A future is being molded through rapid technological developement sold as progress, but is really just a hi-tech form of captivity for the human race who will eventually be phased out.
Autonomous robots will fill the industrial vacuum to forment the new paradise.
The gradual transformation, the subtle withdrawal from the theoretical premise of empowering the individual through the application of classical liberalism to the reduction of dignity implemented through the technocrat agenda.
The plan is transparent enough if one is informed about the world around them. It is apparent that a soft kill operation is being implemented against humanity by the elites.
Some highly respected individuals openly call for the mass murder of humans with the enthusiastic applause of brain dead acolytes; Dr. Pianka, a man who prays for the demise of humanity is an example of how the academic community has sunk into the swampy trenches of depraved wild-eyed lunacy.
Symptoms of this condition are trading liberties for tyrannies and the clever illusory bait and switch technique causes it to appear like more freedoms are gained in the process.
‘Reproductive rights’ has become a new form of gender discrimination–the statement may sound weird because, for many it contradicts the ”progressive” programming installed from an early age, but take an example of the new ”pro choice” legislation:
Recent court rulings in the UK suggest that it is a woman’s right to abort a pregnancy based on the gender of the child. This is the reemergence of sexism, a ”progressive” move for the eugenicists, an additional justification for infanticide.
Corporate controlled media portrays anti abortion advocates as violent clinic bombing extremists; but consider the concept of a truly moral society that rejects killing in any circumstance, save self defense gets ignored and it begs the question of the morality of a people in a free and open society, should they be grappling with questions of murdering their fellow humans—finding ways to rationalize situations where it is acceptable? Or should they acknowledge it is wrong all the time?
The opposition always brings up incest and rape, which are bad, there is absolutely no question, but these are cases where the decadent collective project their deranged concepts onto the innocent unborn child and the question of adoption is neglected almost altogether in favor of a rationalization for murdering children—this is not attempt to minimize the pain inflicted upon the victim of the incest or rape, but the situation has been used to justify the reduction of significance of an infant’s life, it is a way to cause people to react emotionally rather than rationally.
The cases where abortions are needed for incest and rape are actually very rare, according to the New York times these incidents account for only 1% of the 1.6 million abortions every year.
Pro life/pro choice—all a load of semantic garbage; people are easily controlled through incessant distractions via linguistics. People respond easily through emotional stimuli. It is easy to manipulate this issue, convincing people they are receiving a new form of freedom, progressing from their former tyranny.
The classical way to win an argument by changing what it is about, in this case, it has been changed from infanticide to a right to choose. One good way to gauge how far off their rocker some of these eugenicist disciples of Margaret Sanger are is to remember that even Anton LaVey, the founder of the Church of Satan was against abortion because it desecrated the sanctity of life.
The sanctity of life has become such a taboo concept from the indoctrination of the public to believe that humans are parasitic creatures destroying the earth with their sinful ”carbon footprint” which can only be atoned for with the purchase of ”carbon credits”, and feeling appropriately guilty.
The collapse of industrial society will not come because of the collective failure of humanity, but because of an orchestrated coup against freedom, a greedy elite’s desire to destroy the very thing that threatens their power monopoly, the individual endowed with inalienable rights.