"Eugyppius" writes a substack which is widely promoted in the Conservative universe, particularly at Revolver. The author doesn't provide a profile.
His latest offering is a discussion of Bill Gates and the 'global depopulation agenda.' In this essay he dismisses much of the 'evidence' put forth to establish Gates as a de-population zealot, but provides very interesting analysis of the "depopulation" crowd's opposition to normal human instincts, effectively endorsing the Roman Catholic principle of subsidiarity.
...My readers often send me links to podcasts, videos and other media providing proofs of this Global Depopulation Agenda. Clip compilations like this one constitute an important genre in this area. They generally feature globalist goons – in this case, Bill Gates – saying ominous things about the overabundance of humans at different interviews and panel discussions....
Eugyppius believes that what Gates is really after is a healthier and more prosperous Third World which will lead to less children, thus less 'population pressure' on his Goddess Environment. Gates is not off-base here; the prosperity and general health picture in the developed West (plus Japan) is leading to de-population. In Italy and Japan, it is extremely serious; in Germany and the US, the population is stable due almost exclusively to immigration (legal or not.)
Moving on:
...If there isn’t a Global Depopulation Agenda, what’s going on, and how are all these ominous developments to be explained?
The answer is very important, and it lies in the peculiarities of postwar political ideology and the moral instincts which this ideology expresses....
There are many ways to illustrate this, but the most efficient is probably this classic Nature paper on Ideological differences in the expanse of the moral circle.
Among other things, the authors asked study participants identifying as “conservatives” and “liberals” (in the American sense) to indicate their spheres of primary moral concern. “Conservatives” tended to emphasise those spheres nearest to themselves – their immediate family, their more extended relatives, their friends – as bearing the greatest moral weight. “Liberals,” meanwhile, expressed the greatest moral interest in those spheres furthest from themselves – “all people on all continents,” for example, or “all mammals.” ...
(You can see a heat-map of the responses at the link above)
When you understand the political gravity of the Principle of Subsidiarity, especially as it was underlined in the Bill of Rights (see Amendments 9 & 10), you'll get it. It happens to be held by the Roman Catholic Church (although Francis I and his henchmen obviously disagree).
...This tenet [subsidiarity] holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom....
Pope St. John Paul II, who understood the Hard Left (atheist Communism) very well, had something to say on the matter:
...Pope John Paul II took the “social assistance state” to task in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus. The Pontiff wrote that the Welfare State was contradicting the principle of subsidiarity by intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility. This “leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.”...
Sound familiar? Does the current American Couch-Potato Crisis fit that mold? How about the 'bureaucratic ways of thinking' (can you say School Administrators?) and 'enormous increase in spending'..........yah, that's every damned Administration and Congress since LBJ......not to mention the monster-sized Government (think Dept of Education, EPA, Transportation, Homeland "Security,")...
If you've noted the Biden Administration's out-and-proud persecution of moms and dads who dissent at school board meetings, protest peacefully at abortion clinics, and resist the Vaxx Narrative, you've noticed their all-consuming desire to smash the Principle of Subsidiarity and along with it, any Churches and families who resist. Here's Eugyppius' formulation:
... As the problem seems to be growing worse over time, self-reinforcing selection effects probably also play an important part. The more pronounced EMO [Left] is favoured by the governing elite, the more all politicians and persons of prominence in the West are specifically selected for this trait, or at least for their willingness to pantomime it. While people with these moral tendencies have always existed, they’ve never been so heavily concentrated in positions of influence before, and the more concentrated they become, the more aggressively they filter for like-minded radicals like themselves, even in the absence (and in excess) of any specific objective....
Gee. After 2,000 years of existence, the Catholic Church's political sensibility on subsidiarity is correct.
Who could have guessed?
No comments:
Post a Comment