Family Planning: The Controversy
Conventional wisdom says family and population control – especially in the developing world – are linked to development, prosperity and happiness.
Much effort and huge resources have been committed by governments, development agencies and donors to this end.
Melissa Gates, philanthropist and wife to IT mogul Bill, has carved a forte in raising funds for family planning and birth control.
Recently, she was part of the Summit on Family Planning, which was co-organised by the British government to raise money to “provide 120 million women in the world’s poorest countries with access to contraceptives by 2020”.
The Summit was headlined by Prime Minister David Cameron, President Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania and Mary Robinson, the Former President of Ireland.
The Summit’s “Summary of Commitments,” said it would require an additional US$4.3 billion over the next eight years, a quarter of which will be donated by the Gates Foundation.
The International Planned Parenthood Federation, which was part of the Summit, reportedly has a strategic plan for Africa that will push for a 68 percent increase in new “family planning” users by 2015, and an 82 percent increase in abortion “services” by 2015.
Yet not everyone considers this a labour of love.
“Why does an American woman, who claims to be Catholic, think that she must push contraception in a faraway continent? Do the people there even want what she has to offer or is she merely imposing her will, and that of others with the contraceptive mentality, on the masses?” questions Rita Diller on the Christian Post blog.
She fears it “can only lead to the detriment of African society” while it is also against the tenets of Christianity or Catholicism in particular.
“A ‘Catholic’ billionaire says she is doing what the nuns at Ursuline Academy taught her by questioning whether contraception is a sin. Apparently she has decided it is not, since she has said she would challenge the Pope personally on that issue.
“She has embarked on a mission that places her front and centre in a conspiracy with the world’s largest abortion chain and the United Nations Population Fund to foist contraception on young women in developing countries. And she has made it clear she expects ‘no controversy.’”
The article, published on October 3, also cites Cardinal John Njue of Kenya vigorously objecting to Melinda Gates drive and “her interference in African culture”.
He says: “The drive by foreign agencies … to target millions of girls and women in Africa for the artificial family planning programme by the year 2020 is unimaginable, dangerous and could lead to destruction of the human society and by extension the human race.”
Another article, “Opening the Gates wide to population control abuse” written by Brian Clowes for The Guardian, is even more skeptical.
It highlights how some people and organisations have cynically worked against population growth.
“In July 1912, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes and other leaders in the early race-cleansing eugenics movement held their first international conference in London,” he writes.
“Among the leading topics of discussion were how to stop poor and ‘unfit’ African women from breeding. Exactly 100 years later, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the British government sponsored the Summit on Family Planning in the same city.
“This is most likely a coincidence, but the irony is stunning,” he says, noting that the summit had “a heavy emphasis on Africa”.
“Atop the list of the Gates Foundation’s partners were you guessed it International Planned Parenthood Federation and Marie Stopes International, the two largest abortion providers in the world, back to finish the work their founders had started a century before,” he stated.
Over or under-populated?
The argument that proponents of birth control in Africa, which has a billion people as of last December, and other developing countries is that the regions face overpopulation.
For Africa, it is said that drawing a cap on births would help ameliorate the hunger, ill health and under-development.
Less population equals more development, it is proposed.
Yet this has not found universal acceptance not least because the industrial revolutions of the US and Europe were partly on the back of population booms.
The insistence on family planning, contraceptives and alleged willful spread of epidemics is said by conspiracy theorists be a calculated move to keep Africa’s population down at best, and decimated at worst.
In fact some authorities say Africa is under-populated and needs to turn its baby making machine to full throttle plus the attendant interventions to save and secure lives, of course.
“Africa is under-populated,” Mo Ibrahim, a Sudanese-born British businessman and philanthropist, is on record as stating.
“We have 20 percent of the world's landmass and 13 percent of its population. We have a bulge of young people and that brings to the marketplace a huge workforce, whereas Europe's population is ageing. We need to focus on education and training.”
Obadias Ndaba, AfricaNews contributor in Nairobi, Kenya, said in August 2010: “The idea and policy in Africa assumes that ‘less population equals more development’ originated in the West and has been repeated so many times by leaders and media in our countries that everyone seems to agree with it or at least accept it without questioning its viability.
“The thinking behind this declaration is too simplistic to be valid: the fewer people a country has the better the government can take care of those people. Human beings are reduced to what the governments can manage or a ‘manageable’ population. In other words, people are the problem and seen, as the old perception of people in the Third World countries by their masters, as mouths to feed and not minds to think and innovate for a better future,” he contended.
He went on: “Let’s make a few comparisons. According to the UN report ‘World population 2008’ there are 170 people per square km in Western Europe versus 33 people in Africa per sq km.
“For instance the UK has 253 people per sq km while Kenya has only 69 people per sq km.
“Where is the overpopulation? Clearly not in Africa or Kenya, even if Africa’s population increases five times what it currently is; countries of Western Europe like France, Germany or Switzerland will still be more ‘overpopulated’ than African countries.
“Despite these figures, the myth continues to associate population size with development in Africa and other developing regions. The same thing being preached to Africa was preached to Hong Kong in the 1950s when it was still poor.
“Predictions were made that the overcrowded Hong Kong without natural resources had a bleak future, and one newspaper proclaimed that the country was ‘dying’.
“Its government lamented that ‘the problem of a rapidly increasing population lies at the core of problems facing the country’.” The opposite happened.
“The apocalypse predicted never came to pass,” says the writer. “Instead, Hong Kong witnessed an economic miracle and today Hong Kong boasts a population of 7 026 400 people with 6 460 people per sq km (2009 estimate).
“In addition, according to the IMF 2009 estimates, it has a per capita income of US$42 748 (the eighth-highest in the world, if separated from mainland China).
“Still, its population has increased about six times the number it had in the 1950s, when it was said to have a population beyond its ‘carrying capacity’.”
Ndaba argued that birth control is “just placing an emphasis where it shouldn’t be placed”.
“Birth control is a stage in development, when people are provided with good education, security, healthcare services that reduce child mortality and opportunities to exercise their talents they will make free choices, and as history has shown they will responsibly determine the spacing of their children according to their needs, desires, hopes and dreams.”
He added that this mindset of “managing population” has shifted attention away from more pressing issues like education, healthcare services and transfer of technology that would boost economies in poor countries.
This is easily done by associating population growth with every other problem from food shortages to environmental degradation, he explained.
“If current trends continue,” continued Ndaba, “Africa may end up in few decades with negative population growth, not unlike the situation in developed countries, where fertility rates are far lower than what is needed for replacement.
“If this happens, Africa will have the dual problem of a depleted workforce and underdevelopment.”
Peter Schwartzman and David Schwartzman argue in a 2007 paper that mainstream media’s mantra about overpopulation and developmental woes “is largely untrue”.
“It is rather easy to look at big numbers or images of a crowded street (likely in cities of Asia or Africa) and think that population size must be a major contributing factor in the development of our current woes,” they state.
“While this is the recurrent message we hear, it is largely untrue.”
The overpopulation myth leads to the promotion of policies that are terribly unjust and inhumane, say the authors.
• Ethan A Huff
After it was exposed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the philanthropic brainchild of Microsoft founder Bill Gates, purchased 500 000 shares in Monsanto back in 2010 valued at more than US$23 million, it became abundantly clear that this so-called benevolent charity is up to something other than eradicating disease and feeding the world's poor.
It turns out that the Gates family legacy has long been one of trying to dominate and control the world's systems, including in the areas of technology, medicine, and now agriculture.
The Gates Foundation, aka the tax-exempt Gates Family Trust, is currently in the process of spending billions of dollars in the name of humanitarianism to establish a global food monopoly dominated by genetically-modified (GM) crops and seeds.
And based on the Gates family's history of involvement in world affairs, it appears that one of its main goals besides simply establishing corporate control of the world's food supply is to reduce the world's population by a significant amount in the process.
Bill Gates' father, William H Gates Sr, has long been involved with the eugenics group Planned Parenthood, a rebranded organisation birthed out of the American Eugenics Society.
In a 2003 interview with PBS' Bill Moyers, Bill Gates admitted that his father used to be the head of Planned Parenthood, which was founded on the concept that most human beings are just “reckless breeders” and “human weeds” in need of culling.
Gates also admitted during the interview that his family's involvement in reproductive issues throughout the years has been extensive, referencing his own prior adherence to the beliefs of eugenicist Thomas Robert Malthus, who believed that populations of the world need to be controlled through reproductive restrictions.
Though Gates claims he now holds a different view, it appears as though his foundation's initiatives are just a modified Malthusian approach that much more discreetly reduces populations through vaccines and GMOs.
William Gates Sr's association with Planned Parenthood and continued influence in the realm of “population and reproductive health” is significant because Gates Sr is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
This long-time eugenicist “guides the vision and strategic direction” of the Gates Foundation, which is currently heavily focused on forcing GMOs on Africa via its financing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA).
The Gates Foundation has admittedly given at least US$264.5m in grant commitments to AGRA, and also reportedly hired Dr Robert Horsch, a former Monsanto executive for 25 years who developed Roundup, to head up AGRA back in 2006.
According to a report published in La Via Campesina back in 2010, 70 percent of AGRA's grantees in Kenya work directly with Monsanto, and nearly 80 percent of the Gates Foundation funding is devoted to biotechnology.
The same report explains that the Gates Foundation pledged US$880m in April 2010 to create the Global Agriculture and Food Security Programme (GAFSP), which is a heavy promoter of GMOs.
GAFSP, of course, was responsible for providing US$35m in “aid” to earthquake-shattered Haiti to be used for implementing GMO agricultural systems and technologies.
Back in 2003, the Gates Foundation invested US$25m in “GM research to develop vitamin and protein-enriched seeds for the world's poor”, a move that many international charities and farmers groups vehemently opposed.
And in 2008, the Gates Foundation awarded US$26.8m to Cornell University to research GM wheat, which is the next major food crop in the crosshairs of Monsanto's GM food crop pipeline.
The Gates Foundation's ties with Monsanto and corporate agriculture in general speak volumes about its real agenda, which is to create a monopolistic system of world control in every area of human life.
Vaccines, pharmaceuticals, GMOs, reproductive control, weather manipulation, global warming – these and many other points of entry are the means by which the Gates Foundation is making great strides to control the world by pretending to help improve and save it.
Rather than promote real food sovereignty and address the underlying political and economic issues that breed poverty, Gates and Co has instead embraced the promotion of corporately-owned and controlled agriculture and medicine paradigms that will only further enslave the world's most impoverished.
It is abundantly evident that GMOs have ravished already-impoverished people groups by destroying their native agricultural systems, as has been seen in India.
Some may say Gates' endeavours are all about the money, while others may say they are about power and control.
Perhaps it is a combination of both, where Gates is still in the business of promoting his own commercial investments, which includes buying shares in Monsanto while simultaneously investing in programmes to promote Monsanto.
Whatever the case may be, there is simply no denying that Gates now has a direct interest in seeing Monsanto succeed in spreading GMOs around the world.
And since Gates is openly facilitating Monsanto's growth into new markets through his “humanitarian” efforts, it is clear that the Gates family is in bed with Monsanto.
“Although Bill Gates might try to say that the Foundation is not linked to his business, all it proves is the opposite: most of their donations end up favouring the commercial investments of the tycoon, not really ‘donating’ anything, but instead of paying taxes to state coffers, he invests his profits in where it is favourable to him economically, including propaganda from their supposed good intentions,” wrote Silvia Ribeiro in the Mexican news source La Jornada back in 2010.
“On the contrary, their 'donations' finance projects as destructive as geo-engineering or replacement of natural community medicines for high-tech patented medicines in the poorest areas of the world…
“Gates is also engaged in trying to destroy rural farming worldwide, mainly through the 'Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa'.
“It works as a Trojan Horse to deprive poor African farmers of their traditional seeds, replacing them with the seeds of their companies first.” – Natural News