2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum"Depopulation should be the highest priority"
of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. Henry Kissinger
Does Secretary Clinton share, or even respect, the world view of Henry Kissinger?
thereismore
(13,326 posts)MineralMan
(146,308 posts)I don't doubt that he said it, but I'd like a source for the quotation.
cali
(114,904 posts)MineralMan
(146,308 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)we all know what that turned out to be. Fuck Kissinger. May he live forever and rot
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)I asked the OP for one, but went and found it myself. It's from a 1974 foreign policy paper apparently.
Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)In the paper I find a discussion of the linkage between population and mineral resources but it makes the unobjectionable point that there will be less demand for minerals if the ultimate stabilization of global population is at a lower level. For the short term, at least, it expressly disclaims any short-term linkage, in the first passage I've boldfaced. Later, in another passage I've boldfaced, it refers to "reduced birth rates", which IMO must happen, in the United States and other developed countries as well as the Third World.
At least through the end of this century, changes in population growth trends will make little difference to total levels of requirements for fuel and other minerals. Those requirements are related much more closely to levels of income and industrial output, leaving the demand for minerals substantially unaffected. In the longer run, a lower ultimate world population (say 8 to 9 billion rather than 12 to 16 billion) would require a lower annual input of depletable resources directly affected by population size as well as a much lower volume of food, forest products, textiles, and other renewable resources.
Whatever may be done to guard against interruptions of supply and to develop domestic alternatives, the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States. {emphasis added}
In your other post you gave a different link (to rense.com), one that purports to be quoting this paper, but I'm dubious. The rense quotation puts the key word "depopulation" in quotation marks, implying verbatim quotation, but I don't find that word in the paper. Furthermore, the site seems quite unreliable. As of this writing, the home page has a box proclaiming that "Every so-called United States District Court within the Union is a pretended court...." and goes on in that vein. Below that is a photo and caption implying, with not much subtlety, that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian. There's a link to the ho-hum lunacy of Holocaust denial, plus one that was new to me: The Boston Marathon bombing was staged and no one actually died. (The Marathon bombing denial page is linked from the site you cited.)
My conclusion: Yes, Kissinger is vile, but he didn't say this particular vile thing. There's been a game of telephone. Someone somewhere along the way made an unfair paraphrase of the paper's recognition of the linkage between population and resource demand. The paraphrase used the term "depopulation" and a later author picked that up as a Kissinger verbatim quotation.
I rec'd this thread as a great revelation of Kissinger's attitude. Now I'm withdrawing my rec. I don't put it past Kissinger to believe what's in the OP but he was probably too crafty to say it.
randome
(34,845 posts)America would be less divided, IMO, if we were a less populous country. As it is, there is too much competition and too much cutting of corners in order to stand out or to get to the top of the ladder.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]
cali
(114,904 posts)it is not less populous. Kissinger's comment is as vile as it gets. It is, if not a call for genocide, close to it. It is shocking. So is
Hillary's invocation of him.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)I doubt she would agree with what he wrote. In fact, I'm sure of that. Perhaps someone will ask her that question. I would not assume that Clinton is in agreement with everything Henry Kissinger ever said or did. That kind of assumption is not warranted.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)And Chile and Cambodia while they're at it.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Wilms
(26,795 posts)But that's what cluster bombs are doing.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)that HRC dropped Henry Kissinger's name lat night