The CFR on China

Crocodile Tears

Amusing to see Our Masters — the real ones, not the puppets running around in Washington with an R or D after their name — discuss the doom of another nation.

You can listen in vain for information on what the Council of Foreign Relations recommended for China, in the 1970s and 1980s.

When making the right decision would have actually mattered.

As opposed to their crocodile tears today.

[Rushdoony] A very good question. Why are not these groups against killing unborn babies? Why do they not make a like protest against what has been happening in Red China, and Red Russia? The answer is, they are very silent on those issues. They have a sympathy for criminals, but not for innocent unborn babies, or for the victims of communism.

Humanism seems to like the power to take life, and to declare that: “We will establish our moral standards, and make our judgments in terms of them.” As a result, they ask us to bleed for baby seals, but not for unborn babies. There is a monstrous perversion of values in the attitude of humanists. Yes? 

[Audience Member] Are they self-consciously aware of that dichotomy?

[Rushdoony] Are they self consciously aware of what?

[Audience Member] Are they self consciously aware of the dichotomy, of the contradiction?

[Rushdoony] It is pointed out to them regularly, whenever there is a debate. But what their answer usually is, is that: “Well, we have a critical problem of over-population, so we are trying to improve the quality of life for those who live.” We are funding, after all are we not, the aborting of all beyond the first baby in Red China. U.S. funds are going towards that. Which means that we favor it, ultimately, here.

All this involves playing God. This is the most important thing. It is the number one goal of humanistic man. Sartre was right, “Man is a being whose passion is to be God.” Fallen man, that is.

[Audience Member] In China, you are speaking of forced abortion after the first baby, correct?

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Audience Member] Wasn’t Otto speaking not so much of abortion as the criminal and the victim?

[Rushdoony] Yes, but it is a part and a parcel of the same thing. They have no concern for the innocent, or the victims of murder, but for the murderer. At every point, their sympathy is with the criminal. This is why only a few states have been able to get any kind of legislation providing restitution for victims; but it is very easy to arouse people in favor of criminals.

Rushdoony Dr. R.J.R, The POwer to Kill

Also: listen to the strenuous desire to separate the birth of children from the intact family. The natural family is far more a greater enemy for the CFR types than Communism will ever be.

As can be seen by the destruction of both the Soviet Union and Red China.

Long after the Commies are just memories, the Right Sort will still hate believing Christians.1

Choosing Death

If you look into the records, you will find that the USSR legalized abortion in the early 1970s — actually, 1970, if I have it correct —

No, I have it wrong.

On November 18, 1920, Soviet Russia became the first country to legalize abortion, marking the beginning of the legal killing of children in-utero worldwide.


The Soviet Union realized the availability of abortion and birth control would have an alarming effect on the country’s birth rate. These growing concerns about population growth prompted the creation of a 1936 draft law which made abortion illegal again. However, the general feeling among the population was that women should have the right to limit the number of children in their household because of societal conditions at the time. It was also argued that women needed abortions so they could work or attend school. 


The abortion prohibition in Russia lasted for 19 years. The government took measures during this time to encourage family stability by increasing women’s access to resources and strengthening their divorce laws. During this time, Soviet Russia would describe abortion as a “remnant of a capitalistic consciousness among the less enlightened members of society.” 

100 years ago, Soviet Russia legalized abortion. Here’s what we learned from it.
By Samantha Kamman

I like that paragraph about “abortion as a’remnant of a capitalistic consciousness'”.

These people lie like a rug, don’t they?

To continue, but from Wikipedia:

After Stalin’s death in 1953, the Soviet government revoked the 1936 laws[23] and issued a new law on abortion.[24] The decree stated that “measures carried out by the Soviet state to encourage motherhood and protect infancy, as well as the uninterrupted growth of the consciousness and culturedness of women,” allowed for the change in policy. The language of the decree implied that most women would choose motherhood over abortion and that preventing abortion remained a goal of the government, as it was still encouraging population growth.[24]

During the late 1950s and 1960s, it is estimated that the Soviet Union had some of the highest abortion rates in the world. The abortion rate during this period is not known for sure, because the Soviet Union did not start releasing abortion statistics until perestroika. The best estimates, which are based on surveys of medical professionals during this time, say that about 6 to 7 million abortions were performed per year.[25]


If the abortion rates of this survey are taken to be representative, then during this period the number of annual abortions was higher than the number of live births. This would also mean that the abortion rates in the Soviet Union were the highest of any in the world at that time. By the end of the Brezhnev era in 1982, Soviet birthrates hovered just at or below replacement level except in the Muslim-majority Central Asian republics.[26]

Wikipedia, Abortion in Russia

In the Soviet Union, and in Russia today, abortion is just another kind of birth control.

Well, white Russians anyways.

Muslims, having a different Lord, followed different laws (regardless of the babble of the Party): and their reward is independence today, and a future tomorrow.

Red China preferred a more aggressive form of centralized mass murder of the innocent, and have received their fitting reward as well.

(With just a little help from their Progressive American friends. Delivered with a smile.)

Well, some nations choose death.

We believing Christians had better choose life, as our Lord demands.

(And we had better keep our distance from those smiling, helpful, friendly Progressives, too!)

1But if we do our job, the contempt of Our Betters will dwindle into just relentless weak, pitiful whines.

The future does not belong to those who hate it.

Surprise, surprise.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.