type is toast and the rainbow dawn of the age of aquarius will shortly usher in world kumbayah singing. I’ve ceased to be offended by these types and begun to be amused, they are so utterly ignorant of the issues being discussed that nothing they say matters. However, out of a helpful wish to inform the likes of these purveyors why we are the way we are, I thought I could draw up a few points that could give them a chance to objectively view our arguments instead of knee-jerk declaim against them.
First off, there is nothing wrong with being a racist. It is the most natural, healthy, and sensible view in the world. It is evolutionarily adaptive to favor kin and race over foreigners, because they share more of your unique genes than foreigners, and thus helping them helps increase the presence of your genes in the gene pool. Being a racist is just as sensible as being a species-ist or a family-ist, it is simply prioritizing the transmission of your genes into the gene pool over less related genes. Anyone who doesn’t hold this belief is destined to genetic suicide. As noble as it sounds to selflessly ignore evolution, evolution never stops ignoring you. Just as it is death to ignore gravity and jump off a cliff as proof of your more ‘enlightened’ and ‘developed’ beliefs, it is a death sentence to ignore biology and prefer foreign genes to your own. This is especially true when others do not share in your ‘enlightened’ viewpoint. Even if theoretically it would be better if everyone stopped preferring their self, family, ethnicity, race, and species over more genetically foreign elements, if only some people do this while others continue selfishly pursuing their genetic interests, the world will quickly become solely dominated by the selfish, genetically-minded agenda pursuers. Therefore, even anti-racists would be best served to promote racism in the short term, as a tit-for-tat measure against the incredibly racist foreigners who are perfectly content to eradicate others for their own genetic gain.
Putting aside the long-term consequences of ignoring evolution, there are many other reasons to be a racist. It has been shown in study after scientific study that people prefer the company of people like themselves. People sort genetically in a natural process called ‘assortative mating.’ We have a natural affinity for people who share traits with ourselves, and a natural dislike for people unlike ourselves. At this point, I’m not even discussing whether the people unlike ourselves are bad people. They might be wonderful people, but their foreign-ness is bad enough all on its own. This is why the vast majority of everyone on earth finds a husband or wife who shares as much in common with themselves as possible, including race. It is why the vast majority of people on earth prefer friends of their own race, a church group of their own race, a school of their own race, a town of their own race, a country of their own race, so that wherever they go they can interact with people like themselves instead of foreigners, who are scary and unlikable and weird-looking. Fighting against this instinct is counterproductive and about as useful as fighting against the instinct to eat, breathe, pump your heart, sleep, drink, etc. It is an inborn nature to all mankind and the only way to get rid of it would be to redesign the human genome. Where did this instinct come from? See above! It is an evolutionarily fit activity to prefer your own genes to foreign genes, and thus all humanity evolved this preference, and now it is an inborn wish, an inborn motivation to carry out the evolutionarily fit activity–just the same as procreation became an enjoyable and desirable act because it helped replicate your genes and was thus an evolutionarily fit activity. It is as useless to combat people’s innate ‘hatred’ for foreign genes and love for related genes as the sex drive, the appetite, or any other fundamental human emotions. Given we are human and have a human nature, it is important we find a lifestyle that suits our inbuilt desires and needs, rather than one that tries to twist us out of shape. Every time human nature is assaulted, it hurts rather than helps. When communism attempted to root out ’selfishness’ it killed 100 million people, but it didn’t even last a century before everyone had given up on it as hopeless. Why then should we start another doomed crusade against human nature, this time racism?
Then there is the little problem that races are unequal. If people were all equally good, but didn’t like each other simply because they were foreign or strange or ‘not like themselves,’ at least some argument could be made against satisfying our innate racist wishes. This is not the case. There is a vast range of differences between the races, and these differences are genetic not cultural. There is no way to bridge these gaps, even if you became dictator of the whole world and designed every single person’s diet, upbringing, schooling, job opportunities, wealth, religion, language, etc. Nurture and the environment are only so powerful. Everyone in the whole world will admit that a giraffe cannot be raised to be a human, if only it is given the right environment and ‘culture.’ In that case, lurking in the depths of everyone’s brain is the realization that the basis of human intellect and achievement is genetic. That we have genes that code for our intelligence, our behavior, our personality, and so on. Now that we’ve all admitted that genes are the reason behind differences between the species, why is it is so surprising or impossible to think that genes are also the reason behind differences within the species? In fact, scienctists have reached a consensus that intelligence within humans is 80% genetic and only 20% cultural. A vast deal of studies have been done on the matter, most especially twin studies that compare the results of identical twins versus fraternal twins, who share all the same environments but are less or more closely genetically related. There is really no question left in the scientific community as to the truth of this matter, nor is there any dispute as to the accuracy or validity of IQ tests, nor is there any disputing the powerful causitive relationship low IQ has with social degeneracy–whether it’s illegitimate children, poverty, crime, dropping out of school, unhealthy habits, or STD’s. Therefore we are stuck in a world where some races are inherently, genetically, smarter than others and thus the incidence of social degeneracy is inherently, genetically lower among those races than others. It is common sense to prefer the company of people who on average have lower social degeneracy rates than those people who on average have higher social degeneracy rates. Requiring we live around the scum of the earth, criminals, welfare leeches, homeless stinking beggars, retards, alcoholics, etc, just to prove we aren’t racists is unacceptable. If it means that much to you, you go do it. However, some of us wish to live, some of us wish to feel safe in our homes. Some of us want to give a bright future to our children. Some of us want a decent wholesome environment we can take walks in and enjoy looking upon. Some of us are still sane. Now, the moment you find the cure for low intelligence, and cure all the less intelligent races of their social degeneracy, you can come back to the bargaining table and insist it will be different this time. However, for the last century we have lived cheek by jowl with the worst scum of the earth, and they have done nothing but rob us, rape us, murder us, pass affirmative action laws against us, demean us, ruin our schools, ruin our infrastructure, ruin our economies, and so on. It is unfair and wicked to demand whites and other civilized races must continue to bear the burden of a degeneracy not of their own making and not their responsbility.
In fact, nurturing genetic under-achievers with environmental handouts their own genome never could have produced is a dysgenic ticking time bomb. For example, say Person A and Person B are in a giant maze. Person A has the ability to navigate the maze, and can also show Person B the way out. Person B would be lost in the maze forever without Person A, but since Person A is there to help, this is insignificant. Person B meanwhile has a killer smile that attracts the ladies. So long as Person A helps Person B get out of the maze, natural selection will not favor either individual. However, sexual selection will continue to favor Person B. Thus, in a few generations, Person A will go extinct and Person B will populate the whole world. At this point, and for the first time, natural selection suddenly kicks in as Person B still can’t navigate mazes and thus they all go extinct as well. This is the case in the world today. The majority of the world is stupid and cannot sustain itself, but this drawback has no evolutionary impact so long as smart people continue to support them out of their own generosity. These same people have higher birthrates, and thus are continuously expanding their proportion of world population. At some point smart people will go extinct, as there is no natural selection or sexual selection favoring them, since they foolishly waste their own advantages by sharing it out equally with their less endowed inferiors. Then the dumb people will also go extinct, as they still cannot sustain themselves without the help of smart people. It is in the interest of dumb people that they are not sustained above their own ability to sustain themselves, so that negative traits do not proliferate only to crash later on. It is also in the interest of smart people to not undermine their own advantages and thus destroy eons of human evolution that got us to the wonderful traits we currently enjoy. Rather than regressing to some primitive, unsustainable population by coddling our stupidest and weakest, the human race should be devoting its time to the expansion and support of our finest specimens, our smartest, most beautiful, most moral, most admirable men and women. Soon enough, the whole world could be populated by those people best equipped to live in it. Then the continuous tragedies of stuff like AIDS and malaria in Africa, slum cities, poverty, alcoholism, corruption and crime could all be averted, because the people who engage in that behavior would go extinct, while the people who engage in high culture and civilization will have grown and grown. More clean cities, more pristine parks, more safe neighborhoods, more stable homes, more well-educated children, more orchestras, more books being read, more everything desirable and happy in humanity. With eugenics, we could solve most of the problems on earth in a painless fashion, simply by favoring the birth rates of those best suited to life and disfavoring the birth rates of those least suited to life. With the current liberal plan of enhancing every poor and dumb person’s life so that they can do just as well or better than rich, smart people, we reverse evolution and make sure that poor and dumb people will proliferate indefinitely–and their social degeneracy, misery, and ruination will proliferate with them. Where is the sense in that? If we can all agree that we like security, prosperity, and dignity for everyone where is the sense in making the people least able to confer these advantages or receive these advantages the vessels of our cause? Where is the sense in trying to create the perfect device out of the least perfect parts we can find? The perfect society out of the weakest links? We all want a good environment, a good nurturing for our children and the future of humanity. The only question is, should this environment be wasted like pearls before swine, or provided for the people who can truly benefit from it, the ones most genetically gifted and suited to such an environment, nurturing, and future?
Ask yourself what you really want to see in the world. World peace? Justice? An end to poverty, disease, and hunger? An end to all abused children? Equality and freedom for all? Now ask yourself, will this be easier or harder to achieve with smart people or dumb people? Will this be easier or harder to achieve with mean people or nice people? Will this be easier or harder to achieve with liars or honest people? Will this be easier or harder to achieve with vicious or virtuous people? Will this be easier or harder to achieve with ignorant or educated people? Whatever you want, any possible liberal wet dream, is achievable only, and solely through eugenics. You can bet we ‘racists’ want all those things too. The only difference is we know the truth, we understand reality, and we intend to actually achieve those results, while all liberals have ever achieved and will ever achieve is catastrophe.
Source: SA Sucks
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates – When work began in 2004 to build the world's tallest tower, Dubai's confidence also was sky high with a host of mega-projects on the drawing board or rising from the sands.
![[National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth] “... World population growth is widely recognized within the Government as a current danger of the highest magnitude calling for urgent measures.”](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgB3Ys0wMXvt4Bp_A8AWARXPGxkW3k-tRt38mM0mNdMioKTXY-FFp2tWUHIKMmUwB7nnkrDwMgYW9l3ANoQ09n3CXquaLh4AZK2zyabyyYeBHqTkpt2zE6mA4AvVd3dpHenTyZZ1CWggVo/s400/octobama.jpg)
The ecological and economic prognosticators who warn of a potentially unpleasant future for the human enterprise typically portray humanity as being at a fork in the road on our evolutionary journey. They contend that we are at a pivotal decision point at which we must make an “either/or” choice between a positive future outcome and a negative future outcome.
It would be more accurate to portray humanity’s recent evolution as a journey on a highway that offers ever-increasing wellbeing along the way—as our population and material living standards diverge increasingly from sustainable levels—and that culminates in societal collapse at the end—when Nature can no longer support the ever-increasing natural resource and natural habitat overexploitation that enable our ever-increasing wellbeing.
Today we find ourselves passing exits numbered in the 90s, as we rapidly approach the end of the highway. The historically abundant and cheap natural resources that have enabled our industrialized way of life are becoming increasingly scarce and expensive—a trend that will continue going forward until available resource supplies become insufficient to support our hopelessly overextended population level and living standards.
![[Population, Resources, and Human Idealism, Energy Bulletin | Population Growth: Most Powerful Force on Earth, Money&Markets] To advocate for human rights, peace, and social justice while ignoring their necessary ecological basis --— a stable human population – at, or slightly less than – the eco-systems long term carrying capacity --- is intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy.](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhljkaQ3IdsYDlSwhqhtUnur61OFNUIuUgCFkHJkPpL8xPGnZXOzxFfJhTNPxDBODu49hCXKuWfp9l-gQug0wi_EqHClb-iZXZeBXWG1GD0X9D9GQXZCuzB5yP8UHUi6YxWBn6knrpLdx8/s400/ratsbrutalisation.jpg)
