Past comments and scenario-planning events are raising new questions about a depopulation agenda pushed by world elites.
During a TED Talk in 2010, former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates said, “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we lower that perhaps by 10% – 15%.”
Many point to that quote as evidence Bill Gates is part of an international group whose main agenda is reducing the world’s population, mainly through an aggressive vaccine agenda.
But the quote, critics say, has been taken out of context. What Bill Gates really meant is that lower infant fertility counterintuitively lowers population.
From the 2009 annual letter of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Gates’ philanthropic organization, Gates writes:
“A surprising but critical fact we learned was that reducing the number of deaths actually reduces population growth … Contrary to the Malthusian view that population will grow to the limit of however many kids can be fed, in fact parents choose to have enough kids to give them a high chance that several will survive to support them as they grow old. As the number of kids who survive to adulthood goes up, parents can achieve this goal without having as many children.”
Others point to Agenda 21, the worldwide “soft law” that says land and resources will be commandeered not just by governments, but governments acting closely with the United Nations.
One of the goals of that agenda is to “ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns.” Although the document doesn’t mention depopulation expressly, many believe its goals can only be achieved by population control.
Still others point to Operation Lock Step, a planning scenario published by the Rockefeller Foundation in 2010 that seemingly predicted – with startling accuracy – the Covid19 pandemic and the lockdowns that followed.
From the Lock Step document:
The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.
The United States’ initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post- pandemic recovery.
During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.
