Lifestyle > Train of Thought
POLL - Population control?
Rugged Monk:
--- Quote from: virtuoso on March 05, 2009, 05:50:39 AM ---I chose the top one, not because I believe you aren't a good person but just purely because you buy into this crap that the UN are the alternative, you have intelligence, I think it's about time you looked at the cold hard facts.These are; who the UN are, who created it, who runs it.
--- End quote ---
Im studying Public International Law and Human Rights Law, so I'm learning alot about the UN (maybe oneday I'll even work for it). I understand the position you always come from represents a perspective of the truth. But I never rest upon my convictions or beliefs, rather I challenge them and add upon them through more knowledge. That means even learning to emphasize with 'them'. If you can keep your sanity and integrity you may emerge through it with a deeper understanding. Constant challenging of your own beliefs and convictions is honesty with yourself. I'm not saying you should do the same, I think the political position you represent on this forum is especially essential, but really not the whole picture or the full understanding, still it is however a vital perspective.
I think population itself isn't the ENITRE issue, because people in the thrid world don't really use many household appliances and shit, in reality their pollution and waste footprint on the world is virtually non-existant next to your average suburban teenager in the West. The real issue at heart is sustainability and conservation of the world's natural treasures. The problem does not stem from there being too many people in the world, the problem is the consumption and that most people in the world are striving to a level of consumption like that of the West, thats why; the more people=the more waste and consumption. However, it dosn't necessarily have to be that way, if the world's governments had strong planning around conservation and sustainability. Maybe it is again up to the West, as always, to lead by example.
As for covert depopulation, I don't think it is a viable solution because it does not really nip the problem in the bud, it just delays the problem, inevitablly we will have to face the issue of pollution and unsustainability anyway, of which the industrialised world, not the underveloped countries, contribute the most towards. I know that in the Philippines (a Catholic country) it was the custom to have 8-10 kids per family and so on, now the younger generations are getting wiser and changing their attidues, only having kids they can provide a good life for (Hilary Clinton actually once said at Rockefeller Institute lecture; 'education is the key to population reduction').
"The point of population stabilization is to reduce or minimize misery."
--Roger Bengston, founding board member, World Population Balance
Þŕiņçë:
Oh and ugly people too
virtuoso:
--- Quote from: Rugged Monk starring as Illuminatus Overfiend. on March 05, 2009, 08:28:52 PM ---
--- Quote from: virtuoso on March 05, 2009, 05:50:39 AM ---I chose the top one, not because I believe you aren't a good person but just purely because you buy into this crap that the UN are the alternative, you have intelligence, I think it's about time you looked at the cold hard facts.These are; who the UN are, who created it, who runs it.
--- End quote ---
Im studying Public International Law and Human Rights Law, so I'm learning alot about the UN (maybe oneday I'll even work for it). I understand the position you always come from represents a perspective of the truth. But I never rest upon my convictions or beliefs, rather I challenge them and add upon them through more knowledge. That means even learning to emphasize with 'them'. If you can keep your sanity and integrity you may emerge through it with a deeper understanding. Constant challenging of your own beliefs and convictions is honesty with yourself. I'm not saying you should do the same, I think the political position you represent on this forum is especially essential, but really not the whole picture or the full understanding, still it is however a vital perspective.
I think population itself isn't the ENITRE issue, because people in the thrid world don't really use many household appliances and shit, in reality their pollution and waste footprint on the world is virtually non-existant next to your average suburban teenager in the West. The real issue at heart is sustainability and conservation of the world's natural treasures. The problem does not stem from there being too many people in the world, the problem is the consumption and that most people in the world are striving to a level of consumption like that of the West, thats why; the more people=the more waste and consumption. However, it dosn't necessarily have to be that way, if the world's governments had strong planning around conservation and sustainability. Maybe it is again up to the West, as always, to lead by example.
As for covert depopulation, I don't think it is a viable solution because it does not really nip the problem in the bud, it just delays the problem, inevitablly we will have to face the issue of pollution and unsustainability anyway, of which the industrialised world, not the underveloped countries, contribute the most towards. I know that in the Philippines (a Catholic country) it was the custom to have 8-10 kids per family and so on, now the younger generations are getting wiser and changing their attidues, only having kids they can provide a good life for (Hilary Clinton actually once said at Rockefeller Institute lecture; 'education is the key to population reduction').
"The point of population stabilization is to reduce or minimize misery."
--Roger Bengston, founding board member, World Population Balance
--- End quote ---
The third world doesn't "pollute" as much because they have not had the disposable income to do, whereas western nations have been built on consumerism. However you are doing it again, falling for the rhetoric of "pollutant" and sustainability, have you even stopped to think what that means, in order to combat the so called problem and ensure this "sustainability" it follows that there needs to be a complete micro management of every individuals life under schemes such as a globalised carbon tax. We are simply in the realm of semantics here, sustainability has as much goodness as the word reform does, it's all to create a perception of goodness while really it is dictatorship. Therefore the ONLY way you are going to see a massive reduction in pollution is through some sick manipulation of human life which is already going on via the vaccines, the water supplies, the aspartame in the soft drinks, and or a massive reduction in the living standards of the west. However wait a minute, the living standards for the overall majority in the west were not exactly flourishing anyway, in fact when you go to Europe, you look around you, venture outside of the main areas, it's PISS POOR. I myself am anything but affluent and indeed only a few miles up the road, well there is england's equivalent to a ghetto.
I understand the view they were trying to indoctrinate us with now during our information management lessons, they were trying to convey the message to us, that you don't live in poverty, you live in relative poverty compares to affluence. They even gave this sickening example of a middle class person vs some poor guy in Africa. The intention was obvious it's a drive to make white people feel guilty for what they have and when it's laid out in front of them how fortunate they are, they will be more open to surrendering that wealth. However there it is again, the face of deception, it is not me who is screwing the poorest, not your average white person no, it's these hideous evil intentioned global bodies. They are the ones doing it and they are the ones who under the guise of the UN are being portrayed as wonderful. That of course brings back the tired old argument which is repeatedly spun that oh such and such a person gave up their prosperous career to help the UN and of course, good people belong but the goal of the UN is to sell people on global government.
The wealth always goes somewhere and as far as pollution is concerned, well look around you my man, the dumping of nuclear waste in the rwandan seas, the creation of gm crops which is killing the honey bees, the millions of tonnes of depleted uranium which have killed and deformed god knows how many people, have affected god knows how many animals, the dumping of nerve gas into the seas, the testing of chemical weapons on a populous. So this idea of typical "waste" is such a sick, scandalous deception, such a brainwashed scam. Having said there are a lot of pathetic self apologetic self loathing, always gotta guilty about something whiteys out there.
The media tells us over here that someone earning 40K gross is middle class, those greedy people, even millionaire doesn't mean shit anymore because of the devaluation of the currency's which has rapidly sped up since the 60's, so fuck comparative and relative poverty, it's all a distraction away from the ones with real riches and power.
jeromechickenbone:
Absolutely 100% oppose population control by forcing people to do it. If you want to control the population, don't procreate. I would never bring someone into this world that I could not support and love. It's no accident I haven't had one yet because I know that mentally I'm not really focused on that. I'll probably have some some day, but I don't know when that will be.
And yes, they are planning for depopulation but they won't be successful just as they won't be with all the other shit they are planning.
Furor Teutonicus:
we need to reduce the earth population by any means necessary. Of course it'd be better to achieve it without forcing people.
Agent Smith from 'The Matrix' got it right: 'I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet.'
This planet can't handle so many people, especially when they live like we do in western countries. A decreased population would increase the overall quality of life.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version