Environmentalist seeks to limit child birth.

[David of Derby]

I don't know anything about this "green think tank". I would imagine its a rather marginal one. However, the reactionary responses in this thread aside, you have a good point. We have more than tripled the world's population in the last 100 years and that can't continue indefinitely. This is not just for environmental reasons either, but also because of issues of poverty and famine as well. The problem is not really in the developed world though. Its rather more a problem of explosive population growth in the third world and in sub-saharan Africa. One would be hard to find a single environmental organization, aid organization, or NGO period that would not agree that birth rates have to be curbed in the developing world. I don't think anyone is arguing that we need to have some kind of totalitarian restrictions on child bearing in the developing world, but rather that significant steps have got to be taken there to promote family planning (such as contraceptive use among married couples so that they only have kids they actually plan for and can support), and curbing children born out of wedlock.

Bravo, well said. I fully agree.

I don't see the recognition that population growth has to be controlled as totalitarian, nor do I see the bandying about of words like Nazi as a sensible reaction to this viewpoint. Two children per family is ample in my view and I can't imagine many average people in the UK being comfortably able to support many more than that for eighteen years. Ballooning populations are a problem across the world, but as the above poster says, the problem is worst in the third world. Places like China are also experiencing serious problems due to over-crowding, and it's not unreasonable for these governments to enact policies to limit these problems.

Then again, I don't see abortion as murder, either, so no doubt I'm an extremist maniac, too...

[forrestkc]

The purpose of this topic was to point out the totalitarian ideology floating around in some environmentalist circles. Some of the population control ideologies need to be identified and stifled. Totalitarianism, fascism, nazism, elitism comes in many different forms under many different categories, all of it bad. Men like David Lindorff are very dangerous in their ideology and what's worse is that organizations, like the Baltimore Chronicle, are giving these nazis a platform and megaphone to spread this elitist ideology.

There is totalitarian notions floating around at the extremes of every circle though. The far left, the far right, religious fundamentalists, they all have their share of totalitarian lunatics at the extremes. However, its wrong to then take the furthest extremes and try to use them to paint entire movements. For example, it would be wrong to paint all evangelicals by the actions and statements of people like Westboro Baptist Church. Its wrong to paint all conservatives by the actions of militia groups and other extremist radicals. Its wrong to paint all liberals by the actions of far left communists. If that group is advocating some kind of forced population control, then then they are not in anyway representative of mainstream environmentalists.

[JustinM]

The purpose of this topic was to point out the totalitarian ideology floating around in some environmentalist circles. Some of the population control ideologies need to be identified and stifled. Totalitarianism, fascism, nazism, elitism comes in many different forms under many different categories, all of it bad. Men like David Lindorff are very dangerous in their ideology and what's worse is that organizations, like the Baltimore Chronicle, are giving these nazis a platform and megaphone to spread this elitist ideology.

There is totalitarian notions floating around at the extremes of every circle though. The far left, the far right, religious fundamentalists, they all have their share of totalitarian lunatics at the extremes. However, its wrong to then take the furthest extremes and try to use them to paint entire movements. For example, it would be wrong to paint all evangelicals by the actions and statements of people like Westboro Baptist Church. Its wrong to paint all conservatives by the actions of militia groups and other extremist radicals. Its wrong to paint all liberals by the actions of far left communists. If that group is advocating some kind of forced population control, then then they are not in anyway representative of mainstream environmentalists.

quote justinM: "The purpose of this topic was to point out the totalitarian ideology floating around in SOME environmentalist circles. SOME of the population control ideologies need to be identified and stifled."

I, obviously didn't put all environmentalists in that category, did I?

Derby, you don't think that David Lindorff is a Nazi/Elitist? So, are you saying I was wrong to say his ideology falls into that category?

Abortion is murder b-t-w and it is becoming more stigmatized in the US everyday. I love my life and I am so happy that I am a Roe V Wade survivor, I just wish I could speak for the rest of the children that didn't have a choice to live.

[tah]

Know what ...it's not about population ..it's about control..

Control every aspect of your life...

The more control they have the less you have..

goal accomplished...

Evil evil thing to do to people...

Anyone who would want the government to tell them how many children they can have is nuts!!!!!!

This world has a whole lot worse problems than children..

Seems to me the first post to this pointed out that we already kill lots of our youngsters ...

[David of Derby]

What do you consider the developing world? Third-world countries? Because, I believe some countries aren't even developing. Famine, war, and plague, infect the undeveloped world. Any option other than a Western invasion will not solve the problem.

So, what's the moral and humane thing to do? Drop bags of wheat from helicopters and watch the people fight over scraps, or destroy their primitive army and government and establish a modern civilization? The warlords have to go, the corrupt governments has to go, the murderous militias need to be eliminated.

I believe that only a heavy handed response will solve these problems.

Or we could continue to just watch them, from our satellites, tear each other apart for scraps and we can say that we are doing good in the world by airdropping food onto those pitiful people. It's the easiest thing to do right?

That's an entirely different discussion, but as it happens I agree with you. Africans didn't starve when the British Empire was running half the continent. A very great man once said "Freedom to starve is no freedom at all." Better to be ruled by the most benign imperial power in history than by a pack of fueding warlords who leave you to starve while they fight their petty brush wars.

[JustinM]

Know what ...it's not about population ..it's about control..

Control every aspect of your life...

The more control they have the less you have..

goal accomplished...

Evil evil thing to do to people...

Anyone who would want the government to tell them how many children they can have is nuts!!!!!!

This world has a whole lot worse problems than children..

Seems to me the first post to this pointed out that we already kill lots of our youngsters ...

The US birthrate is, on average 2.09 per woman. Seems the US has developed it's own "carbon neutral" birthrate. However; US population growth is in decline, it's at about .894%, basically less than 1 birth per person. I'm sure if people like Gullebaud were acquainted with the data, he would be unable to contain his glee.

Datasource: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...k/print/us.html

[Bolts]

I come from the view point that technology has become more important than human life - after all Science can now pick and choose a population through making clones - watch out for those guys, they could already be planning clones of themselves

My Father comes from a family of 16 children. My mother comes from a family of 14. In their generation, this was a very normal practice. Education was not a priority then, so they both spent most of their time (from an early age) working and developing their family farms. Food was plentiful, the land was fertile and no one went without.

The shift in economics came when technology was introduced on a bigger scale requiring less manual labour. So these two families began searching for work else where. Without an education, they had to find work where ever they could. When they met, they bought a home and put their children through the education system. Once our education was complete, they were out of pocket with little or nothing to show for their hard work, because we left to make a life of our own. I can't remember the figure on how much it costs to put a child through school. It's quite expensive.

My Grandfather died and because we were all educated in other fields and my Grandparents were not educated at all, the farm and land ended up tied up in Land issues and has now turned to wasteland.

Emissions, industrial businesses, Governments (technology), created all these situations. But as usual it is the human that has suck it up and comply. If the price of petrol keeps going the way that it is, we may very well end up living life the way my Grandparents did - I'n not sure how many of us actually know how to live off the land

[Silver Shadow]

>.< The birth rate over here in the US is already lower than it has been in 12 years.... Here is some info from the CIA site about it:

Population growth rate:

0.894% (2007 est.)

Birth rate:

14.16 births/1,000 population (2007 est.)

Death rate:

8.26 deaths/1,000 population (2007 est.)

Total fertility rate:

2.09 children born/woman (2007 est.)

Interesting ne?

Edited January 9, 2008 by Silver Shadow

[buckthesystem]

I think you two are over-reacting a tiny little bit. No one's suggesting murdering anyone. The issues raised are perfectly valid and in no way immoral, yet you're both acting like this report suggests leaving female babies outside to die of exposure.

You're right, they're not saying that yet! That'll come next! Just wait and see!

It's great how these people never think of themselves when they are advocating that "other people" do things they suggest. I'm sure scientists think of themselves as superior to the masses while they sit back and push these weird ideas.

Eugenic programme coming your way soon!

[Guest Biblicist]

Environmentalist seeks to limit child birth. We should stop reproducing to prevent global warming.

This is just begging for a joke, but I'll behave!