Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More conspiratorial? It is a conspiracy, I said as much and they have too.
Quote:
Michel Rocard or the ethical conspiracy
The Expansion.. November 2002. By Guy Mettan
Guy Mettan, Executive Director of the Swiss Press Club. Article published in the Expansion in November 2002.
At 72, the former French Prime Minister has lost none of his bagout and militant passion. He continues his mandate as an MEP. But above all, alongside Slovenian President Milan Kucan, he led the fight for good global governance. Objective: to create an International Ethical, Political and Scientific College to find solutions to the three major challenges facing humanity today.
…
Exporter of moral criteria
A vast and ambitious program, which does not frighten Michel Rocard, who was visiting Geneva recently to present it. "We are in a plot that we enjoy carrying out. It's a bet. But we are convinced that global regulation will not progress through hard law, by binding treaties, but rather by "soft" law, through open initiatives like this."
…
"In a global ethical project, we must be wary of definitions that are too simple and that only benefit those who established them, we must change the vocabulary, discard narrow morality. And tackle the big fish." This is the deep meaning of what has now been agreed on sustainable development. This concept, established by the Brundtland Commission on the initiative of former United Nations Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar, took twenty years to impose itself in vocabulary. Michel Rocard and his friends intend to implement it quickly.
To successfully advance in solving global problems, we need to develop new methods of thinking, to elaborate new moral and value criteria, and, no doubt, new patterns of behaviour.
Mankind is on the threshold of a new stage in its development. We should not only promote the expansion of its material, scientific, and technical basis, but, what is most important, the formation of new value and humanistic aspirations in human psychology, since wisdom and humaneness are the 'eternal truths' that make the basis of humanity. We need new social, moral, scientific, and ecological concepts, which should be determined by new conditions for the life of mankind today and in the future.
I.T. Frolov Editor-in-Chief, Communist Magazine
WCED Public Hearing Moscow, 6 Dec 1986
&
Quote:
Some unique objects like Lake Baikal and Siberia, the Great Lakes in Africa and North America, are part of our global patrimony. They are some of the absolute values our planet possesses and their significance transcends any national boundaries. We should learn how to foresee their future and how to anticipate the after-effects of large-scale engineering projects.
Since people's interests vary, it cannot be taken for granted that people will accept scholars' recommendations and come to agreement on that score. And their agreement is of special importance in situations where global problems are involved and where the human race as a whole may be threatened with perils generated by the absence of such agreement.
What is needed today is the moulding of a new ethos and new arrangements for building an understanding among people, countries, and regions. And as a first step we should produce new knowledge, concentrate our research efforts on maintaining life on earth, and develop a system distributing and disseminating knowledge and new moral criteria in a way that makes it available to billions of people who inhabit our planet.
Academician N.N. Moiseev
USSR Academy of Sciences
WCED Public Hearing Moscow, 8 Dec 1986
What exactly do they mean “new moral criteria?” You can’t just install “moral criteria” like it’s software.
Quote:
Mao Zedong Meets Richard Nixon
Declassified transcript of the Beijing meeting between
China's leader and America's. It took place in Chairman Mao's living quarters.
February 21, 1972
…
Chairman Mao: Do you have anything to say, Doctor?
Dr. Kissinger: Mr. Chairman, the world situation has also changed dramatically during that period. We've had to learn a great deal. We thought all socialist/communist states were the same phenomenon. We didn't understand until the President came into office the different nature of revolution in China and the way revolution had developed in other socialist states.
First came the mandate from Mao Tse-tung himself: "Ideological reform, first of all the ideological reform of the intellectuals, is one of the most important conditions for a country's all-out complete democratic reform and industrializa-tion." Next, the central ministry of education called together three thousand leading university professors and academic administrators of the Peking-Tientsin area to launch a "study campaign" aimed at "the reform of the teachers' ideology and of higher education." Premier Chou En-lai addressed this group for five hours, spelling out in detail a program for transforming the university into a genuinely "progressive" institution, and stressing such personal reform issues as "stand-point," "attitude," "whom we serve," "problems of thought," "problems of knowledge,"
"problems of democracy," and "crit-
icism and self-criticism." (One of the educators present reported that Chou set a personal example with a self-criticism of his own "social relations.") Then, under Communist guidance, study groups were formed. At the same time, the campaign was given wide publicity in newspapers, magazines, and radio broadcasts; and through organizational work, it spread from the capital city outward, to all universities and intellectual communities throughout China.
Centered in universities (but including all intellectuals, whatever their affiliations), the campaign included everyone from the elderly college president to the newly-admitted freshman student, as "tens of thousands of intellectuals . .. [w-ere] brought to their knees, accusing themselves relentlessly at tens of thousands of meetings and in tens of millions of written words."4 This was the campaign's harvest: a flood of self-castigation from China's most learned men, public confessions which became a prominent feature in the country's press during the next few months, and on repeated occasions from then on. Combining personal anecdote, philosophical sophistication, and stereotyped jargon, the confessions followed a consistent pattern: first, the denunciation of one's past-of personal immorality and erroneous views; then a description of the way in which one was changing all of this under Communist guidance; and finally, a humble expression of remaining defects and a pledge to work hard at overcoming them with the help of progressive colleagues and Party mem-
bers.
Distinguished scholars denounced careers that had brought them international fame, and expressed the desire to begin over again in their work and in their lives. One prominent feature (also present in the case histories) was the professor's public humiliation before his own students: a professor of law, for instance, in making his confession before a large meeting of undergraduates, addressed them as "fellow students," went on to thank them for their suggestions and to promise to adhere to these "in the most minute detail so that I can improve myself," then closed with the pledge "to be your pupil and to learn from you." (These confessions must be read to appreciate their full flavor; the published confession of a Har-vard-trained professor of philosophy, made at a leading university in Peking, appears in the Appendix, page 473.) While much of the content of these documents seems ritualistic and unconvincing, my Western subjects made it clear that even such expressions are by no means free of emotional involvement, and reflect pressures of immense magnitude. Students outdid their professors in reform enthusiasms.
Tribune of Geneva. March 7, 2012. By Alain Jourdan.
The former French Prime Minister was in Geneva yesterday to relay the call of the Collegium International.
Michel Rocard was alongside Stéphane Hessel yesterday in Geneva to present the "Call for solidarity and responsible global governance" written by the Collegium International. It is a synthesis of a very dense reflection conducted by intellectuals and former political leaders who have come to the conclusion that a "process of metamorphosis" must be initiated towards a "global community".
"I am aware that talking about global governance at the moment is incongruous," admits the former French Prime Minister. "But don't take us for idle dreamers who don't know how to fight," he warned. The Collegium International, of which it is the voice, advocates, among other things, the parenthesis of the concept of a nation-state. It would be "largely outdated" because it is unable to face the challenges of "interdependence" in a globalized world. Michel Rocard distinguishes four: global warming, financial bubbles, rising unemployment and precariousness, new crime.
“It is a synthesis of a very dense reflection conducted by intellectuals and former political leaders who have come to the conclusion that a "process of metamorphosis" must be initiated towards a "global community.”
So like global citizens?
July 24, 2008:
Quote:
Obama in Berlin: 'The Burdens of Global Citizenship Continue to Bind Us Together'
I don't see how anyone can look at all the slums in the world and not logically conclude that there are too many people on this planet. I guess if you live out in the country or a small town and never bother to learn about life outside your bubble, the problems of overpopulation might seem alarmist or conspiratorial.
No, I don't think we should euthanize people to reduce population. I don't think that people living comfortable lifestyles out in the country or small towns need to be reduced. But I strongly believe that poor people should not reproduce. Poverty breeds poverty. It is not the responsibility of wealthy people to stop poverty. It is the responsibility of poor people to stop creating poor people.
They already are...its called abortion. It was made mainstream by the founder of planned parenthood who believed in Eugenics...the culling of undesireables in society.
All the black on black murders also stops creating poor people. None of those murdered young men will get to reproduce. Another aspect of Democrats Eugenics plan? I think so. The Dems dont seem to care 1 bit about black abortions or black on black murder.
The Dems wiped out the Native Americans, and now they are doing it to blacks....while making it appear as though they are trying to help blacks.
The 1st thing I'd do if I wanted to kill off humans, is to pack them close together so they have to fight over resources, & can't run away and hide....like in our big urban areas...hmmm. Who runs the big urban areas?
In my best British accent … indeed sir, there does seem to be a growing over abundance of the rabble, and they do breed like rabbits, don’t they sir? Although, I think we shan’t get rid of all of them sir, for then who would attend to the improper work, the menial tasks inappropriate for our class of sophisticated ladies and gentlemen? Yes indeed sir, we’ll need to keep around enough of them to attend to those tasks, and dispatch the surplus, because they are quite burdensome in large numbers, aren’t they? I’ll attend to it immediately!
Whether you realize it or not, that is what you are really saying. And you’re not alone in such thinking … there is an entire ideology lockstep with that line of reasoning. It’s called Eugenics, and one of the most historically well known versions was Adolph Hitler’s desire to sanitize and purify the human race, ridding it of the rejects, morons, imbeciles, genetically defective, and otherwise undesirables. His goal was to create the “master race”, for the betterment of humanity no less, except for those cursed with brown eyes.
The truth is, we haven’t yet come close to exceeding the population capacity of the earth, and particularly within the context of the United States, whose entire population could relocate within the boundaries of the State of Texas ….. but please don’t view that statement as an invitation.
To put things in proper perspective, the land mass of India is roughly 1/3 the size of the US, with a population three times ours, yet no mass starvation or societal collapse is occurring in India. And we are at the all time peak population today, with the US being in the top 3-5 most populous countries.
I suspect this might surprise many, just as it did me, but one of the most well known destinations of the rich and wealthy elite, Monaco, also happens to be the most densely populated City-States on the earth. Imagine that! One can conclude from this that it’s not as much the volume of people that determine quality of life or sustainability, but involves financial resources and a strong cultural component which seems to be the more dominant driving force contributing to the quality of life.
The only issue we have with regard to population are the few who believe themselves more valuable than the rest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
About that 1 billion people. Just to get a basic idea of how many Americans the Earth could support if industrialization, food production, pollution, population and resource extraction were capped at the year 2000 levels. The global population was roughly 6 billion and the global GDP was roughly $33.65 trillion. That’s $5600 per capita. With 8 billion people the GDP/capita is roughly $4200. If the population dropped all the way down to 500 million the GDP/capita would be $67,300, roughly the current US GDP/capita.
Obviously that’s overly simplified. I’m sure someone could expand on that idea indefinitely, maybe to the point that it makes it null and void because 500,000,000 people might not be able to even run a global economy, IDK.
All of this goes back to the very foundations of philosophy. You are correct though, that WEF link to its own history even brings up Thomas Malthus.
You also have to take into account of all the farm animals (pigs, cows, chickens, sheep, etc.) that are needed to feed the world's population and require the land/space necessary to raise them. A group which greatly outnumbers both human and wildlife populations.
And there's the domesticated pet populations (cats, dogs, etc.) and the necessity to feed them as well.
You also have to take into account of all the farm animals (pigs, cows, chickens, sheep, etc.) that are needed to feed the world's population and require the land/space necessary to raise them. A group which greatly outnumbers both human and wildlife populations.
And there's the domesticated pet populations (cats, dogs, etc.) and the necessity to feed them as well.
I understand that. This is a great graph to understand where we are for that. The exponential growth started with the Information Age .
Here’s the problem. If you understand that and you accept “leadership” is trying to do something about it, you can’t ignore what is happening at the border and in school and exam rooms. It’s an extension of eugenics and the picking of winners and losers in a battle that determines the future of the human race.
They do all this under the guise of “democracy” when they know it is not democracy, they know it is an “educational dictatorship.” They could not be questioned about what goes out to the educational systems across the globe.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,601,582 times
Reputation: 5697
We should have subreplacement birth rates until we lower the population down to two billion at most. Better yet, around one billion. It's not genius level thinking to see that the more people there are, the more pollution and resource use there will be.
If you were interested in trying to figure out how we got here.
The Plan
This is important to understanding what is going on now and why it matters. I’m attempting to connect some dots and make a case for what I believe is going on but that requires some backstory to be able to follow along and even then it is still not an easy follow.
I understand, it’s hard to believe that this is an actual program being forced on the general population. Deindustrialization, Depopulation, Reduced Food Production, Lowering Pollution and Limiting Resource Extraction.
Is this two different programs or was the original changed on us somewhere in the middle?
The first part of you post, I can understand and agree with. It seemed like the world powers were coming together, we would get a Star Trek utopia of sorts. They wanted to preserve the Earth for generations to come. I cant see what is wrong with that. They wanted to limit growth. Well, its a finite world. Cant have unlimited growth.
But then the second part with the DEI, I dont understand. What is the DEI? Are you saying they using LGBTQ as a way to control population?
Does anyone else remember all those dystopian sci fi movies from the late 60's and early 70's? Some of us took it as entertainment. Democrats took it as a plan for the future.
If there is unchecked growth, the dystopian movies will become reality eventually.
I don't see how anyone can look at all the slums in the world and not logically conclude that there are too many people on this planet. I guess if you live out in the country or a small town and never bother to learn about life outside your bubble, the problems of overpopulation might seem alarmist or conspiratorial.
No, I don't think we should euthanize people to reduce population. I don't think that people living comfortable lifestyles out in the country or small towns need to be reduced. But I strongly believe that poor people should not reproduce. Poverty breeds poverty. It is not the responsibility of wealthy people to stop poverty. It is the responsibility of poor people to stop creating poor people.
Before you do that though, you have to eliminate the parasites within the ranks of the wealthy people. Yes, those always exist. Once there is only other wealthy people left, the parasites will have to leach off of them since only hosts left. I doubt the wealth people want that.
To put things in proper perspective, the land mass of India is roughly 1/3 the size of the US, with a population three times ours, yet no mass starvation or societal collapse is occurring in India. And we are at the all time peak population today, with the US being in the top 3-5 most populous countries.
Have you seen how dirty India is? If they dont get their act together they will be in trouble. There have been mass starvations in India in the past. Modern tech though has kept that at bay temporary. By drawing resources from elsewhere. But all modern tech does is speed up the depletion of resources. So that train would ride forever either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lycanmaster
You also have to take into account of all the farm animals (pigs, cows, chickens, sheep, etc.) that are needed to feed the world's population and require the land/space necessary to raise them. A group which greatly outnumbers both human and wildlife populations.
And there's the domesticated pet populations (cats, dogs, etc.) and the necessity to feed them as well.
Most of the production is geared at people eating three large meals a day and being overcharged for it. 1st world, and I am sure 3rd world throw away lots of food. Most humans do better eating much less then they currently are. Its better for their health especially, and better for environment.
Most of 1st world already try to curb domestic pet populations.
Is this two different programs or was the original changed on us somewhere in the middle?
The first part of you post, I can understand and agree with. It seemed like the world powers were coming together, we would get a Star Trek utopia of sorts. They wanted to preserve the Earth for generations to come. I cant see what is wrong with that. They wanted to limit growth. Well, its a finite world. Cant have unlimited growth.
But then the second part with the DEI, I dont understand. What is the DEI? Are you saying they using LGBTQ as a way to control population?
Don’t think of it as separate programs. It’s a timeline. If you know that there is a “limit to growth” and you also know that Chairman Mao just transformed his society into a one party totalitarian state using mass scale thought reform (brainwashing), it’s not terribly complicated to see that that will lead to something rather precarious in the future. In this case a hundred or so years or less until you reach that “limit to growth.”
We were suppose to start those reforms in the 1970’s and gradually decline into a rebalancing of East-West relations. That didn’t happen because MAGA OG won in 1981 and reversed the decline, even if it was only temporary. That led to 30 years lost out of that 100 year prediction about “limits to growth.” That why I bring up the Brundtland Commission because it talks about the same ideas LtG did. A “change in values and priorities” or the creation of a “new moral criteria.”
How do you create a “new moral criteria” for an entire nation? We don’t have to ask, books have been written and I quoted Kissinger saying as much about mass scale thought reform to Mao. In fact one of the most prominent academics on the subject is Robert Jay Lifton. The same Lifton that teamed up with Dr. Brandi Lee which sort of kicked off “Duty to Warn” which went outside of the norms of psychology to “warn the public” about Trump and his malignant narcissism. Did I mention he’s also a member of the Collegium International? His name is on the Declaration of Interdependence. That where they essentially laid out the Collegium’s goals.
Quote:
The members of the International Ethical, Political and Scientific Collegium intend to work on a number of concrete applications of the principles outlined in the general declaration. Far from being exhaustive, this first list may be regularly enriched with new themes that are considered to be priorities by the network that will be created through the Collegium, in particular by representatives of the world's civil society. An appeal for contributions may be launched in that sense.
a. Invent democracy on a global scale
The horizontal logic of interdependence implies the recognition of the diversity of the roots of democratic cultures; its vertical logic implies the emergence of a common base adapted to the changes of our era. In this spirit, the Collegium could reflect upon the establishment of "indicators of democracy" (in the sense recommended by UNDP), and may also highlight whatever may contribute to the construction of a "global citizenship", from the civil society point of view.
b. Identify and protect world public assets
Interdependence implies the recognition of the "common property" character of certain world assets. In particular, the Collegium will focus its attention upon those assets whose preservation and distributionpresent major challenges. This is notably the case of:
drinking water;
- access to knowledge;
- agricultural food resources and the problem of genetically modified organisms as both
risks and opportunities;
- energy resources;
pharmaceutical products;
- public transport.
c. Construct the conditions and indicators of sustainable development Interdependence implies making the different time horizons coherent. However, the indicators that we possess today lead us to make short-term choices, contradicting already established mid and long-term objectives. A new approach to wealth and the adoption of new indicators appears therefore to be a necessity, so as to better integrate the ecological and social requirements of sustainable development.
d. Build a universalism of values
Between the affirmation of absolute relativism and the temptation to define universal ethics based on purely occidental foundations, the universality of values must be built on the basis of a dialogue among civilisations. A joint questioning of the great spiritual and moral authorities of this world (on matters of environment, ethics, and gender relations) could serve as a basis for this work. It would also allow the emergence of the foundations of a "mental ecology" and an education toward responsibility and global citizenship adapted to our times.
e. Guarantee economic and social rights
The concrete application of the principle of planetary inter-solidarity implies that economic, social and cultural rights are not separated from civil and political rights. Consequently, the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank would be obliged to respect the UN instruments concerning human rights, the conventions of the ILO concerning social rights and the international conventions on the environment. This legal fabric would be opposable to all economic players.
Idk about you but a Declaration of Interdependence kind of makes it sound like it supersedes something like a Declaration of Independence, does it not?
But it is all part of the same timeline, not different. If anything it was just all combined into “interdependence.” So the Collegium created a doctrine for global governance. It’s a program to synchronize the planet. You’d have to read Robert Lifton’s book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism (1961) to see what I mean. Lifton lays out eight themes for which you can judge your environment and test it to see how totalitarian it is.
1. Milieu Control
“Trusted News Initiative,” Five Eyes, full pressure from specialist associations like the AMA, AHA, AFT, NEA, etc.
2. Mystical Manipulation or Planned Spontaneity
Vanguardism in BLM/LGBTQ+++
3. Demand for Purity
Kendi’s and DiAngelo’s “Anti-Racism” or Fauci’s zero COVID-19 maximum STUPID-19 policies
4. Cult of Confession
Attempts by management to gather as much information about sex, marital life, children, gender, etc. not for therapeutic or simply to gather statistics but to use for political purposes - DEI (corporations, governments, churches), SEL (education), ESG (finance), CRT (which is at the core of the DEI program, it is the philosophical basis for it) (.mil)
5. “Sacred Science”
Trust only the science from us, the rest is dis/mis/malformation
6. Loaded Language
White Supremacy, Black Lives Matter, Trans Rights, Speech is Hate, Silence is Violence, etc. - Thought Terminating Cliches
7. Doctrine Over Person
All the different doctrines are really just subcategories of the one doctrine, Critical Theory > CRT > CQT and everyone must be subordinate to it
8. Dispensing of Existence
Cancel Culture (self evident)
Idk about you but that seems like a pretty large number of coincidences if you ask me. If I’m using those theme as a judgement for totalitarianism, I’d say we are already in a totalitarian state and it is not the republicans who are running it. But you tell me. You can skip to chapters 22 and 23 to read about Lifton’s description for yourself and see if you think what is happening is organic?
I guess the best document to explain all of it is from 2014. It’s called “Towards world governance.”
Quote:
The world faces a convergence of crises of global scale without precedent: the depletion of natural resources, biodiversity loss, financial bubbles and bank failures, the dehumanisation of the economic system, social disintegration, rising inequality and social insecurity, rising intolerance, disparagement of the political elites, famines, shortages, viral pandemics…
…
It would be vain to merely bemoan the negative effects of globalisation, of capitalism, and of fanatism, and unrealistic to wish to draw up a roadmap or a perfect model of society. It is now imperative that we implement the needed reforms and transformations, designing them in a holistic and interdependent manner. This global approach is of the utmost importance as the problems that we face are interconnected and constitute the vectors of a “poly-crisis”, threatening our world with a “poly-catastrophe”.
…
The international community has, regrettably, proven its impotence, if not its irresponsibility, in the face of these dangers. It is clear that the sovereignty of the people, the foundation of most political regimes, does not encourage leaders to devote sufficient attention to crises that occur in the antipodes, or to concern themselves with long-term challenges, given the frequency of and circumstances surrounding electoral cycles.
…
In order to overcome this difficulty without betraying our values, the sole available solution is to rethink the very principles of global governance. This process must take place under the auspices of the only body with the legitimacy to deal with global challenges: the United Nations. Such an exercise can only be undertaken by persons who have exercised high political, academic, or economic offices, have a clear view of world affairs and who, free from electoral constraints, are able to think beyond the interests of their own generation, country or social group.
That was 2014 before the Paris Climate Agreement and before Trump. They were pessimistic about sovereignty, elections, self interest and the future to the point of saying we were heading towards a “poly-catastrophe.” That sounds really bad. I wonder what they would do to try and avert a “poly-catastrophe?”
To sum all of it up it goes something like this:
Limits to Growth/Thought Reform > UN/UNESCO/Collegium Internation/WEF > schools and institutions get turned into machines of revolution. But don’t take my word for it. Here is UNESCO saying that outright:
Transformation is the red thread running through all the Sustainable Development Goals, the United Nations’ agenda for responding to global challenges facing humanity and the planet. Setting our world on a more sustainable course requires radical shifts in current development paradigms that are exacerbating inequalities and imperilling our common future. This transition is dependent on new knowledge, research and competences that only higher education institutions are in a position to provide, rooted in their historic role of service to society.
…
In 1964, inspiring the 1968-student revolt a couple of years later, Herbert Marcuse wrote a key text against “one dimensional man”, urging universities and campuses around the world to become places that resisted reductionism. He urged for a thinking that would show us alternatives beyond the universalizing forces of current rationalism. Universities, especially through higher education, could pave the way for human development independently of industrialized society. Giving attention to that which is not captured in the universals of one-dimensional-man, formed to serve the productive, consuming society, he created visions for alternatives.
Quote:
Above all, his call was to the universities and to the students in particular, as they occupy those key position outside of productive society; still on the outside but geared towards the processes of its reproduction.
If you don’t know who Marcuse is he is the father of the New Left. He was also part of the Frankfurt School and he was also in FDR’s brains trust and an employee of OSS, forerunner to the CIA. Later he worked for the State Department in the Intelligence and Research Bureau in charge of overseeing the intelligence coming out of the Communist countries. He would have been collecting things like Mao’s speeches and Stalin’s writings.
So DEI, ESG, SEL, CRT, ***** Theory, etc. (and many other ideas) all got brought together at the Collegium International. Idk about all of the members but what I can tell you is they range from Open Society people to Club of Rome/Madrid people to the UN General Secretary to scholars and academics philosophers and economist. People who advised Bill Clinton while was POTUS. People who have written extensively in Continental Theory (neo-Marxism/post-Marx), Democracy/Interdependence, and Thought Reform/Psychohistory/Totalitarianism/Cults.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
