The Jaffe memo, pictured above (source), is a table constructed from measures proposed by the eugenics movement in 1969. The proposals were never intended to be made public.
A word about the eugenics movement: people today are largely unaware of it. Those that are aware of it mostly seem to be under the impression that it’s no longer a significant factor in world events.
Eugenics came about in light of the Darwinian theory of evolution, and it was embraced by racist people because it provided a scientific basis for their racist tendencies. The earlier 20th century saw much of the world’s races proclaiming themselves the best.
After WW2, eugenics became highly unpopular. This had much to do with the fact that Hitler and his party of National Socialists took the idea to extremes, and became world famous for his inhuman behavior.
The popular perception today is that eugenics was defeated, and that the world has not looked back, since. In reality, ideas are nearly impossible to destroy, no matter how much they deserve it. In reality, eugenics was driven underground, resuming its dark designs outside of the public eye.
Among the beliefs of eugenics is that there is getting to be too many human beings, which is why the Jaffe memo above calls for measures to discourage people from procreating as abundantly.
At one point, the eugenics movement went crazy with the compulsory sterilization of those whom they deemed unfit. Today, it seems they are more about deterring family plans. This can sometimes have the appearance of allowing people to make their choices voluntarily, but considering the underhanded methods they have engaged in, it’s easy to see that there is no ethical way to deter family plans.
Let’s look at a few aspects of the memo to see just what ideas they came up with about five decades back. They’ll be interesting to think about considering how many of their plans have already come to fruition.
(Some points may be skipped for brevity.)
Restructure family: a) Postpone or avoid marriage, b) Alter image of ideal family size
Eugenics has declared war on the family, and their misinformation campaign is well underway. It’s easy to see that people are marrying later in life. For eugenics, this is a dream come true, as the result is people skipping their more fertile years.
Also of note is that their intent to restructure the public perception of the ideal family size. Traditionally, a larger family has been viewed as a blessing. In a sense, eugenics wishes to prop itself up, making themselves out to be gods, restructuring families as they wish, and taking it upon themselves to dictate to us a new set of values.
Compulsory education of children
Like the socialists and communists before them, the eugenics movement knows that children are the key to the future, and if they have your children as a captive audience, they can fill their minds with whatever mashugganah they please, and few would be able to resist or gainsay.
There is a bit of a sobering pause for thought to be had, here. Isn’t the education system highly establishment, these days? And don’t we currently have compulsory education? If the eugenicists did have sway over the education system, just how pervasive are they?
Encourage increased homosexuality
How well do you suppose this went? Homosexuals only make up about 2.5% of the population, but corporations and media are making it seem as though it’s more widespread.
How this would benefit their movement is easy to see, because homosexuals, when allowed to pursue their passions, don’t procreate.
Still, the suggestion that homosexuality can be encouraged, rather than be a natural occurrence in the human genome, appears to suggest that they are aware that it can be the result of external conditioning. It certainly flies in the face of the more cultivated perception.
The Jaffe memo doesn’t say anything about transsexuals, but it’s understandable that some similar principles apply. Interestingly, a transsexual has been appointed to the position of Health Secretary.
Fertility control agents in water supply
Here comes the people who have been pointing at fluoride. But the fact that a similar measure has actually been considered is food for thought.
Encourage women to work
One might wonder how this could possibly limit fertility. This has to do with a couple nuanced points.
For one thing, there’s the more obvious observation that a woman who takes on career pursuits at a young age may end up skipping out on the more fertile years of her life, and might not start a family until a later point when she’d likely have fewer children.
There’s also the point that women are naturally hypergamous, meaning that they tend to marry upward on the social scale. Recent times have seen many women ascend the career ladder, but upon doing so, they find fewer men that they find suitable for themselves.
Modify tax policies: (etc. etc.)
European colonists in America went to war over a tax of about 2 to 3 percent. Today, the federal government chows down on roughly 45% of a person’s income.
A recurring theme among the economic deterrents is the idea of penalizing parents who have children, particularly after a certain number. Today, mere economic difficulty seems to serve as a deterrent to family plans. The mobility of the middle class has long been a vexation of the upper class, but in recent decades, the gap between the upper and middle class has widened to a near-insurmountable chasm.
It’s hard to imagine that eugenics could ask for an approach for population control more effective than ensuring that the middle class joins the ranks of the destitute.
What happened to the middle class might have actually exceeded their expectations. Then there’s the fact that there’s fewer payouts involved when taking the routes of penalties and hardships than to provide incentives. Perhaps they’ve decided on a more cost-effective path.
The effects of depression on reducing a person’s motivation is easy to understand. But what methods would they be considering to induce depression on their intended victims?
Compulsory abortion of out-of-wedlock pregnancies
Compulsory sterilization of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three
Daaaayyyuuuummm… They’re getting into some Hitler territory, there!
What more do I have to say? They’re straight-up saying that some people deserve to procreate more than others, and they want to decide how many children people get.
Confine childbearing to only a limited number of adults
It wouldn’t surprise me if they wanted to carefully select who these people are, based on behavioral, genetic, and idealogical criteria. Or class criteria, for that matter.
One thing we’ve already seen is the one-child rule in communist China. Ted Turner was an outspoken fan of this rule, but Ted Turner himself has had four children.
The idea isn’t to place limitations on the wealthy, it’s to place limitations on you.
Housing policies: a) Discouragement of private home ownership
Millennials are often criticized for their hesitance to buy homes. What’s being overlooked is that economic factors are making home ownership for younger people cost prohibitive.
Older people who already got while the getting was good would do well to know that they’d be unlikely to replicate their previous successes in current conditions. They’d be better off holding on to what they’ve got for as long as they could manage.
No generation has become as heavily educated, and worked with as sharp career focus, just to get less compared to the preceding few generations. Obviously, this means that something is not right.
The eugenicists don’t want you to own your own home. It wouldn’t surprise me if the current housing market was the result of years of meddling by the world’s worst people.
Payments to encourage abortions
If you don’t have to have it explained to you why moral people would find rewarded abortions infuriating, you’re likely a moral person, yourself. Note the implication that abortions are so important to eugenicists that they actually considered paying people to undergo the procedure.
Eugenics, like abortion, is about murder. It’s about deciding who lives and who dies, hidden behind a veneer of civility. When the blood is hidden from the sight of ordinary people, it’s easy for them to pretend it’s not happening. But those who do the murder also kill an important aspect of themselves: their humanity.
Because humanity would not approve of what they’re doing, it’s easy to see why they’d desire to reshape humanity according to their own image.
In five decade’s time, a lot has happened. Obviously, the plan is a lot further along. In some ways, it has taken on different directions, and achieved successes that the original brainstormers hadn’t anticipated. Of course, the Jaffe memo is dated, what with it going back five decades. It stands to reason that the orchestrators behind the original memo have since revised their plans, in light of changing conditions.
But now that you’re aware of this memo, what do you think? Does it provide a surprising explanation for the direction of certain societal trends? Or perhaps you might be skeptical about it. Not everyone finds it easy to accept that a group of people like the eugenicists could have such a pronounced impact on society, though it seems they may have been more pronounced than we gave them credit for.
Personally, I think it reveals some possible motivations behind certain influential people whose decisions may initially seem to make no sense. If a “leader” makes a choice that might result in undesirable consequences, it’s possible that they might be undesirable for you by design.
Now, we fight back.