Obama's Science Advisor John Holdren: British Russellite Nazi

In March, President Obama appointed John P. Holdren, an advocate of a global police state to reduce population, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Holdren is known as a leading anti-nuclear nuclear "expert".

When Obama says he wants to restore "science" to its rightful place, in healthcare and elsewhere, this is what he means.

In fact, Holdren's views closely follow the genocidal doctrines of Lord Bertrand Russell, founder of the Pugwash Conferences, and his fellow Fabian fascist H.G. Wells. In fact, Holdren chaired the Pugwash Conferences' executive committee from 1987 to 1997, helping the British organize the post-Cold War world as an imperial dystopia.

A review of Holdren's Nazi views led Lyndon LaRouche to comment today that the Obama Administration seems to be trying to fulfill the wet-dreams of every crazy right-wing fanatic in the country. Perhaps Obama will soon be declaring a "Crazy right-wing Fanatics Day," just to make it official.

An avowed Malthusian, Holdren wrote many works with his mentor Paul Ehrlich, calling among other things for coercive population reduction and mass sterilization. Holdren and Ehrlich worked together to try to stop the development of fusion energy, on the grounds that it would give humanity cheap energy. Holdren was one of the agents used by Margaret Mead in the initial launch of the global warming hoax. His views on population rival, if they don't surpass, those of that deadly virus Prince Philip.

Now in a sense in charge of U.S. science policy, Holdren has, among other things, demanded an end to the manned exploration of space — so that resources could be committed to the final solution here on Earth.

Here are quotations from the 1977 book, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, by Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich and John P. Holdren.

"Involuntary fertility control — a program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men. 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." (p. 786)

"Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock." (pp. 787-8)

"Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society." (p. 837)

"If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility — just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns — providing they are not denied equal protection." (p. 838)

"In today's world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?”" (p. 838)

"If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization." (p. 917)

Toward a Planetary Regime:

"Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime, —sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus, the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”

"The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region, and for arbitrating various countries shares within their regional limits." (pp. 942-3)