Gary Anderson Blog | Conspiracy! Self Driving Cars And Culling The Human Population | Talkmarkets
Muckraker of the Financial System

The Fed knew about the housing bubble before it burst but lied and said they didn't: Bill HR 1424 to buy bad paper (eventually called TARP) was introduced in March 9, 2007, before there began to be bad commercial paper from private subprime RE loans, in August.

I have ... more

Conspiracy! Self Driving Cars And Culling The Human Population

Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 9:44 PM EST

Update. Central to this article was the idea that Elon Musk and/or his contemporaries showed an interest in using self driving cars both to control the movement of the population and to cull unnecessary people from the face of the earth. This does not mean that Musk or his technological cohorts have the power to facilitate this radical change. There is no direct evidence that Musk has engaged in the communication spoken of here. The article was written to point out that there is talk about culling the population and talk about eliminating personal freedom with self driving cars and evidence there is some communication between some of these parties.

But certainly, when Musk said that the self driving car would result in a ban on manually driven cars, it raised red flags. Well, it was not a one off, as Musk has again in November of 2015 said a similar thing, that the manually driven car will go the way of the horse.

The disturbing talk continues from Musk. How this destruction of the gasoline powered car and the manually driven car will fuse with the futurists and eugenicists is yet to be determined, but they have more hope for their evil plans than they have ever had previously.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a conspiracy of Futurists brewing. It has been brewing for quite some time, with the publication in 1968 of Paul Ehrlich's book, The Population Bomb. Fear of population growth, coupled with fear that economic growth could not keep up, has been played out in the years since the book was published.

The world has doubled in population since the book, and debt no longer causes big growth in GDP, especially since wage growth has stopped dead in its tracks. All the constant drone of these facts makes us believe that those Futurists must be right. And with the advent of self driving cars, it is estimated that a sharing society will allow for most cars to be taken off the road, which will result in the need for cars and fewer people.

Of course, that technology would decimate all the oil nations in the world, insurance companies, and jobs that depend on the manually driven auto. Eventually, as the Economist recently pitched, self driving cars would save lives, manually driven cars would be outlawed in many places, and ultimately make the employment usefulness of many people suddenly not so useful.

One wonders where the then "useless" permanently unemployed people would get the money to share the self driving vehicles. Maybe they would get a stipend until they withered away. Who knows?

By the way, that economist article was a What If article, being futuristic and pitching self driving cars at the same time. Big money is fusing these two schools. There can be no doubt.

The unnerving thing about all this is that the self driving people and the Futurists are even conferencing together. I found one example of them planning or showing interest to conference together awhile back. Natural Capitalism Solutions, a think tank in Colorado, had on its interest list the inventor of the self driving car, and Futurists.

The project was called An Economy in Service to Life. R. Buckminster "Bucky" Fuller was quoted in the about section. They knew him as Bucky. That is just creepy to me. There is no technology that meets "Bucky's" standards more than a self driving car, doing "more with less". Makes you shudder in horror, or ought to.

1 2 3 4
View single page >> |
Disclaimer: This and other personal blog posts are not reviewed, monitored or endorsed by TalkMarkets. The content is solely the view of the author and TalkMarkets is not responsible for the content of this post in any way. Our curated content which is handpicked by our editorial team may be viewed here.

Comments

Leave a comment to automatically be entered into our contest to win a free Echo Show.
Dick Kaplan 5 years ago Member's comment

Fascinating, but if I understand correctly, your entire argument hinges on the assumption that self-driving cars will make many people irrelevant. But why?

It just means that people will be in the backseat or passenger seat instead of the driver's seat. The only people who may not be around are taxi drivers, and even some of them may prefer to stick around for the ride. And if not, they won't be the first profession to disappear and be replaced with something else.

Or am I missing the crux of your article?

Gary Anderson 5 years ago Author's comment

Hi Dick, I did not develop that thought. I only took the assumption from two points. First, oil producing nations would no longer produce oil. Those people would become unneeded. Then also, people point to the expense of owning a vehicle. Self driving vehicles would, I assume, be much more expensive than regular vehicles, hence the ride sharing would make less vehicles needed. There are other issues there, so I will look into it more. I hope others do as well.

Alexis Renault 5 years ago Member's comment

Interesting article but "conspiracy" is such a dirty word and I'm not convinced.

Gary Anderson 5 years ago Author's comment

We only see glimpses, Alexis. We can only form circumstantial evidence based on bits and pieces. You could be right, but when Musk says it will be illegal to drive your own car and the Google self driving fellow indicates interest in a conference cosponsored by the Club of Rome, you just have to wonder.