If Copenhagen Talks Fail Is The Alternative Mass Genocide?

By James Donahue

There is a story that a British organization called Optimum Population Trust (OPT) has determined that a major reduction of the world’s population will be the best and least costly way to resolve the global warming crisis if nations fail to draft a workable plan at Copenhagen.

The organization, a product of the London School of Economics, argues that the single greatest cause of climate change has been the effects of over-population and industrialization. To save the planet and head-off human extinction, the UK economists call for a population reduction of 500 million between now and 2050.

Unfortunately experts are projecting a population increase from the 6 billion counted about ten years ago to over 9 billion by that date. Thus the issue of population control would mean the elimination of 3 billion people.

An OPT press release in March, 2009 warned that the world’s sustainable population is currently at 5 billion, which means that the planet has been grossly overpopulated for possibly the last 20 years and the problem is intensifying.

The release said the figures are based on ecological footprint and biological capacity data based on consumption of food, water, lumber, oil and other resources, and the emission of pollution created by human activities.

The statement noted, however that “these figures are predicated on present levels and patterns of consumption. Greener lifestyles . . . could push up its sustainable population.” By contrast, the report warned, “if the world as a whole grows richer and consumes more, this will reduce the planet’s carrying capacity.

“If present trends continue, by 2050, when the UN projects world population will be 9.1 billion, there will be an estimated 5 billion more people than the Earth can support.”

A special OPT report prepared for Copenhagen called for world governments to put population control and population reduction at the top of the agenda. The organization “called on climate change negotiators to ensure that population restraint policies are adopted by every state worldwide.”

Indeed, many people who have studied the complexities of the climate change issue and its link with world economies, argue that since Europeans and Americans have a lopsided impact on the environment, the best solution would be a forced population reduction rather than forcing emission cuts in developing countries.

An article by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, of The International Schiller Institute, a think-tank promoting the New World Order as foreseen by Lyndon LaRouche, suggested that a decision had to be made to find a way of eliminating 3 billion humans. The general thrust of the story asks who would pick the ones to go and the ones to stay.

The article stops, however, at any attempt to answer this question and the word genocide is never mentioned. Yet we must wonder if that isn’t part of a world plan.

The LaRouche story noted that the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), in its State of World Population Report 2009, argues that global warming “can only be reined in by means of a massive reduction of the world population.”

Noting the chaos emerging from the Copenhagen talks stemming from pressure on developing nations that include China and India to risk economic collapse by making major reductions in carbon emissions, LaRouche suggests the following:

“If this Conference in Copenhagen has had any use at all, then at least it has made the genocidal agenda of organizations such as the OPT and the UNFPA come to the light of day. It is this agenda which must be rejected with full force.

“The systemic crisis of Globalization, which is escalating daily, allows for only one useful discussion, how to create a new, just world economic order, in the quickest manner possible.”

LaRouche concludes that “the only realistic proposal is that put forward by American economist Lyndon LaRouche – that the four most powerful nations of the planet, namely Russia, China, India and the USA of Franklin Roosevelt, replace the currently bankrupt monetary system with a credit system.

President Roosevelt’s intention for the Bretton Woods System, to end colonialism for all time, must now be placed on the agenda!”

The Bretton Woods System was an international monetary management plan created by delegates from 44 nations who met after World War II in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. The nations all signed the Bretton Woods Agreements, established an International Monetary Fund and International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. That bank now is part of what is called the World Bank Group.

The system obligated each country to adopt a monetary policy that maintained a currency exchange rate within a fixed value in terms of gold and the ability of the International Monetary Fund to bridge temporary imbalances of payments.

The system operated well from 1944 to 1971, but then collapsed when the United States unilaterally terminated convertibility of dollars to gold. This resulted in financial stress in the world economy and resulted in the dollar becoming the “reserve currency” for states that signed the agreement.

This may help explain why the collapse of the US economic system in 2008-09 has had such an impact on other world economies. And it helps explain why delegates at Copenhagen are unable to agree on paying the cost of carbon emission reduction at this time.