Would you let someone microchip your kid?

Years ago conspiracy theorists warned that there was a secret plan underway to microchip the earth's population. I first heard this in the late 1980's, when it sounded like pure science fiction. Now, as I've documented in this blog[1], the idea is being pushed to the public through the mainstream media.

This week's issue of "That's Life!" magazine has the idea as a fun little talk topic:

They prepared the way for this, and presumably sourced their contributors, with a piece on their Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/thatslifemagazine/posts/10153008728237480

Some of the comments there are fascinating. This is a debate which will come to you in your lifetime. These are the sorts of things people will say. What do you think? When the time comes, will you microchip your kids? How will you deal with the social stigma of not doing so?

As the first national UK radio show host to have put this topic on air for debate, many years ago now, I think it's frustratingly difficult to mount a counter argument to the microchip agenda. There are lots of reasons why it would be practical. However, I will never willingly accept a microchip. Never. I don't trust them. Not one bit.

Remember, this idea is not new. It's fairly reasonable to think it has been in the works for some time. However, if that's true, the only people really powerful enough to have planned and executed this sort of thing are not likely to be what I'd call 'nice'. You don't generally become powerful in The West by just being nice. Most of our elites think invading countries and killing people is a good idea, cover for the likes of Jimmy Savile and think it's a good idea to protect and bail out banks[2]. This is the mindset which came up with the suggestion we should chip kids like cattle. The same mode of thought that can think drones flying around killing kids is ok.

In short: the West's most powerful people are precisely the last ones on this earth I'd trust to put anything at all into a child.

Nick Margerrison

[1] Barclay's payment gloves: The Microchip Agenda

[2] What's wrong with bailing out banks? Banks take money from those who need it to give to those who have it. They are the precise opposite of Robin Hood. To think our taxes should have been given to them so we could borrow our own money back with interest is only nice if you work for a bank.


Rob Someone said…
I read as far as "drones" and thought how easy it would be to target absolutely anyone for a nasty surprise if they were chipped. You know, they could be like the ones Amazon say will be delivering our parcels soon....
Yellowbentine said…
It's the potential for misuse of microchip technology that concerns me - but in terms of debating with people about it, I suppose it depends whether people are prepared to think bad of their government.

As a society we've maybe gone on for too long without any real conflict or hardship and it's just hard for the majority of people to imagine how totalitarian things can, and do, get in any apparently 'civilised' society. The microchip makes you vulnerable to being identified/classified/manipulated and controlled under these circumstance.

If you look at examples from history like the IBM punch cards using census data to identify victims for the nazi holocaust or the genocide in Rwanda identifying social groups by ID card data.

Maybe if people can only see their own government as benevolent could be asked to imagine their county being invaded and taken over and the microchip technology being misused by others.

But we're all tiptoe-ing their with social media, loyalty cards and the footprints we leave all over the Internet.

Perhaps the goal of changing someone else's mind with a reasoned, informed argument is besides the point these days. I think that just being prepared to put your own views forward - having the balls to do so - when peer pressure might dictate otherwise, has value in itself.

Popular Posts