Breitbart

A coalition of Republican attorneys general are seeking to bypass President Joe Biden’s last-minute preemptive pardon of Dr. Anthony Fauci to investigate him on a state level for his role in the COVID-19 pandemic response.

The attorneys general, led by South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, sent a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) on Wednesday asking to be kept in the loop about “any further findings or direct evidence that suggests there may have been any violation of state laws” so that “we may evaluate state-level courses of action.”

“Certainly, one potential tool at our disposal is the referral of any pertinent findings to state officials. As you are aware, a pardon by former President Biden does not extend to preclude state-level investigations or legal proceedings,” they wrote. “As state Attorneys General, we possess the authority to address violations of state law or breaches of public trust. We are fully committed to investigating any malfeasance that may have occurred to the fullest extent of our authority and are prepared to collaborate with you in further efforts.”

The attorneys general specifically referenced a report released by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic in December 2024, which details widespread failures and potential misconduct by high-ranking government officials, including Fauci. Some of the report’s findings include:

• Evidence suggesting Fauci worked to discredit the “lab leak” theory, despite evidence supporting it.
• Accusations that Fauci allegedly provided false testimony to Congress about the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
• Evidence NIH allegedly mismanaged taxpayer funds by failing to properly oversee grants to EcoHealth Alliance, which funneled funding to the Wuhan lab.
• Evidence that prominent scientists who raised concerns about vaccine risks were allegedly silenced, ultimately limiting debate and public awareness.

Despite the report’s findings, Biden preemptively pardoned Fauci with just hours left in his administration, effective from January 2014 to the day of the pardon, and lauded Fauci for “sav[ing] countless lives by managing the government’s response to pressing health crises, including HIV/AIDS, as well as the Ebola and Zika viruses.”

“During his tenure as my Chief Medical Advisor, he helped the country tackle a once-in-a-century pandemic. The United States is safer and healthier because of him,” Biden said.

The attorneys general noted that pardon “purports to apply to any offenses arising from his service as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force or the White House COVID-19 Response Team, or as Chief Medical Advisor to the President.”

“To say we are troubled by the scope and timing of the pardon—on the heels of the Subcommittee’s Final Report—would be a gross understatement. To ensure that former President Biden’s shameful pardon does not frustrate accountability, we urge Congress to consider using all available tools at its disposal,” they wrote.

[…]

Via https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/02/07/republican-attorneys-general-seek-to-bypass-biden-pardon-investigate-fauci-on-state-level/

Talk About Conflict of Interest

Who’s Next?

Billionaire Elon Musk’s barely legal lackeys at his DOGE group have infiltrated their latest victim: the US Labor Department.

It’s a particularly hairy situation, even by the fraught standards of DOGE, because the department has investigated several of Musk’s enterprises, including Tesla and SpaceX.

And given Musk’s well-documented extremely vindictive nature, it’s not impossible the richest man in the world may try to single them out for retribution.

His ventures have a well-established record of violating the rules of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which is a regulatory agency of the Department of Labor.

OSHA has previously fined Musk’s SpaceX, Tesla, and even the Boring Company for countless safety incidents. SpaceX even kept the death of a worker secret, as OSHA inspectors found in November 2023.

Federal investigators are also currently looking into a separate death at Tesla’s Gigafactory in Austin, Texas, which occurred in August.

In short, having Musk’s lackeys stir things up at the Labor Department isn’t just a massive cybersecurity disaster waiting to happen — it’s an enormous conflict of interest as well.

Not OSHA

As the Associated Press reports, a group of labor unions sued DOGE to protect sensitive information about workers, some of whom may have previously filed safety complaints against their employers.

According to the AP, DOGE hasn’t accessed any data about these employees just yet. The federal judge who’s been put in charge of the lawsuit has yet to make a decision of whether to block DOGE from accessing the Labor Department’s systems.

However, unions are trying to get ahead of the problem by jumping into action now.

“At every step, DOGE is violating multiple laws, from constitutional limits on executive power, to laws protecting civil servants from arbitrary threats and adverse action, to crucial protections for government data collected and stored on hundreds of millions of Americans,” union lawyers representing Democracy Forward wrote in a complaint.

[…]

Via https://futurism.com/the-byte/elon-musk-doge-boys-department-labor-investigating-tesla

Tom Parker

“Under the Biden administration, we’ve seen the rise of what many are calling Operation Choke Point 2.0, where federal regulators exploited their power, pressuring banks to cut off services to individuals and businesses with conservative dispositions, or folks aligned with industries they just didn’t like.”

During a US Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee hearing titled “Investigating the Real Impacts of Debanking in America,” senators and witnesses laid out how Joe Biden’s administration, regulators, overbearing rules, big banks, and more had resulted in millions of Americans being blacklisted from the banking industry.

The Biden Administration’s Role in Debanking

Throughout the hearing, witnesses and senators noted that Biden regime pressure was a major contributor to this debanking wave, particularly through Operation Choke Point 2.0, a Biden-era push that primarily focused on pressuring banks to refuse to service cryptocurrency companies.

These claims were bolstered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC’s) release of 175 pages of documents before the hearing, which, according to FDIC Acting Chairman Travis Hill, show that banks that sought to offer crypto-related products or services were “almost universally met with resistance” from the FDIC, with some of this resistance coming in the form of “directives from supervisors to pause, suspend, or refrain from expanding all crypto- or blockchain-related activity.”

“Under the Biden administration, we’ve seen the rise of what many are calling Operation Choke Point 2.0, where federal regulators exploited their power, pressuring banks to cut off services to individuals and businesses with conservative dispositions, or folks aligned with industries they just didn’t like, like the color of one’s skin in my family’s history,” Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) said. “I wholeheartedly believe that debanking someone over their political ideology is un-American and goes against the core values that our nation was founded upon.”

Scott added that the newly released FDIC documents “further proved that Choke Point 2.0 was real” and “paint a disgusting and disheartening picture of abuse.”

Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) also showcased a quote from a confidential Federal Reserve implementation handbook on account actions that she described as “hard proof of Operation Choke Point.” The quote in question requires Federal Reserve staff to “consider the conduct of the institution and its leadership and whether association with the institution poses reputational risk to the Reserve Bank.”

One of the witnesses, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP Partner Stephen Gannon, was shocked by the quote, saying he’d “never seen anything like that before” and that “it’s really quite unusual.”

“Who’s to say what is controversial and what is not controversial?” Gannon added. “It’s chilling to me that it’s possible that access to the Federal Reserve payment system might be dependent on whether the applicant was engaged in some sort of controversial commentary…or activities…We don’t want to be in a place where free speech is chilled because there’s a concern that I might not get access to banking services.”

Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) also slammed the Biden administration for the way it “weaponized government at all different levels” and targeted the crypto industry.

And when Ricketts questioned Gannon on Operation Choke Point 1.0 (a 2013 Obama-era debanking effort that targeted gun dealers, payday lenders, and other companies considered to be “high risk”) and Operation Choke Point 2.0, Gannon said these efforts had resulted in “many small, perfectly legal businesses” ceasing operations.

Other Debanking Pressure Valves

While the Biden administration and its actions during Operation Choke Point 2.0 were identified as major contributors to debanking, participants also shone a light on the confluence of other factors that led to businesses and people losing access to financial services.

Big banks denying access to customers was one such factor. Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) asked Mike Ring, the President, CEO, and Co-Founder of the freedom-focused bank, Old Glory Bank, to name the American banks that “have been discriminating, debanking customers because of their religious beliefs, because they support the Second Amendment, or because they hate fossil fuels.” Ring responded by saying Bank of America has “certainly picked and choose [sic] winners” and also named Chase Bank, Citibank, and KeyBank.

Overburdensome regulations that lack transparency were also pointed to as a reason customers are excluded from the financial system.

Ring said that the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), an anti-money laundering (AML) law that requires banks to file Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) for transactions involving more than $10,000 in cash and Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) for transactions they deem suspicious, is “the Trojan horse for banks to do whatever they want.”

Aaron Klein, a Senior Fellow in Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution, said that the AML rules have created an exclusionary system that results in banks excluding low profit customers:

“I think one of the problems that we have in our anti-money laundering system is we’ve created an economic structure where the costs are very high. And the banks respond by saying, ‘If you’re a low-profit customer, we don’t want you because of the AML cost, but if you’re a high-profit customer, we’ll just pay the AML fine.’”

And Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ) shone a light on the “excessive amount of reporting” banks have to file and the lack of transparency around SARs, which are usually filed without customers having any awareness of them or having the ability to appeal.

Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN) summed up the overall sentiment and explained how a “constellation of problems exists at multiple levels” and that these problems are created by “partisan ideologues that actually operate within banks, public affairs divisions, or their so-called reputational risk committees that are exerting their influence to choke off disfavored industries,” external pressure from political activist groups, proxy advisory firms, and “activist regulators that have abused their supervisory authority.”

Hagerty added that this has ultimately created a “de facto debanking” system where “unelected individuals that are dictating what kind of companies can exist and thrive in our nation, and with no directive at all from the American people or from their elected representatives.”

The Devastating Impact of Debanking

Several witnesses and senators shared personal horror stories and shocking statistics that highlighted just how destructive this scourge of debanking has been.

Nathan McCauley, the CEO and co-founder of Anchorage Digital, a crypto bank for institutions, detailed how his bank was “virtually shut out of the federal banking system, despite being a federal bank ourselves.” His debanking nightmare began in June 2023 when a partner bank told him they were closing Anchorage Digital’s corporate bank account in 30 days because “they were not comfortable with our crypto clients and their transactions” and refused to provide any further explanation. McCauley added that the partner bank had never previously raised any issues with the account during Anchor Digital’s years-long relationship with them and that Anchorage Digital was even having active talks with them to expand into new partnerships.

While Anchorage Digital was ultimately able to find other banks to partner with, McCauley said “the impact of nearly being shut out of the banking system was devastating,” caused extreme disruption to his business, and contributed to his bank laying off 70 US-based employees.

Gannon provided an example of the debanking pressure small businesses face when they attempt to push back against regulators. He described how the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), a banking regulator that provides deposit insurance to depositors in American commercial banks and savings banks, had demanded that a small bank stop making legal tax refund application loans. When the bank refused, it found itself subjected to a review staffed by 400 FDIC examiners.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said her staff had identified 11,955 complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the US government consumer protection agency in the financial sector, about debanking over the last three years. Warren also claimed that consumer complaint hotline data has shown “tens of millions of customers have been blacklisted by the banking industry because they overdrafted their account a few times.” Warren even agreed with President Donald Trump’s stance on debanking, saying, “Donald Trump was on to a real problem when he criticized Bank of America for its debanking practices.”

[…]

Via https://reclaimthenet.org/senators-witnesses-slam-biden-debanking-operation-choke-point

The Pentagon by David B. Gleason is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

By Jim Hoft

President Donald Trump revealed that he has directed Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to conduct a comprehensive audit of the Pentagon’s funding.

During a press conference with Japan’s prime minister, when asked by a reporter about directives related to Pentagon budget reviews, Trump confirmed his decision.

“Yes, I have [directed Musk to review] Pentagon, Education, just about everything,” Trump said.

Trump continued, “We’re going to go through everything, just as it was so bad with what we just went through with this horrible situation [with USAID]. I guess 97% of the people have been dismissed. It was very, very unfortunate. You’re not going to find anything like that, but you’re going to find a lot.”

It can be recalled that acting USAID Director and Secretary of State Marco Rubio is reportedly downsizing the bureaucratic agency, retaining only 294 of the agency’s 14,000 employees worldwide. This move cuts 97% of USAID’s staff.

“I’ve instructed him to go check the Pentagon, which is the military. Sadly, you’ll find some things that are pretty bad. But I don’t think, proportionately, you’re going to see anything like we just saw,” Trump said.

[…]

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/02/breaking-trump-directs-elon-musks-doge-team-conduct/

By Michael Schwarz

Affluent liberals’ purported compassion bears a striking resemblance to self-interest.

In fact, like their 19th-century forebears, modern Democrats seem to fancy themselves benefactors to those whom they exploit.

According to the New York Post, police officials in the upscale village of East Hampton on New York’s Long Island have assured wealthy residents that local police cannot cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in detaining and deporting the illegal immigrants upon whom those residents rely for domestic service.

“If it is an ICE detainer or an administrative warrant, we do not have the authority. We will not hold them,” East Hampton Village Police Chief Jeffrey Erickson said at a community meeting on Tuesday.

East Hampton Town Police Chief Michael Sarlo said effectively the same thing at a different meeting.

“Our level of participation and cooperation with ICE lies in criminal matters,” Sarlo said. “I haven’t seen an ICE agent in this town in I can’t tell you how long.”

Sarlo did add, however, that local police do not make a habit of violently confronting armed federal agents.

In other words, police in sanctuary cities cannot assist ICE, but neither do they actively resist ICE’s efforts. Thus, sanctuary cities themselves constitute the real problem here.

Tom Homan, President Donald Trump’s border czar, made that clear last month when he complained that sanctuary cities’ policies make ICE agents’ jobs exponentially more dangerous.

East Hampton’s affluent liberals, however, could not care less about ICE agents’ safety or about federal immigration laws. After all, those liberals need cheap maids and landscapers.

“I think it’s a very good idea and very helpful considering we have a very large community here, and people rely on them,” East Hampton resident Alex Lovett said.

According to Zillow, the average home price in East Hampton is $1.92 million.

Meanwhile, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, that wealthy enclave nonetheless maintains a poverty rate of 11.5 percent. How many of those impoverished people work as maids and landscapers?

Of course, Democrats have given no indication that they feel any shame about the slave-like wages they pay their domestic servants.

In fact, they talk openly about how much they need illegal immigrants to pick berries for their fruity drinks.

[…]

Via https://www.westernjournal.com/modern-slavery-wealthy-new-yorkers-beg-police-not-turn-cheap-illegal-servants/

John Shipton

The Assange Story

RT (2020)

Film Review

https://en.rtdoc.tv/films/206-the-assange-story

Mainly based on interviews with Assange’s father antiwar activist John Shipton, this 2020 documentary provides the first comprehensive biography on Julian Assange I’ve seen.

Julian grew up in Melbourne Australia, which in the late eighties and early nineties was the Australian center for international hackers and “experimenters.” As a teenager, Assange and his friends spend most of their spare time trading hacking programs. In 1989, the Melbourne hacking syndicate broke into the NASA computer and infected it with a “wank worm” containing a message about warmongering. The breach would force NASA to postpone a shuttle launch.

By 2006, Assange was less interested in hacking than in material he discovered on-line related to constant lies the US and other governments told the public. The same year he and hacking friends founded Wikileaks, using the Tor* server as an anonymizer for government whistleblowers to share embarrassing documents. The first leaks Wikileaks made public concerned Somali government malfeasance. In 2009, they exposed the Climategate emails revealing climate scientists were faking data about global warming.

In 2010, Wikileaks made world headlines after they published the Collateral Murder video. Shot by US troops from an Apache helicopter gun-sight, it clearly shows the deliberate unprovoked killing of 12-18 Iraqis civilians, including a Reuters journalist, his rescuers and two young children.

Wikileaks’ next major leak concerned monitoring by US intelligence of all private gmail, iPhone and Blackberry communications.

On November 28 2010, Wikileaks shared their third major leak, consisting of 400,000 classified cables from 2001-2009 about the US coverup of Iraqi civilian deaths, torture of Iraqi prisoners and child prostitution. The New York Times, the Guardian and Der Spiegel eagerly collaborated with them in releasing this explosive material.

Although Wikileaks offered the Obama White House the opportunity (which they declined) to review the logs before they were published, Obama immediately accused Wikileaks of endangering Afghans who helped US occupying forces in Afghanistan. On November 30, Interpol issued an Interpol Red Notice for Assange’s arrest for sexual assaults that allegedly occurred in Sweden mid-August.** He was arrested in Britain, having left Sweden after the Swedish prosecutor assured his lawyer there were no arrest charges against him.

In May 2012 after losing his Supreme Court appeal against extradition to Sweden (based on fears Sweden would extradite him to the US where he potentially faced the death penalty), Assange was granted asylum in London’s Ecuadoran embassy.

He spent the next eight years in the tiny Ecuadoran embassy (a three-bedroom apartment), confined to a single room and foregoing access to sunlight or dental or medical care. Wikileaks continued to operate from the Ecuadoran embassy, releasing another high profile leak in 2016, of DNC emails regarding a deliberate Democratic Party conspiracy to sabotage Bernie Sanders primary campaign.

Six years into his stay, Ecuador elected a pro-US government, and the new president Lenin Moreno did everything he could to force Assange to leave voluntarily. This included denying him access to his lawyers and razors, searching his visitors, putting surveillance cameras in his room and periodically neglecting to provide food and toilet paper. They Ecuadoran government also released media stories about Assange being messy, having poor hygiene and smearing feces on the walls. After 18 months, the Ecuadoran government allowed British police into the embassy (which is sovereign Ecuadoran territory under international law) to arrest him.

The US immediately filed for his extradition on espionage charges, but the UK forced him to serve his 11 month sentence first for breaching his parole.

Afternote: During his 2022 extradition trial and subsequent appeals, Assange was confined to Belmarsh high security prison, where he was denied Internet and telephone and forbidden to fraternize with other prisoners.

In June 2024 he was finally released from prison after pleading guilty to a single charge of “conspiracy to obtain and disclose classified US defense documents.” He was released at a hearing in the US District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, and from there flew home to Australia.***

*Tor is a free overlay network for enabling anonymous communication. Built on free and open-source software and more than seven thousand volunteer-operated relays, users can have their Internet traffic routed via a random path through the network

**See Sex Lies and Julian Assange

***See Assange is Free: Wikileaks Founder Freed in Deal with US

Criminal migrants arriving at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba on Feb. 4, 2025. US Department of Defense/AFP via Getty Images

By Jennie Taer and Chris Nesi

A second deportation flight carrying 13 Venezuelan gang members wanted for a range of violent crimes departed El Paso, Texas, for Guantanamo Bay in Cuba Thursday.

The flight roster includes a Tren de Aragua gang member who committed a homicide and another who admitted he is wanted in Venezuela for escaping from jail, aggravated robbery with a weapon and intent to commit homicide, according to a Homeland Security official.

Other offenses the migrants are accused of include possession of dangerous drugs, robbery, assault, fraud and entering the US illegally, the official said.

The flight comes 48 hours after the first such planeload, which left Fort Bliss, Texas, Tuesday carrying about a dozen “highly dangerous” illegal migrants, including 10 Tren de Aragua gangbangers.

The prison complex located in the south of Cuba became known for housing notorious criminals including 9/11 plotters, and has been newly repurposed to house criminal migrants as part of President Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration.

[…]

https://nypost.com/2025/02/06/us-news/second-group-of-migrant-criminals-including-one-tren-de-aragua-killer-sent-to-guantanamo-bay/

By Jefferey Jaxen

The recent Telegraph headline rang out of England recently with unsettling tones: Tenth of farmland to be axed for net zero

More than 10 per cent of farmland in England is set to be diverted towards helping to achieve net zero and protecting wildlife by 2050, the Environment Secretary will reveal on Friday.

Swathes of the countryside are on course to be switched to solar farms, tree planting and improving habitats for birds, insects and fish.

The move comes on the back of an aggressive and highly unpopular inheritance tax placed on generational farmers by British politician Rachel Reeves that has drawn sustained protest in the country. The commercial officer of Britain’s largest supermarket chain Tesco warned Reeves’ tax raid on farmers is placing “UK’s future food security is at stake.”

What if that’s the whole point? Tucker Carlson recently asked Piers Morgan this uncomfortable question.

Morgan refused to let his mind go there. And for good reason. It’s a dark premise. Yet one with historical context that must be analyzed due to the aggressive moves now in play against farmers around the world and humanity at large.

The British East India Company was the early template for the modern mega-corporate monopoly, globalization & vehicle to expand colonial power. Eventually dominating trade between Indian and Britain and far beyond. To say the company’s practices were ruthless would be putting it lightly.

Thomas Malthus was the East India Company’s first economist training individuals for service as administrators for the organization. Malthus was also a eugenicist in the economic wheelhouse of the world’s largest corporate monopoly with its own private army.

He wrote the following in his 1798 Essay on the Principle of Population:

The power of population is so superior to the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction; and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague, advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and ten thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world. 

Eugenicists aren’t picky. Whatever gets people off the planet en masse – they’re into. Notice his last sentence, when bases are loaded and “success be still incomplete,” it’s the famine that is the preferred home run hitter – the weapon of choice.

In the 1860s, the full weight of the East India Company’s monopoly helped kill off India’s economy of textile industries putting countless out of work and forcing them into agriculture. This, in turn, made the Indian economy much more dependent on the whims of seasonal monsoons as dry seasons gripped the country.

The Indian and British press carried reports of rising prices, dwindling grain reserves, and the desperation of peasants no longer able to afford rice.

All of this did little to stir the colonial administration into action. In the mid-19th Century, it was common economic wisdom that government intervention in famines was unnecessary and even harmful. The market would restore a proper balance. Any excess deaths, according to Malthusian principles, were nature’s way of responding to overpopulation. 

-BBC

The current overlay argument government, NGOs, and global bodies like the United Nations are using to interrupt farming during present day is because of ‘net zero’ goals.

[See video below on the origin of the ‘climate crisis’ narrative highlighting the Club of Rome’s hand in crafting the modern day operation.]

Cows create greenhouse gases, carbon emissions from fertilizers, destruction of wildlife, and people themselves are all, we are told to believe, BIG negatives for the earth. Therefore they must be reduced.

Not in an orderly way, but as fast as possible because we’re told change in climate is the biggest, world-ending threat humans face – or something like that.

The United Nations [think Agenda 2030, Paris Agreement] has been the prime mover, policy-shaping action arm to accomplish this ‘net zero’ utopia. Enter Julian Huxley.

Huxley emerges after World War 2 as a crucial bridging figure from what has been referred to as “old eugenics” [Malthus] to a new eugenics based on molecular biology and human evolution.

In 1945 as World War 2 was ending, the United Nations was founded in New York. That same year, the United Nations Conference for the Establishment of an Education and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) was also founded in London with Julian Huxley becoming the first Director-General.

One year later Huxley wrote UNESCO ITS PURPOSE AND ITS PHILOSOPHY stating:

At the moment, it is probable that the indirect effect of civilisation is dysgenic instead of eugenic; and in any case it seems likely that the dead weight of genetic stupidity, physical weakness, mental instability, and disease-proneness, which already exist in the human species, will prove too great a burden for real progress to be achieved. Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for Unesco to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable. 

As it appears we are now in the home stretch of the environmental overlay of modern-day eugenics, the consensus-building and subtle messaging are being done away with.

A 2022 research article published in the journal Social Studies of Science titled Environmental Malthusianism and Demography writes:

Some bioethicists argue that, because ‘we are threatened with more population than the planet can bear’, humans simply ‘don’t have a right to more than one biological child’ (Conly, 2016: 2). Some recommend that governments act to uphold this limit (Hickey et al., 2016). Even feminist historians and sociologists of science, including some sharp critics of the population control projects of the late 20th century, now call for measures to reduce childbearing as a means of combatting climate change. Environmental Malthusianism, the idea that human population growth is the primary driver of environmental harms and population control a prerequisite to environmental protection, is experiencing a resurgence.

[…[

Via https://brownstone.org/articles/the-real-purpose-of-net-zero/