Transcript for 11/8/24: 4B – ANOTHER DEPOPULATION AGENDA

During this election, women overwhelmingly supported Kamala Harris and men overwhelmingly supported Donald Trump. 

While the media has been left in shambles over the vote -- there are a few oddities that need to be addressed and some of them are being pushed through quickly before the month of January.

There seems to be this organized revolt against men called 4B which is being called a sex strike -- because of the outcome of the election.

Some liberal women have decided that it is time for a nationwide sex strike in order to punish men for voting for Trump. Yes, they are quite serious about this.

The women that are going on strike are taking inspiration from the "4B movement" in South Korea...

In short, the 4B movement is a vow to swear off men. It is called the 4B movement because in Korean, the four tenets each begin with bi, which means no, according to a paper published by two South Korean researchers at Yonsei University's Institute of Humanities.

Apparently there are four primary pillars of the "4B movement"...

No marriage (Bihon): Advocates believe marriage often limits a woman's independence, as it traditionally assigns her the role of caregiver and homemaker.

No childbearing (Bichulsan): This principle opposes the societal expectation for women to bear and raise children, arguing that motherhood can trap women in lifelong caregiving roles.

No dating (Biyonae): The 4B Movement views dating as reinforcing male-centered dating norms and pressures that can compromise a woman's autonomy and emotional well-being.

No close relationships with men (Biyeonae): The movement encourages women to form supportive, empowering friendships with other women rather than depend on male companionship.

Since the 4B movement began, the fertility rate in South Korea has fallen dramatically, and it is now the lowest in the entire industrialized world.

In fact, it is being projected that the population of South Korea could be cut in half by the end of this century if current trends continue.

So this type of thinking has had a dramatic impact on population.

If it picks up momentum it could again threaten the future population of our country. 

In addition to South Korea, major sex strikes have been instituted in many other countries around the world in recent years.

Sex strikes are a form of protest more widespread than the 4B movement, have taken place in countries around the world including Colombia, Kenya, Liberia, Italy, the Philippines, South Sudan and Togo.

Apparently, many women consider the complete rejection of all men to be a radical form of "female empowerment".

While the 4B Movement may seem radical to some, it emphasizes a message of female empowerment through non-conformity and a rejection of prescribed gender roles. For many women in the U.S. and abroad, it represents a way to prioritize self-determination, foster communities with other women, and question societal norms around marriage and motherhood.

Can you imagine what would happen if all men and all women decided to embrace this type of ideology?

We would have no marriages, no families, no children and no future.

It is literally a suicidal ideology.

A lot of women that supported Harris are absolutely determined to exercise their power any way that they can. On TikTok, large numbers of young liberal women are posting videos in which they pledge to be celibate.

Apparently, the issue of abortion is motivating a lot of these young women to embrace the 4B movement, and some of them are promising to abstain from sex until a new president is elected in 2028.

So what happens if a Republican is elected in 2028? 

Will these young women remain celibate until 2032?

Well, as I say -- timing seems to be everything, it seems-- there may be more to this crazy 4B movement.

A few weeks ago, a statement was made by The Climate Governance Commission at the UN General Assembly High-Level Week & Climate Week.

The commission, which includes the current president of the Club of Rome, Sandrine Dixson-Declève, and Johan Rockström, paints a bleak picture of the future.

The world faces a deepening planetary emergency – and is on a reckless path toward catastrophic climate change – having already over-stepped six of nine scientifically-identified planetary boundaries. 

A continued failure to address the underlying causes of this emergency – such as fossil fuel-based economies, resource waste/overconsumption and the destruction of nature – will have further devastating effects for all of humanity, triggering potentially irreversible tipping points, with dangerous consequences for planetary stability, both social and ecological. A system-wide approach to solving the climate crisis is required now, ensuring reliable climate and planetary boundary governance for the Earth as a whole.

Due to these alleged crises, the commission recommends “bold and concrete steps to catalyze a shift in global governance” in their forthcoming report Governing Our Planetary Emergency, which will be released in conjunction with the climate summit in Dubai Monday November 11th, 2024.

The Climate Governance Commission was founded by the Swedish Global Challenges Foundation at the UN75 Global Governance Forum, September 16 & 17 2020, and is led by former Irish President Mary Robinson from The Elders and Club of Madrid with Johan Rockström and the former President of the UN General Assembly María Fernanda Espinosa as co-chairs. Supporters include Club of Madrid, Stimson Center and The Rockefeller Foundation.

They CGC state that the “global governance system is ill-equipped to deal with our planetary emergency, which now encompasses the “polycrisis” including, for example, international conflict, financial instability, global inequality, population control and pandemic risks.

The platform has stated that we have over-stepped our planetary boundaries. Meaning that we are overpopulated, and we are depleting resources.

Their strategic priorities are to change minds, actions and systems in order to safeguard the global commons and “regaining planetary stability”. They are ready to act swiftly when an emergency is declared.

By 2025, the true magnitude of the multifaceted transformations we need to safeguard the global commons will be well understood. Key actors will know what they need to do, where things are most urgent, and be taking action that sparks and sustains transformational change in order to protect the global commons.

The UNA Environment and Development Conference submitted their views on the matter by stating:

The security council of the UN, led by the Anglo-Saxon Major Nation Powers, will decree that henceforth, the Security Council will inform all nations that its sufferance on population has ended, that all nations have quotas for REDUCTION on a yearly basis, which will be enforced by the Security Council’ by selective or total embargo of credit, items of trade including food and medicine, or by military force, when required.

This has now been rebranded as carbon footprint reduction.

The climate crisis has always been an excuse for depopulation agendas.

In the academic journal known as “Social Theory and Practice” a memo entitled “Population Engineering and the Fight against Climate Change” by Colin Hickey, Travis N. Rieder, and Jake Earl states clearly the objective of the Powers that be and their agenda of population engineering and what it means to everybody.

In the published memo it states:

“There are two important considerations that favor including population engineering as part of the global policy response to the threat of dangerous climate change. First, the current consensus approach to mitigating climate change, which does not include population engineering, falls short of offering a clear and reasonably certain pathway to avoiding dangerous climate change. Second, reducing global population growth over the next century would have a truly massive effect on global Green house Gas emissions.”

Furthermore it says:

“While reducing fertility in developing nations is important, since their per capita GHG emissions are projected to increase significantly (and should be allowed to do so) over the next several decades, it is not nearly as critical as near-term reductions in the numbers of the world’s wealthy. Although it would be difficult to lower the fertility rate in the United States from 1.9 to, say, 1.4, such a reduction would have a massive impact on both near-term and long-term global GHG emissions—much more even than proportionally larger fertility reductions in sub-Saharan Africa.

But this raises a question: Why bother to reduce fertility in developing nations at all?

If the United States and other developed nations are the real problem, then our efforts, surely, ought to focus exclusively on reducing their numbers. But this is also too simplistic. Many of the world’s poor are becoming richer, and all of the rest ought to become richer. That is, it is both descriptively true that many of the world’s poor will have higher per capita GHG emissions as a result of economic development over the next century, and normatively true that they ought to be allowed to develop this way.47 But the details concerning climate change and demographics in the previous sections make clear that Earth cannot sustain a significantly larger population of wealthier individuals.”

And finally the way to intervene is to use coercion or change the cultural norms regarding having healthy and happy families.

“Sitting to the right of choice-enhancing interventions on the coercion spectrum is a category of interventions aimed at adjusting preferences to encourage people to have fewer children. The policies in this category work by changing cultural norms and influencing individuals’ beliefs and desires, with the ultimate goal of changing procreative behaviors in the direction of lower fertility. These changes could be achieved through mass media such as radio and TV content, billboards, poster campaigns, leaflet distribution, folk theater or other artist sponsorship, campaigns or assemblies in public schools, funding for public lectures, etc.”

There is more, but it is very terrifying; what is equally terrifying is that it appears this agenda is underway, not only do they want fertility rates to plummet, but our life expectancy is also plummeting.

As you can probably tell, the 4B agenda is again another plot to depopulate the planet. This is also why the abortion agenda is such an important issue with those who believe in Eugenics programs to curb the population.

What is most chilling is that this is certainly a reminder that in the book 1984 by George Orwell O'Brien tells Winston that the goal of the globalist party is to abolish the orgasm. This also can be applied to what is mistakenly called gender affirming –because it is well known that children who undergo transition will never attain sexual satisfaction – rendering their orgasm to zero.

It is just one more indication that in the future the world order will establish a science dictatorship – that was first indicated on the Georgia Guidestones.

“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

Guide reproduction wisely – improving fitness and diversity.”

These ideas again create a Eugenics ideal that warrants fear and a lack of hope – especially in the LGBTQ community.

Calls to the Rainbow Youth Project’s crisis hotline are not just dealing with suicide – but gay and trans teens threatening to commit mass suicide.

They fear that Trump is going to round up Gay and Trans Americans and have them executed – this is mass psychosis that media has bred into the gay community.

Its as if Trump was never President before and that he had a pogrom before in 2016.

Is this how the world dies?

I am astonished at this “holding our breath moment.”

It is also important to note that even though this campaign focused on sexual orientation and abortion – The National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior in the US found that between 2009 and 2018 there was a rise in adolescents reporting no sexual activity (partnered and alone), from 28.8% to 44.2% of young men and from 49.5% to 74% of young women. In one interview, the study’s authors raised several possible contributing factors, including gaming and social media taking time and precedence, more awareness of asexuality as an identity, a decline in alcohol use, an increase in “rough sex” practices such as choking that may be frightening or off-putting to many, and lower incomes.

There seems to be a growing trend among young people who see sexual encounters as off putting.

It can be said that it is the growing trend towards delayed adulthood. 

Individuals might see sex and relationships as distractions, or as not having much point until they’ve found stability in other life circumstances. The pressures of studying, establishing a career or saving for a home may take priority. While voluntary celibacy seems less popular among non-religious heterosexual men, some have talked online about intentional celibacy providing more focus for their careers, with sex being a distraction.

While celibacy is for many a positive personal choice, it can also be viewed as the result of, or a reaction against, a messed-up sexual culture, just as some of the second wave feminists chose political lesbianism decades ago. Last year, the “femcel”, or “female involuntary celibate”, went mainstream.

Femcels the opposite of Incels posting in online groups tend to blame their celibacy on the soul-destroying sexual landscape and a society that, for all its hollow talk of “body positivity”, is still obsessed with looks and beauty conventions.

Which brings us full circle to the 4B political celibacy trend. 

Again this is also a body autonomy issue – something that I predicted would become a political movement after the overturning of Roe v wade.

This could very well – be a very effective trend because a lot of women are satisfied with having no sexual relationships at all. They can always to the jobs themselves –and so can men and with Artificial intelligence and hyper reality sexual arousal can be adjusted for more intensity.

Our society puts a lot of emphasis on sex, but it’s not for everyone and conventional sex is being replaced with computer enhanced Onanism.

But can we have human intimacy or is it being replaced? Will women figure out that they do not need men –and what will this do to create a divide amongst the sexes?

You see, that the 4B threat means that we can face a demographic winter. If having children was solely connected to a person’s sexual activity, then college campuses would be centers of population growth.

Obviously, they are not – less people are interested in sex otherwise women wouldn’t be willing to give it up so quickly and go into political celibacy.