The "Jaffe Memo": Outline of Measures to Reduce Fertility - Is it legitimate and other questions?

[Cara]

I just came across this document outlining proposed measures for population control, which seems to be called "The Jaffe Memo" in the sources I searched. Here it is:

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/15123434_10154607472971420_6616846703107658853_o.jpg

It is alleged to be a memo from Frederick Jaffe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_S._Jaffe) of Planned Parenthood (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Planned_Parenthood) to the president of the Population Council (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Population_Council), Bernard Berelson (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bernard_Berelson).


The Jaffe Memo was written in 1969 by Planned Parenthood’s then vice president Frederick Jaffe to the president of the Population Council, Bernard Berelson. The memo is featured in the 1970 October issue of Family Planning Perspectives, which is published by the Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood). This memo highlights the social constraints and economic deterrents/incentives to “reduce U.S. fertility”. Many of these social and economic factors have come to fruition.
From: http://plam.org/education/jaffe-memo/


It is cited by many pro-life, anti-abortion, conservative, Christian, "fundamentalist", etc. sites... examples are many if you put "Jaffe Memo" into a search engine.


Questions:
(a) has anyone come across this before? do we know if it is authentic?
(b) it seems to be a tailor-made "summary" for activists and alternative researchers... perhaps I am unnecessarily sceptical but is this disinfo?

If it is real, or at least real disinfo, or perhaps a deliberate leak, what is interesting is the mix of ideas included plus the extremism of many of them. It would seem to paint a picture of "we will do anything and everything to achieve our goals".

This might tend to make people feel under attack and increase the fear factor:
(c) is this a psyop purpose of the document?

Along with the ideas of population control, it mixes in other ideas which are now "tarred with the same brush"; for example: women working.
(d) is this a tactic of creating cognitive dissonance and internal conflict? example, if I am a woman working, who happens to be anti-abortion, do I now question whether my working is contributing to this "evil" agenda?
This would seem to provide an additional indication that this document is a psyop.

What do others think?

[sdv]

Surely this must be a hoax? Why would the USA be considering such drastic population control measures in 1969? Is it feasible that abortion and homosexuality were being promoted in 1969?

Seems to be a lot in this so-called memo that is unconstitutional and illegal (even criminal)!

[greybeard]

Its probably disinfo--or wishful thinking.
Fertility, sperm count, has been going down for years.
Probably just a side effect of the way we live--mobiles in trouser pockets, laptops on lap--processed food--you name it all contributing to this.

Chris

[Hervé]

When one looks at the roots of "eugenics" and the various programs and implementations that have taken place for a very long time... psy-ops and disinfo fall off the wagon... these people are extremely very serious in their beliefs and when they have the means (e.g. Rockefeller) to achieve the elimination of those "useless eaters," well, they just do.

[Blacklight43]

I wonder, if maybe this memo was part of the beginning stages of the planning of UN Agenda 21/30? It seems to have that flavor....in my thinking.

[Cara]

When one looks at the roots of "eugenics" and the various programs and implementations that have taken place for a very long time... psy-ops and disinfo fall off the wagon... these people are extremely very serious in their beliefs and when they have the means (e.g. Rockefeller) to achieve the elimination of those "useless eaters," well, they just do.

Thank you @Hervé.

Yes indeed, eugenics has a long history of powerful and wealthy backers - family dynasties among them - none of whom lack funds or influence to drive their agendas.

If I remember correctly there was strong support in Europe and North America for the ideas of eugenics from the late 1800s. Also, there were several highly opinionated thinkers and writers in the early 1900s who supported the ideas of eugenics including George Bernard Shaw among others.

So if the ideas had this power player and "thought leader" support then, why not in the 1960s (when this document was created) or today, albeit perhaps in a disguised, "propaganda-wrapping" of family planning?

And if the document is a real one, when leaked it also has a disinfo psyop benefit for those who don't accept it? Two birds with one stone?

[Cara]

I wonder, if maybe this memo was part of the beginning stages of the planning of UN Agenda 21/30? It seems to have that flavor....in my thinking.

Thank you @Blacklight43. I don't know much about the origins of Agenda 21... Just that it exists and based on my skim read of it that has some provisions that are "anti-humanity" and pro eugenics in essence.

I am not familiar with Agenda 30. Is it next iteration of Agenda 21? Or something else?

[Hervé]

[...]
And if the document is a real one, when leaked it also has a disinfo psyop benefit for those who don't accept it? Two birds with one stone?
Right: playing the two sides of the same coin:


"A lie so big..."
"A truth so unbelievable..."

[sdv]

There is a difference between eugenics (basically, selective breeding) and responsible population growth (often the term population control is used, and I do not use it here because I find it problematic).

Often responsible population growth is confused with eugenics and thus dismissed. I do not support that (a woman in her early thirties without the education to earn above minimum wage is having her sixth child, all by different men; an uneducated couple living on meagre social grants have 12 children and counting; a president lives way beyond his means and is on wife number 6 and has more than 19 children, not only with his wives, so he becomes corrupt and destroys a country ...). maybe I should call it responsible parenthood! But then, I also love the wilderness and hate seeing it disappear, contaminated, used up, disrespected, becoming devoid of wildlife because of exponential population growth.

To go back to the Jaffee memo ... surely responsible growth was not an issue in the USA in 1969 (or was it for an elite?), and a lot of the items on the list are blatant eugenics.

Eugenics makes no sense (there will always be the best of people who are born in the worst circumstances and the worst of people who are born in the best of circumstances).

[LoneWolf76]

Y'all gotta remember the extraordinary info by Dr. Richard Day - all the way back in 1969.
He outlined the plans for what was to come, the methods that were planned to control us.

A Dr. Dunegan, who was there, made a series of tapes about it some 20 years later, based on his notes after the event, and his observations of events in the intervening years.

The New Order of Barbarians!

Thread here on Avalon about the whole thing. If you haven't seen or heard this, it's vital information... http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?73054-True-Cabal-Insider-Dr.-Richard-Day-Delivers-Talk-in-1969-Outlining-the-Full-Agenda

So yes, in 1969, their plans were well under way...

[Flash]

looks like a high school or first year college work, not some studied measures by government agencies (if they are, well, they were uneducated government agents lollll)

i vote for hoax

[amor]

It is NO HOAX. Dr. Day's information blew the whistle on the wretches who thought it up. Some think tank paid by the likes of Rockefeller no doubt. Well, women out of the kitchen and into the office, so that prices could increase and the government by means of inflation cut the wages of men in half without their wives realizing they were now working for nothing better than they had before. Homosexual encouragement and marriage cannot bear children. Remove jobs and we are all back in poverty to discourage breeding. However, there are those men who are undeterred and whose Balls require to be removed. When the "civilized" part of the world is suitably depopulated, the "savages" of the planet will continue to increase and one day turn around and eliminate the "civilized" people and their over Lords.

[Cara]

Y'all gotta remember the extraordinary info by Dr. Richard Day - all the way back in 1969.
He outlined the plans for what was to come, the methods that were planned to control us.

A Dr. Dunegan, who was there, made a series of tapes about it some 20 years later, based on his notes after the event, and his observations of events in the intervening years.

The New Order of Barbarians!

Thread here on Avalon about the whole thing. If you haven't seen or heard this, it's vital information... http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?73054-True-Cabal-Insider-Dr.-Richard-Day-Delivers-Talk-in-1969-Outlining-the-Full-Agenda

So yes, in 1969, their plans were well under way...

Thank you @LoneWolf76, I was not aware of that thread or Dr Dunegan - I will have a look into it.

[Cara]

There is a difference between eugenics (basically, selective breeding) and responsible population growth (often the term population control is used, and I do not use it here because I find it problematic).

Often responsible population growth is confused with eugenics and thus dismissed. I do not support that (a woman in her early thirties without the education to earn above minimum wage is having her sixth child, all by different men; an uneducated couple living on meagre social grants have 12 children and counting; a president lives way beyond his means and is on wife number 6 and has more than 19 children, not only with his wives, so he becomes corrupt and destroys a country ...). maybe I should call it responsible parenthood! But then, I also love the wilderness and hate seeing it disappear, contaminated, used up, disrespected, becoming devoid of wildlife because of exponential population growth.

To go back to the Jaffee memo ... surely responsible growth was not an issue in the USA in 1969 (or was it for an elite?), and a lot of the items on the list are blatant eugenics.

Eugenics makes no sense (there will always be the best of people who are born in the worst circumstances and the worst of people who are born in the best of circumstances).

Thank you @sdv.

I agree that there is a difference between eugenics and planned or responsible parenthood. However, it is still possible to use planned parenthood as propaganda cover for eugenics oriented tactics.

There is also the very real problem you allude to of human activity degrading the environment and natural spaces of the planet. It certainly seems to be that poor practices, short cuts, and not taking into account downstream effects in industrialization, urbanization, and agricultural activities such as livestock grazing, mono-culture farming, etc. have tended to degrade the natural environment.

These realities make for concerned people creating environmental movements and activism - good people with good intentions. Unfortunately, these groups are sometimes high jacked and coopted for use as cover for eugenics and population control type measures. That they are used this way does not negate the underlying problem of the degrading effects of human impact in the environment. It seems to be another example of where human impulses for doing good in the world (in this case limiting or reversing environmental degradation) are debased for some other purpose.

But, as you say, back to topic on eugenics.

[Cara]

looks like a high school or first year college work, not some studied measures by government agencies (if they are, well, they were uneducated government agents lollll)

i vote for hoax

Thank you @Flash and others on the "hoax" side of things.

The document does indeed look like a copy of a copy and may have been purposely made to look that way - i.e. a hoax/forgery type document. It also has all the "obvious" candidates included to "press the hot buttons" for conspiracy researchers and truth seekers.

...Or it may be real and just badly photocopied by the person who leaked it from a real typewritten report - I will continue to see what I can find about it.

[Cara]

In looking for more details on this document, I found a website dedicated to it: http://jaffememo.com/

-> More on what is on this website in next post. Here, just some background on it.


The website is run by Dr. Anthony Horvath of Athanatos Christian Ministries (http://athanatosministries.org/). About this organisation I found that it is based in Wisconsin, USA and here are some details I found out about it:

From Conservopedia (http://www.conservapedia.com/Athanatos_Christian_Ministries):

Athanatos Christian Ministries is a ministry dedicated to defending and promoting the Christian faith through the arts, as much as through arguments and evidence.

From Buzzfile (http://www.buzzfile.com/business/Athanatos-Christian-Ministries-202-280-7971):

Athanatos Christian Ministries is located in Holmen, Wisconsin. This organization primarily operates in the Religious Organizations business / industry within the Membership Organizations sector. This organization has been operating for approximately 6 years. Athanatos Christian Ministries is estimated to generate $68,026 in annual revenues, and employs approximately 2 people at this single location.

From the Taxation Archives at ChristianWorldView (http://www.christianworldview.net/tag/taxation/):

Athanatos Christian Ministries, an apologetics ministry based out of Wisconsin, is one of the few Christian ministries that not only does not have tax exempt status, but deliberately refused to pursue it. In light of revelations that the IRS has been targeting conservative organizations based on their beliefs, ACM’s decision, made in 2008, now seems prescient. On the ‘donation’ section of ACM’s website, there is this simple statement: “In order to operate unmuzzled, ACM is NOT tax exempt.” ACM’s Executive Director, Anthony Horvath, explains, “While it does not appear that tax-exempt status was originally meant to stifle free speech, it is evident that it has become a way to silence the opposition while hiding behind and inside a bureaucracy.” However, Horvath believes the real harm has come from the self-censoring that organizations have engaged in long before the Obama administration decided to turn the bureaucratic machinery against his “enemies list.” Horvath says, “Churches and other tax-exempt organizations have refrained from aggressively stating their beliefs on important issues in order to retain their tax status. Has it been worth it?” According to Horvath, ACM chose not to pursue tax-exempt status to ensure that it would never have to make such a “devil’s bargain.” Horvath believes that 501c3 status would have forced him to be silent on issues he believes are extremely important, or tip-toe around a topic instead of being direct. “I did not want my tax status held as a club over my head, just waiting for the day when some atheist or pro-choice organization decides I had gone over the line. ACM pays its taxes, therefore ACM speaks its mind,” Horvath says. Horvath urges Christians to think carefully about the practical implications of tax policies. ...

Clearly Anthony Horvarth has a conservative Christian viewpoint. He also seems to perceive a "trap" in being a 501c3 organisation and the limitations that may place on what the Athanatos Christian Ministries says or does.

So far, I cannot find any details of shenanigans or nefarious funders of this organisation... but I don't know much about Christian organisations in the US so my researches have been rather blunt so far.

[Cara]

So, this website - http://jaffememo.com/ - has a page called A Tale of Multiple Versions (http://jaffememo.com/a-tale-of-multiple-versions). From this page:


The document that is widely circulated as the ‘Jaffe Memo’ is, strictly speaking, a table included in a full memorandum written by Frederick Jaffe to Bernard Berelson. The full memorandum summarizes and synthesizes a number of sources and policy proposals, which in turn are adequately summarized and synthesized into a single table. However, the extant copy of that table is hard to read in places, so someone, somewhere along the way, reproduced it.

The reproduction, however, had some flaws. The table wasn’t completely aligned, which didn’t allow accurate interpretation of the table. Also, the phrase “Chronic Depression” was in bold text, suggesting it was a new category, rather than one more idea worthy of consideration as a way to reduce the population.

For your reference, all three editions are listed below: 1., the re-created and most accurate edition, 2., the re-created edition that currently has the widest circulation, and 3., the actual, original, Jaffe Memo table.

According to the numbering above

1. The Jaffe Memo
http://jaffememo.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Jaffe-Memo-jaffememo-com-small.jpg (http://jaffememo.com/a-tale-of-multiple-versions#)

2. Slightly Flawed Recreation of the Jaffe Memo
http://jaffememo.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/jaffe-reproduction-flawed-small.jpg (http://jaffememo.com/a-tale-of-multiple-versions#)

3. 1969 Original Jaffe Memo Table - this is the one I posted in the opening post of the thread.
http://jaffememo.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Jaffe-Memo-Table-small.jpg (http://jaffememo.com/a-tale-of-multiple-versions#)

There is more from this site and I will post as I work through the contents.

[Tintin]

I just came across this document outlining proposed measures for population control, which seems to be called "The Jaffe Memo" in the sources I searched. Here it is:

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/15123434_10154607472971420_6616846703107658853_o.jpg

It is alleged to be a memo from Frederick Jaffe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_S._Jaffe) of Planned Parenthood (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Planned_Parenthood) to the president of the Population Council (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Population_Council), Bernard Berelson (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bernard_Berelson).


The Jaffe Memo was written in 1969 by Planned Parenthood’s then vice president Frederick Jaffe to the president of the Population Council, Bernard Berelson. The memo is featured in the 1970 October issue of Family Planning Perspectives, which is published by the Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood). This memo highlights the social constraints and economic deterrents/incentives to “reduce U.S. fertility”. Many of these social and economic factors have come to fruition.
From: http://plam.org/education/jaffe-memo/


It is cited by many pro-life, anti-abortion, conservative, Christian, "fundamentalist", etc. sites... examples are many if you put "Jaffe Memo" into a search engine.


Questions:
(a) has anyone come across this before? do we know if it is authentic?
(b) it seems to be a tailor-made "summary" for activists and alternative researchers... perhaps I am unnecessarily sceptical but is this disinfo?

If it is real, or at least real disinfo, or perhaps a deliberate leak, what is interesting is the mix of ideas included plus the extremism of many of them. It would seem to paint a picture of "we will do anything and everything to achieve our goals".

This might tend to make people feel under attack and increase the fear factor:
(c) is this a psyop purpose of the document?

Along with the ideas of population control, it mixes in other ideas which are now "tarred with the same brush"; for example: women working.
(d) is this a tactic of creating cognitive dissonance and internal conflict? example, if I am a woman working, who happens to be anti-abortion, do I now question whether my working is contributing to this "evil" agenda?
This would seem to provide an additional indication that this document is a psyop.

What do others think?

Just came across this thread and have sourced the material being discussed here via the Internet Archive.

"The Jaffe memo" is a real document: here's all 10 pages of it. But, do note this archivist note on the last page:


This is the "Jaffe Memo" from Frederick S. Jaffe (at the time Executive Director of Planned Parenthood's Center for Family Planning Program Development) to Bernard Berelson (President of the Population Council) of March 11, 1969 that is the source of a chart used by opponents of Planned Parenthood to document the supposed aims of that organization. In fact Jaffe was merely cataloging various proposals for population control advocated by others, not Planned Parenthood, which is clear in this original memo where the sources of the proposals are cited (Jaffe Memo Table.jpg). These attributions were left out of the table when it was published in Family Planning Perspectives in October, 1970 (“U.S. Population Growth and Family Planning: A Review of the Literature", by Robin Elliott, Lynn C. Landman, Richard Lincoln and Theodore Tsuoroka), also included here.

---

Link to flippable view here:

https://archive.org/details/fredericks_jaffe_memorandum_to_bernard_berelson/1969.03.11%20-%20Original%20Jaffe%20Memo%20-%20Horvath%20Compilation/mode/2up

Link here to the PDF:

https://ia803103.us.archive.org/34/items/fredericks_jaffe_memorandum_to_bernard_berelson/1969.03.11%20-%20Original%20Jaffe%20Memo%20-%20Horvath%20Compilation.pdf