Some of you may be interested in this documentary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy
On 9/25/2013 12:40 AM, Martin Meiss wrote:
Thanks for the respones, guys. I am glad to learn that the "perceived ban"
is not quite as thorough as it seemed to me.
I realize that historically most political attempts at population control
have been essentially racist, or at least ethnically biased. Basically,
people advocating that some other group ought to control THEIR population.
(This is a rather close parallel to how eugenics movements have mostly been
about controlling the reproduction of people who are "undesirable" because
of their race or economic status.) I also realize how hypocritical it is
for people in countries with huge per-capita resource consumption to
suggest that other countries ought to limit THEIR resource consumption.
Here in North America the largely European-derived population denuded the
forests, ruined the soils, clogged the rivers and slaughtered the wildlife
in a virtual centries-long orgy of wasteful destruction. On the one hand,
that might mean those of us who inherit this legacy are in a very poor
moral position to lecture other continents on how they ought to conserve
their resources. On the other hand, perhaps we can hope that others will
learn from our mistakes.
I have read about the so-called demographic transition: how liberation and
education for women, reduced infant morality, economic security for the
elderly, and other factors, lead to couples voluntarily reducing family
size, thus slowing population growth. Presumably projections that show the
human population levelling off are taking this into account.
But I wonder how reliable the demographic transition is in the face of
religious dogma and ethnic rivalries. I don't know if it is true, but I
have read that religious teachings regarding birth control have caused
Holland, and perhaps other countries, to shift from majority Protestant to
majority Catholic populations. Does such a shift not lead people to
perceive themselves as being in a demographic war, with various ethnic or
religious groups trying to out-breed each other? Will this not cause
political and religious "leaders" to fight against the amelioration of
conditions that lead to the demographic transition?
I realize I'm jumping around a bit here, but I'd really like to hear more
discussion of these points.
Thanks.
Martin
2013/9/24 Angus R. Chen! <[email protected]>
Martin,
I get the frustration with the perceived gag rule on population control,
but to be fair politicians are unable to discuss it for a reason. Either
way, I think we all understand that overcrowding and the growth of the
human population beyond the carrying capacity of the Earth is a problem.
But there are, in my opinion, very few options for population control that
are ethical. The only one that really comes to mind is the voluntary
human extinction
movement<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Movement>,
which submits that human beings stop making babies to end the human race.
Even that one is controversial for many people. I, for one, would prefer to
find other alternatives to sustainable human life before aggressively
seeking population control. But, if anyone wants to dive into that can of
worms, you're more than welcome to.
On another note, I think Herman Daly's essay is pretty interesting, as his
assertion that the economy needs to emulate the ecosystem. But, I would
also say it's all fine and good to say that we ought to have an economy
that operates in a "stable state" on a finite flow of energy. The reality
is that it's difficult to have such a sustainable economy when current
economic infrastructures and systems are flawed.
Anyway, just my two cents, but the essay ignores a lot of important
caveats: what is the mechanism for conforming the economy to the confines
of a finite ecosystem? Daly says that current economic theory about
internalizing negative or positive externality costs (via taxes/cap and
trade/what have you) is a pipe dream. So... what's next? (also something I
somewhat disagree with, since incorporating externality costs can shrink
the economy.) Even Daly, with his last sentence, seems to throw up his
hands and say, "well, fuck it, there's clearly no good or even plausible
political or economic solution at this point."
On 24 September 2013 20:52, Martin Meiss <[email protected]> wrote:
I'm tired of people expressing deep thoughts about sustainability and
"green" this and "green" that and steady-state economics and never once
mentioning limiting the human population. I realize that people running
for public office dare not mention population control, but does the ban
extend to scientists and economists?
Martin M. Meiss
2013/9/24 Rob Dietz <[email protected]>
This short essay by Herman Daly describes the political ramifications of
approaching the ecological limits to economic growth:
http://steadystate.org/growth-and-laissez-faire/
Thanks,
Rob
--
Robert Dietz
Author, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH - http://steadystate.org/enough-is-enough/
Editor, DALY NEWS - http://dalynews.org
ATD of ATB and ISI
--
Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D.
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs
Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from Insect-Based Innovation
http://allthingsbugs.com/about/people/
http://www.facebook.com/Allthingsbugs
https://www.facebook.com/InvertebrateStudiesInstitute
1-352-281-3643
