Friday, May 29, 2009

Life Isn't the Only Thing That Persists

I’m sorry; the mistake I made in my last post was including the Monty Python video, which detracted from my original question. Which is simply this: why do none of today's environmentalists deal with the question of human (over)population? You would think that this issue would be central to their argument that we are in such an environmental mess because of our inability to think long term about the impact our actions have on the planet.

While I’m not sure I buy into the “myth” of overpopulation, neither do I believe it takes a rocket scientist or a mathematical genius to see the potential for trouble if humans (or any creature for that matter) continue to expand their numbers within a limited space and with access to limited resources.

Aunty cited a Harvard study that postulates the ability of the earth to support 40 billion humans. Support, okay, maybe. But in what way? Supports, after all, is a very different word from thrives. And I can't help but wonder, with those kinds of numbers, if even more Draconian government controls would need to be in place to manage us all?

So again, why are the environmentalists mute on the issue of population “control” when they seek to control everything else we humans do in relation to Mother Earth? Why change a light bulb and drive a Prius but not use a condom or get a vasectomy?

Is it because human reproductive rights are too sacred a cow even for these busybodies? Is it because they cannot find a rational way to challenge the fundamentalists’ passion regarding this issue? Or could it just possibly be that they are silent because they are not really interested in preserving the earth for human use, but in eliminating our species entirely from the equation?


Margo said...

I like your title. It's easy to love "earth" and people as a group, but not so easy to care about an individual or personal freedoms. More than one or two "environmentalists" I have come across find it very difficult to think in terms of a singular person who doesn't hold and practice similar beliefs with anything but total ire.

Kymical Reactions said...

Thought provoking post. I agree with Margo. I hear the environmentalists saying 'if we don't take care of the earth now, there won't be much for future generations to enjoy.' Well - for that matter, if the population reaches numbers of 40 billion then there won't be any ROOM for future generations to enjoy. hummm...

Jenny said...

I consider myself a HUMAN BEING and I have to ask the Universe... what is better? To have a child die of starvation (or worse) or never be born? Is it right to subject women into giving birth under dangerous conditions, unhealthy conditions, or to save her energy to take better care of the ones she already has? Just because I'm sitting on a side of the World that treats dogs better than people, doesn't mean they don't LITERALLY count.

I've had people tell me that starvation/etc is "God's way" and I have a hard time understanding that.

chickory said...

margo makes a great point. ive always marveled at people who care so deeply for people across the globe but cant say a civil word to their immediate family. because its abstract - you dont live it or suffer the consequences of "it".

like hollywood movie stars that promote gun control or outright bans -from the safety of their walled video camera security and bodyguarded manses.

as for starvation - i think youll see more of it in the coming decades and not just because of numbers but because of government corruption. case in point: somalia. we send food. the bandits steal it and trade it for arms. it never reaches the people. war and famine go hand in hand. case in point: monsanto corp renders once fetile grounds sterile enslaving the population that once subsistence farmed. many more examples. case in point HB 875 massive US control of farming all the way down to selling tomatoes on the side of the road. control of food is a critical arm of tyranny. and its coming to a theater near you.

h said...

You're prolly to young to remember, so you might want to do a search using the terms "Paul Erlich", "Malthus" and "The Population Bomb".

Like Fat Albert Gore's fact-free "An Inconvenient Truth" Erlich's absurd book "The Population Bomb" was required reading in Government Schools for decades. And was widely hailed by "environmentalists" long after none of his predictions came even close to being accurate.

So, PART of the reason most of today's pseudo-environmentalists stay away from the population issue is because Erlich failed so miserably in his predictions.

Another PART of the reason is that they don't want to be accused of racism. Because most pseudo-environmentalists ARE White and most of the Nations with low-population growth are White.

P.S. Probably the funniest thing Erlich did was use financial compound interest figures to extrapolate human population growth.

In general, he was about as well qualified to write about the subject as Fat Albert Gore was to write about Climatatology.

moi said...

Margo: Once the political is no longer personal, you're dealing with ideology, rapidly followed by tyranny. Add water, a couple of olives, shake, and voila: the modern environmental movement.

kmwthay: And your point in my previous post about teenager mothers was a good one, too.

Boxer: A large percentage of the population who operates under what I call a fundamentalist viewpoint still believes that every child born is a miracle. But I do have to ask: even to parents who cannot afford to feed or educate those children? Then that miracle becomes, what, a ward of the state? A corpse on the side of the road?

Chicory: Excellent points. We can't deal with the possibility of disappearing resources until we deal with the problem of resources that, thanks to tyrants, are completely and utterly wasted.

Troll: Thank you for specifically addressing my question. I think you're on to something with the racism angle. And, I most certainly remember when Erlich's Population Bomb was all the rage. And how quickly the issue fell out of fashion.

Bottom line, though: I cannot see how a rapidly increasing human population can be good for anyone – and not just from an environmental, but also from a political standpoint. Am I for government sanctions, however? No. But I am for us beginning to rethink the issue in personal terms.

Pam said...

I have a feeling Mother Earth is going to outlive us all ... when we are all dead and gone from wars, famine, over-population ... I think Mama E is gonna still be here and recreating herself all over again. Mankind shouldn't presume themselves better than the dinosaur. We could be extinct for any number of reasons. And the earth will be here long after we're gone. So I'm choosing not to worry about things very much.

NYD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
moi said...

Pam: And, eventually, our sun will go supernova and pfffft – no more Mother Earth at all. But I think that's not scheduled to happen for another billion years or so.

NYD said...

I think that the Monty Python clip was brilliant. It it offended anyone then it did exactly what the authors intended. I myself, laughed my ASS off!

It is quite possible that "environmentalists" avoid including the human factor when discussing the problems that face the globe because of the actual definition of overpopulation.

When a county lacks the land area or resourses to sustain their masses then we have overpopulation. You can sy that about much of the world these days., This problem has been overcome through incredible advancements in agricultural science lead by Norman Borlaug (A real fucking superman in my book) as well as land development (there is still plenty of space on the globe.

Now birth rate and relative wealth of a nation also factor into this because developed nations, while having a lower birthrate, often use up far more natural resourses then their developing cousins. Yet we are judging this by poulation density which is important but not nearly as indicative as the exponential rate in which said resources are being used.

The problem for environmentalists is not "overpopulation", but rather encroachment. We as a race are spreading out (natural as a dutch oven)and it is not the population growth that is a problem. It is manner with which we consume.

We don't really have to watch our numbers. We can produce all the food and materials that are needed for a healthy happy existence. What we really have to learn to do is to find ways to avoid screwing up the balance nature has provided for us by living in tune with our surroundings, using a little common sense and social responsibility. Don't make babies if you can't support them without govt. aid. if you are worried about Muslims (Foolish)if they produce a vast population then they will have to feed them. That in itself will keep then busy behind tractors.

The world is big enough for all of us and if we respect it then we can make as many babies as we want. What we can't do is walk around with the bullshit top of the food chain attitude that will get us bitch slapped and eventually, replaced.

moi said...

NYD: Excellent comment. I like your encroachment versus overpopulation distinction. Good stuff and definitely food for thought.

The Poet Laura-eate said...

Rumour has it that the exhumation of 1918 world flu epidemic victims is no idle scientific curiousity and that certain powers that be want to artificially create similar to clear out the weak and elderly in various areas of the world.

Late abortion worth protesting against, if true.

Anonymous said...

Τhіs design is wicked! You definitely know how to keеp а reаdeг amused.

Betweеn your wit anԁ уοur videos, I was almοst movеd tο ѕtаrt my οwn blog (well, almost.

..HaHа!) Gгeat jοb. I really enjoyed ωhat you
had to saу, and moгe than thаt,
how уou presented it. Too cоol!

Hегe is my ωeb-sitе: boom trucks

Anonymous said...

Greetings ӏ am so delighted Ι founԁ your
web site, I really found you by accidеnt, while I ωas searching on Digg for something
elѕe, Nonethеlesѕ I am heгe nоw аnd wоuld ϳuѕt likе to say many thanks for a increԁіble poѕt аnd a
аll rounԁ inteгesting blog (I alsο
lovе the theme/ԁesign), I don't have time to look over it all at the minute but I have saved it and also included your RSS feeds, so when I have time I will be back to read a great deal more, Please do keep up the fantastic job.

Feel free to surf to my web page :: tens 7000 review

Anonymous said...

Hi theгe, Ӏ enjoy гeaԁing thгοugh your aгticle poѕt.
Ι liκe to write a lіttle comment tо
support you.

Take a look at my ωeb blοg ... tens therapy

Anonymous said...

Keep οn writing, great job!

Here is my ωeblоg: taxi blog