The UN’s Population Replacement Plan You Probably Haven’t Heard Of

I’m going to break down the UN’s immigration plan which is strangely titled; “Replacement Migration”. The question which the document purports to answer is; “Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Population?”

The document, starts like this:

“United Nations projections indicate that over the next 50 years, the populations of virtually all countries of Europe as well as Japan will face population decline and population ageing. The new challenges of declining and ageing populations will require comprehensive reassessment’s of many established policies and programmes, including those relating to international migration.”

CYtGDTfWYAAbDnTNotice how they are not so subtly stating that the “ageing” host European population problem will be solved by “international migration”. It’s awfully odd that the European people have been told for the last 50 years, “the world is overpopulated, stop having children” until very recently where that sentiment has been completely reversed. Now it seems the world is not overpopulated, and the European people need to accept foreign population expansion to make up for their dropping fertility.

The next introductory paragraph:

“Focusing on these two striking and critical population trends, the report considers replacement migration for eight low-fertility countries (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and United States) and two regions (Europe and the European Union). Replacement migration refers to the international migration that a country would need to offset population decline and population ageing resulting from low fertility and mortality rates.”

We have been sold a vicious over-population lie, now it seems we urgently need to offset the “declining and ageing” European population by importing foreign populations. It might appear the case that this population decline has been artificially manufactured in Europe. With the staunch promoting of life style choices that are ultimately destructive. For example; promiscuous sex, abortion, homosexuality, and refraining from marriage are all life choices that have been heavily imprinted as normal on the minds of the European populace.

The first chapter lays out the declining population of the people of Europe and some other areas. Of course it doesn’t touch on the reason for this decline which we have already discussed. It also doesn’t state any alternative solution to this problem, for example, it would be quite easy to positively encourage European population growth by honestly dealing with the destructive behaviours that are being falsely portrayed as healthy.

In chapter 2 this statement is made:

“The future population size and age-sex structure of any country depend basically on three demographic components: fertility, mortality and net international migration. As no policies to increase the mortality of a population are socially desirable, there are, in theory, two possible ways of retarding or reversing demographic ageing. First, a reversal of declines of fertility would lead the age structure of the population back towards a younger one, thus slowing down the ageing process. However, the recent experience of low-fertility countries suggests that there is no reason to assume that their fertility will return anytime soon to the above-replacement level”

So, that is enough to completely debunk the idea of trying to raise European fertility levels. There is not even one suggestion as to why this decrease in fertility has taken place. These are very intelligent people, I find it incredibly difficult to believe that they cannot see that this decline in European fertility was manufactured and could be easily remedied… Which leads me to conclude that they don’t want to consider it for some reason, raising the question: “The UN seems to care more about mass immigration than avoiding the petty economic downsides of an ageing population; why is this?”

It’s important to note that the issues caused by an ageing population, which are mainly economic, pale in comparison to the issues (economic and social) of importing masses of third world immigrants to these countries.

The next segment I am going to share is regarding the twelve countries of Europe:

“With the present below-replacement fertility and with no further immigration, the total population of these European countries would be reduced by approximately 20 to 25 per cent by the year 2050. The calculations showed that an overall population decline during the first half of the twenty-first century can be avoided if about one million immigrants move into the area every year. Assuming the same annual migration gain of one million, Lutz (2000) recently showed that the total population of Western Europe would grow by 13 per cent (to 505 million in 2050), as opposed to declining by three percent (to 422 million) in the case of no migration.”

I don’t think anyone can read that quote and not instantly realise that this policy (which is currently being enacted) will eventually lead to the complete dissolution of the native European population. If anyone can see this, the people actively pushing these policies must see it also.

Accompanying table showing the purposed levels of migration to sustain the population

For the sake of brevity we are going to take a look at the UN’s official conclusion. They outline five issues that are going to have to be “reassessed”, giving the reason as being the (normal) fertility levels during the second half of the twentieth century were simply “transitional”. So, this steep decline is not due to nefarious influence, rather it is a natural process. (This can be debunked by looking at the European fertility levels throughout history.)

The first four issues that must be reassessed have an ominous dysgenic feel to them:

“Critical issues to be addressed in those reassessment’s would include (a) appropriate ages for retirement; (b) levels, types and nature of retirement and health-care benefits for the elderly; (c) labour-force participation; (d) assessed amounts of contributions from workers and employers needed to support retirement and health-care benefits for the increasing elderly population.”

This to me this indicates “population control” being a massive focus of the UN rather than just population replacement. They are subtly hinting at a few things here; including higher retirement age and lower levels of health care.

The final and most in-depth issue to be reassessed:

“(e) policies and programmes relating to international migration, in particular replacement migration, and the integration of large numbers of recent migrants and their descendants. In this context, it should be noted that immigrants to one country are emigrants from another country. As such, international migration must be seen as part of the larger globalization process taking place throughout the world, influencing the economic, political and cultural character of both sending and receiving countries.”

I think this sums up the article quite well. “Globalization” is not a natural process, and seems in part being purposely manufactured by organisations like the UN. The fact that a document like this is open for public consumption without any kind of outcry or discussion is extremely worrying.

It is important that you share this article and others like it.


One thought on “The UN’s Population Replacement Plan You Probably Haven’t Heard Of

  1. Been researching this – Replacement Migration links to the ‘Limits to Growth’ policies in UK in 1970’s. Our Birthrates were cut severely & many were sterilised without consent – happened to many in my family & community especially the ‘working classes’.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s