Evil Incarnate: The Lies that Keep On Killing

Independent Individualist ^ | Jul 14, 2008 | Reginald Firehammer

[Hank Kerchief]

If you think the vilest evil possible comes with a pitch fork, and horns, breathing fire, sneering and hurling curses, and wearing red, you are wrong. The most despicable evil in the world comes with a smile, a declaration of its concern for the future of mankind, and a promise to save the world—wearing green.

The Green Lie

We human beings are fallible creatures and in spite of our best efforts to learn the truth we can be mistaken. Medical science was mistaken for a long time about the nature of peptic ulcers, and even resisted the truth about their nature when it was finally discovered. Honest mistakes can corrected, and forgiven, but intentional distortions of truth are never corrected because they are not intended to be—and they must never be forgiven.

One of the biggest intentional distortions of truth in history consists of a whole package of lies that today go by the names ecology and environmentalism.

Like all dangerous and effective lies, the distortion contains elements of truth, but it is a colossal fabrication hiding its true nature and purpose under a banner of "science." That purpose is the total control of human culture and society; its essential characteristic is a hatred of Western Civilization, particularly its science, technology, and industry.

Begins and Ends with Lies

Environmentalism is a social-political movement with its roots firmly implanted in European anti-free-enterprise fascism. Environmentalism is both an anti-human anti-civilization ideology and a totalitarian political movement. Though factions of the movement are sometimes contradictory, they are united in their ultimate goal—the total destruction of Western culture and individual liberty and the imposition of a world-wide government.

This fascinating history of environmentalism provides a thorough examination of the development of the core ideas and policies of the movement. There are other influences not covered in that article, such as the cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School and Postmodernism, both of which helped pave the way for the acceptance of the forest of lies by which environmentalism has been put over. Please read that article for the details of that history—this article will concentrate on the intentional lies and deceptions of environmentalism.

From the article we learn the very words of environmentalism are lies. "As part of the social movement’s efforts to maintain a scientific veneer, the word 'ecology' re-gained currency in 1970 as a complimentary word to 'environmentalism'. The words were used almost synonymously, with ecology carrying a more scientific connotation."

"The word 'ecology' was coined by German writer Ernst Haeckel in 1866. ... Haeckel’s Ecology was 'Nazi' metaphor. Haeckel was a member of the Pan-Germanic Nationalist Society and the Thule Society. The latter society was a multi-chapter aristocratic cult promoting a mystical racism. Haeckel was a frothing anti-Semite. He argued Germans were forest-evolved while Jews were from a desert ecosystem, hence an invasive species to Europe. He argued German soil was made of decomposed German sewage, German corpses and German-bred crops and livestock; in other words German blood and soil were chemically united in a single “ecosystem”. In the 1920s the Thule Society took to the streets forming a political party appealing to lower class Germans. To lead the party they chose a young Adolf Hitler."

The article explains that the movement named "environmentalism" in the 1960s was 200 years old by the time that name was applied to it, and that it had always had as its goal, the control of people, originally the serfs, by the ruling oligarchy. From the beginning, their stated goals and purposes were a cover for their true intentions.

"By the 1870s there were widespread, high-level efforts to 'conserve' the countryside in Europe and the wilderness in America. Phobias of overpopulation were the conservationist’s constant companion. Conservationists bluntly opposed liberalism: the State was to protect wilderness, conserve resources and control industry."

The "over-population" lie is one of the perennial lies of environmentalism which persists to this day.

One Early Big Lie

This one ought to sound familiar:

"Between the 1870s and 1890s, to stifle westward agricultural expansion, conservationists within the US Bureau of Forests ran a climate change hoax. The three first chiefs of the Bureau each authored articles alleging forests generate rain clouds. They succeeded in lobbying for the Timber Culture Act 1873 requiring each homesteader to plant forty acres of trees. This climate change hoax was also used as a rationale to prevent forest clearances."

Unlike today's gullible citizens, there is this interesting side note: "Settlers developed a rival climate mythology called “rain follows the plough” arguing newly broken soil had rain-making properties." Afraid those kinds of Americans are all gone. So-called global warming is exactly the same kind of lie, but it is swallowed whole by almost everyone today.

Environmentalism's Most Famous Liar

The article points out that, "Rachel Carson's anti-chemical industry diatribe, Silent Spring (1962), does not mark the beginning of," environmentalism, but that it "does mark a change in this social movement's scale and sophistication. Carson was a staff naturalist writer for the US Fish and Wildlife Service. One of her naturalist books was made into a movie by Joe Kennedy. She was an acquaintance of Larry Rockefeller with whom she met prior to Silent Spring's release. The social movement super-hyped the book; selling 500,000 hard cover copies in its first run. Before the ink was dry, President Kennedy ordered an investigation into the “pollution crisis”."

In his article, "The Lies of Rachel Carson," Dr. J. Gordon Edwards documents that Rachel Carson's hugely influential book is based entirely on obfuscation of the truth and bald-faced lies.

As an example of her disingenuousness: "her bibliography ... was filled with references from very unscientific sources. Also, each reference was cited separately each time it appeared in the book, thus producing an impressive array of 'references' even though not many different sources were actually cited."

And her misrepresentation: "I next looked up some of the references that Carson cited and quickly found that they did not support her contentions about the harm caused by pesticides."

In addition to Carson's lie that the development of DDT was somehow related to the development of chemicals for, "chemical warfare," the author points out this complete lie, which is no mistake and as evil as any lie has ever been:

"Page 17. Carson says arsenic is a carcinogen (identified from chimney soot) and mentions a great many horrible ways in which it is violently poisonous to vertebrates. She then says (page 18): “Modern insecticides are still more deadly,” and she makes a special mention of DDT as an example.

"This implication that DDT is horribly deadly is completely false. Human volunteers have ingested as much as 35 milligrams of it a day for nearly two years and suffered no adverse affects. Millions of people have lived with DDT intimately during the mosquito spray programs and nobody even got sick as a result. The National Academy of Sciences concluded in 1965 that “in a little more than two decades, DDT has prevented 500 million [human] deaths that would otherwise have been inevitable.” The World Health Organization stated that DDT had “killed more insects and saved more people than any other substance.” A leading British scientist pointed out that “If the pressure groups had succeeded, if there had been a world ban on DDT, then Rachel Carson and Silent Spring would now be killing more people in a single year than Hitler killed in his whole holocaust.”

There are so many lies in the book, even the author of this article could not list them all. Some he does list include the following:

"On page 22, Carson adds, '... we know that the average person is storing potentially harmful amounts [of DDT].' This is totally false!"

"Page 28. Carson refers to the origin of organophosphate insecticides like parathion (the insecticide that EPA Administrator William Ruckelshaus recommended as the substitute for DDT). She states that the insecticidal properties of organophosphates were 'discovered by a German chemist, Gerhard Schrader, in the late 1930s' and that 'Some became the deadly nerve gases. ...' Actually, the insecticides of that nature were not discovered until after World War II (15 years later than Carson implied) and the similarity of insecticides to the dreaded nerve gases was greatly exaggerated by Carson. Carson's attempt to spread terror about beneficial insecticides becomes even more vicious."

There are many many more examples of the lies this book is packed with, a book responsible for millions of preventable deaths, from diseases like malaria in places like Africa because a world-wide ban is effectively in place and there are actually moves to make it a true worldwide ban. Death and destruction are the inevitable consequence of any and all policies based on environmentalist lies. This is but one example.

All Lies Acceptable to Promote Environmentalism

All aspects of the environmental movement are meant to deceive and emotionally motivate people to accept the lies--primarily through fear and terror.

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill..." ["The First Global Revolution," Club of Rome, an elite think-tank (David Rockefeller, Gorbachev, etc.) working with the UN. Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution (New York: Pantheon Books, 1991), 115. Also in this video.

Here is another leading environmentalist liar, Stanford Professor Stephen Schneider, author of the book Global Warming (Sierra Club).

"On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method. ... On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. … To avert the risk (of potentially disastrous climate change) we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public imagination. That of course means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. ... Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective, and being honest." [My Emphasis.]

Environmentalists have no interest in the environment, no interest at all in human life or welfare, except to limit them both as much as possible. The environment is nothing but a propaganda tool, a means of manipulating, through fear, people and governments, to ultimately control both. If you don't think this is the case, consider that "two decades ago, Mr. Schneider was among those actively warning of a returning Ice Age."

Better yet, take the word of Christine Stewart, then Canadian Minister of the Environment, speaking before editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald, 1998:

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony... climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” What clearer evidence do you need to see environmentalism is a purely social political movement that has nothing to do with the environment?

What The Greens Really Intend

The "true evil nature of Environmentalism: the obsession to see us all reduced to the level of animals, barefoot and naked, filthy and sick, miserable and helpless." If you do not believe they intend to impoverish you, starve you, make you sick, and hopefully die, read their own words.

"If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."
Prince Philip, reported by Deutsche Presse-Agentur (DPA), August, 1988. Prince Philip, first President of WWF-UK from its foundation in 1961 to 1982, and President of WWF-International from 1981 to 1996, is now President Emeritus for WWF. He was a founder of the Australian Conservation Foundation and its President from 1971 to 1976.

One "human way to reduce the population might be to put something in the water, a virus that would be specific to the human reproductive system and would make a substantial proportion of the population infertile. Perhaps a virus that would knock out the genes that produce certain hormones necessary for conception. ... A triage approach will be necessary so that scarce medical resources go to those who can contribute most to the long-term viability of the planet. Consequently, many middle-aged-to-elderly people will die uncomfortable deaths. Not every problem is solvable."
Dr John Reid speaking with Robyn Williams on ABC radio, 10 December, 2006. Full transcript here.

“Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialised civilisations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Maurice Strong, Secretary-General of the UN Earth Summit, June 1992.

“…At present the population of the world is increasing at about 58,000 per diem. War, so far, has had no very great effect on this increase, which continued throughout each of the world wars…. War … has hitherto been disappointing in this respect … but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full…. The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of it? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other peoples'….”
Lord Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, 1953.

“This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world populations, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it.”
Jacques Cousteau, co-recipient in 1977 (with Sir Peter Scott) of the International Environmental Prize awarded by the United Nations for outstanding contributions in the field of the environment. Quoted from UNESCO Courier, November 1991.

“We, in the green movement, aspire to a cultural model in which killing a forest will be considered more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of 6-year-old children to Asian brothels.”
Carl Amery, Founding member of the German Green Party, quoted in, Mensch & Energie, April 1983.

“I got the impression that instead of going out to shoot birds, I should go out and shoot the kids who shoot birds.”
Paul Watson, founder of Greenpeace, as quoted by Dixy Lee Ray in her book, Trashing the Planet (1990).

“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. …All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
David Brower, first executive director of the Sierra Club; founder of Friends of the Earth; and founder of the Earth Island Institute.

“I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”
John Davis, editor of, Earth First! Journal

“We advocate biodiversity for biodiversity's sake. It may take our extinction to set things straight.”
David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!

[Cannibalism is a] “radical but realistic solution to the problem of overpopulation.”
Dr Lyall Watson, anthropologist, Commissioner for the International Whaling Commission, as quoted in the Financial Times, 15 July 1995.

“To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.”
Dr Lamont Cole, Professor of Ecology, Cornell University, as quoted by Elizabeth Whelan in her book, Toxic Terror.

“The world has cancer, and that cancer is man.”
Merton Lambert, former spokesman for the Rockefeller Foundation, quoted from Harpeth Journal, Dec. 18, 1962.

What To Do?—Hate the Greens!

Ron Ewart compares the greens to Islamo-Fascists. He says, "It is abundantly evident that the lie that is radical environmentalism/fascism, is the embodiment of incarnate evil that will strip us of our free will, our pride, our money, our property, our liberty and ultimately our very sovereignty." Ron leaves one thing out, if the greens have their way, they will strip most of us of our lives.

Ron's article also provides a list of eight things that can be done to reverse the "massive con game that has the Western World on its knees, perpetrated by the cult that is radical environmentalism/fascism." Most are "educational" and "political" and all might help, but the real solution is one I would almost never recommend, but in this case is the only one that will work.

In the article I referenced at the beginning of this piece, there is an interesting aspect of the environmental movement that most people are not aware of which helps to explain why these lies are so entrenched and invulnerable to reason and education. It's called "built constituency." Here are some examples from the article:

"An example of this process was the 1995 World Conference on Sustainable Tourism which encouraged governments to draft laws promoting the dual goals of economic development through tourism and protection of the environment. This generated the 1997 Declaration on Sustainable Tourism whereby 27 Asia-Pacific countries committed themselves to ecological practices and to fund a heightened awareness of eco-ethics. Although these laws were soft, the publicity surrounding this process, coupled with the subsequent policy changes in each country, helped found and legitimize the eco-tourism industry – now thousands of businesses strong. Thus, partially through the treaty process the movement enhanced its economic base and attracted more government resources.

"A much larger example of 'built constituency' is the alternative energy industry – the wind, solar and hydrogen companies that have blossomed in state-subsidized green-houses. Another example of 'built constituency' is the organic farming industry - now tens of thousands of businesses strong."

This "built constituency" includes every business, organization, or agency that exists because of the environmental movement, such as every related government department or bureau, the huge and growing biofuels industry, every business, agency, or organization, involved with so-called carbon-credits, and every writer, publisher, broadcaster, and college professors or teacher specializing in ecology or so-called environmental sciences.

Remember, every single aspect of environmentalism is a lie, and everyone one of these businesses, agencies, and individuals has a vested monetary interest in perpetuating those lies.

The Hate The Greens Movement

There is only one method that will end the assault of the anti-civilization, human-hating, death-and-disease-dealing, movement toward world-wide totalitarianism—a counter movement of free individuals that will crush environmentalism in all its vile forms.

The movement does not need to be "organized." That is the method of collectivists. It must consist entirely of individuals who may or may not, as they choose, work in concert with others.

The objectives of the movement, however, are perfectly clear.

1. Stand for and defend everything environmentalism opposes (because it opposes everything required for human life and happiness in this world).

2. Oppose militantly, everything environmentalism promotes or teaches (Because it promotes death and destruction and the end of Western Civilization and all it teaches is lies.)

3. Expose all their lies loudly, publicly, bravely, and unashamedly (because we do not need to and must never lie, science and truth are on our side, and it is we, not they, who hold the moral high ground.)

4. To whatever extent possible, refuse to support with your time, or money, or energy any company, agency, or individual who's business or employment depends on any of the environmentalist lies. (They demand sacrifice, for example, for the sake of the environment. We demand nothing, but choose not to support anything based on lies and fear—which is no sacrifice.)

5. Encourage others to join the movement by making them understand the nature of environmentalism and what is at stake. (Explain what the greens have in store for their children, for example.)

6. Though political methods almost never work, everything possible ought to be done to overturn the multitude of oppressive laws based on environmental lies, and wherever possible, they ought to be defied. (It is immoral to obey an immoral law, and all environmentally based laws are immoral.)

7. Defy in every way possible every recommendation and policy coming out of the environmental scam: use incandescent bulbs (unless the saving is a personal choice), do not sort your trash, use plastic bags, use as many carbon dioxide producing products as you can (or would like to), use lots of insecticides, herbicides, and fertilizer, NEVER eat anything labeled "organic" or "all natural" unless you would choose them even if labeled otherwise.

8. Make it known what the true nature of environmentalism is. Call them what they are—promoters of squalor, poverty, famine, disease, and death on a scale that puts the twentieth century murderers and oppressors to shame. This should be done with such vehemence that it will generate the same kind of feelings in people that they have towards Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, because environmentalists are worse than any of those.

[Subsequent articles will expand and provide resources on each of these anti-environmental goals.]

It is your future, your fortune, and lives of your children the Greens intend to destroy. At every turn they will lie about those intentions, and even when it is exposed, the lie is so effective, the gullible will go on believing it.

Some "environmentalists" are just the gullible of which most of our societies are comprised today, but every politician, professor, publisher, broadcaster, businessman, cultural or religious leader that has any part of this civilization destroying movement knows exactly what it is, knows it is all a lie, and knows what the consequences are going to be. As Ayn Rand once said, "mistakes of this magnitude are not made."

—Reginald Firehammer

[Hank Kerchief]

PHILOSOPHY PING

(If you want on or off this list please freepmail me.)

Hank

[joeystoy]

Another lie being advanced is that Rachel Carson herself died of cancer caused by her exposure to DDT.

If you look at the comments on this blog entry a clear picture of the Enviro-Fascists emerges.

http://give-n-go.blogspot.com/2006/12/enviro-genocide.html

[hocndoc]

You know, if we were to follow the lead of some of these examples, and approach our public policy from an evolutionary standpoint, any one who denies human exceptionalism and is *not* a speciesist, probably shouldn’t be allowed to propagate either his ideas or himself.

[hosepipe]

Leftists seem to be members of a death cult like Islam..
Leftists murdered #00,000,000 worldwide last century.. they seem to be intent on murdering by the Billions this century.. That leftist leaning granny may not be just an ignorant old woman but a cog in the/a coming machine of death..

[brushcop]

Push come to shove, make sure that these people (still living) are at the top of the list. I’m glad to know that my folks educated me about this scourge many years ago starting with Rachel Carson’s lies when so many had bought into them.

Environmentalism is the “new” Communism with a friendly face.

[enviros_kill]

GREAT post.

[hocndoc]

(that was sarcasm)

[IYAS9YAS]

It is interesting to note that among those calling for destruction of human life above, most are or were old when they called for it.

My response to anyone who says we need to reduce the human population is "You first. Put your money where your mouth is or shut up." They usually look at me in a stunned disbelief, then I tell them that unless they are willing to take that first step themselves, they should not be asking anyone else to do it for them.

[maine-iac7]

"human way to reduce the population might be to put something in the water, a virus that would be specific to the human reproductive system and would make a substantial proportion of the population infertile

“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. …All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”

Chilling. These people are as insane as the islamofacists...frightening that such minds exist.

The one and most salient fact that all these envirowackos miss is the one overriding acknowledgment of the Native Americans: WE, the 'Two-leggeds', are also part and parcel of the environment - not apart from it.

[brushcop]

Oh I realized it!

[Borges]

No mention of Malthus?

[Hank Kerchief]

The link to the “fascinating article” mentioned in the first part of this article is incorrect. It should be:

http://www.ecofascism.com/article14.html

It is definitely worth the read.

Hank

[expat_panama]

GREAT post.

Agreed.  

We're past the point of saying that environments are mistaken or misled.  Their behavior is evil.

[JamesP81]

One could credibly argue that the one world government and one world religion of the end times will be based on environmentalism. While that’s JMO, I think it’s plausible things could turn out that way.

[Skooz]

bump bump bump bump

[JDoutrider]

Ping!

I wonder if the Ron Ewart cited in the section called: “What to do: Hate the Greens” is the same as our FRiend here in Wa. State?

I believe it is...

[neverdem]

BTTT!

[YHAOS]

"My response to anyone who says we need to reduce the human population is "You first. Put your money where your mouth is or shut up." They usually look at me in a stunned disbelief, then I tell them that unless they are willing to take that first step themselves, they should not be asking anyone else to do it for them. "

Bet you don't get invited to very many parties.

[IYAS9YAS]

Well, to parties that have these types at them, not any more.

[grey_whiskers]

The World Health Organization stated that DDT had “killed more insects and saved more people than any other substance.”

A mosquito was heard to complain,
"I fear they have addled my brain!
The cause of my sorrow
is para-dichloro
diphenyl tricholoroethane!"

--Chemical and Engineering News, circa 1984

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

Incidentally, for those Christians following the thread at home, C.S. Lewis more or lest forecast this in That Hideous Strength:

"Surely," said Mark, "one requires a pretty large population for the full exploitation of Nature, if for nothing else? And surely war is disgenic and reduces efficiency? Even if population needs thinning, is not war the worst possible method of thinning it?"

"That idea is a survival from conditions which are rapidly being altered. A few centuries ago, war did not operate in the way you describe. A large agricultural population was essential; and war destroyed types which were then still useful. But every advance in industry and agriculture reduces the number of work-people who are required. A large, unintelligent population is now becoming a deadweight. The real importance of scientific war is that scientists have to be reserved. It was not the great technocrats of Koenigsberg or Moscow who supplied the casualties in the siege of Stalingrad: it was superstitious Bavarian peasants and low-grade Russian agricultural workers. The effect of modern war is to eliminate retrogressive types, while sparing the technocracy and increasing its hold on public affairs. In the new age, what has hitherto been merely the intellectual nucleus of the race is to become, by gradual stages, the race itself. You are to conceive the species as an animal which has discovered how to simplify nutrition and locomotion to such a point that the old complex organs and the large body which contained them are no longer necessary. That large body is therefore to disappear. Only a tenth part of it will now be needed to support the brain. The individual is to become all head. The human race is to become all technocracy."

Cheers!

[Billthedrill]

A BTT and a mild objection to lumping Bertrand Russell in with the others - that statement was written in irony. Russell was a lifelong pacifist.

[Lady Jag]

Breathtakingly brilliant.

Environmentalism is a social-political movement with its roots firmly implanted in European anti-free-enterprise fascism. Environmentalism is both an anti-human anti-civilization ideology and a totalitarian political movement. Though factions of the movement are sometimes contradictory, they are united in their ultimate goal— the total destruction of Western culture . . .

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Environmentalism is the “new” Communism with a friendly face.

No, it is not new. It is just another step forward for the Communists.

Preceding it were Unionism (for the downtrodden workers), Social Security (for the elderly), the Income Tax (for all of us), the New Deal (to cure the Depression), WWII (to assure Joe Stalin's survival), LBJ's great Society and all its programs Medicare, Civil Rights act, Voting Rights Act, etc.), Feminism, Political Correctness, No Smoking, Environmentalism, and all other forms of government encroachment are all just steps on the same ladder.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[Hank Kerchief]

"A BTT and a mild objection to lumping Bertrand Russell in with the others - that statement was written in irony. Russell was a lifelong pacifist."

Yes, Russell was a pacifist, at least he did not want to participate directly in any war, or for England to, and despised it's death and destruction. However, I do not think the quote was irony, when taken in the context of The Impact of Science on Society. Here are some quotes from that book. You can see where it's going.

Page 54 - Scientific Dictatorship

"After all, most civilized and semi-civilized countries known to history and had a large class of slaves or serfs completely subordinate to their owners. There is nothing in human nature that makes the persistence of such a system impossible. And the whole development of scientific technique has made it easier than it used to be to maintain a despotic rule of a minority. When the government controls the distribution of food, its power is absolute so long as they can count on the police and the armed forces. And their loyalty can be secured by giving them some of the privileges of the governing class. I do not see how any internal movement of revolt can ever bring freedom to the oppressed in a modern scientific dictatorship."

Page 103-104 - Bacteriological War, Population and World Government

"I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. There are others, which, one must suppose, opponents of birth control would prefer. War, as I remarked a moment ago, has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. There would be nothing in this to offend the consciences of the devout or to restrain the ambitions of nationalists. The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people's. However, I am wandering from the question of stability, to which I must return.

There are three ways of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third that of general misery except for a powerful minority. All these methods have been practiced: the first, for example, by the Australian aborigines; the second by the Aztecs, the Spartans, and the rulers of Plato's Republic; the third in the world as some Western internationalists hope to make it and in Soviet Russia... Of these three, only birth control avoids extreme cruelty and unhappiness for the majority of human beings. Meanwhile, so long as there is not a single world government there will be competition for power among the different nations. And as increase of population brings the threat of famine, national power will become more and more obviously the only way of avoiding starvation. There will therefore be blocs in which the hungry nations band together against those that are well fed. That is the explanation of the victory of communism in China.

These considerations prove that a scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is a world government."

Page 105 - Necessity of World Government

"The need for a world government, if the population problem is to be solved in any humane manner, is completely evident on Darwinian principles."

Page 110 - Elite Preservation of Power

"A society is not stable unless it is on the whole satisfactory to the holders of power and the holders of power are not exposed to the risk of successful revolution."

Page 110-111 Food Rationing by World Government

"First, as regards physical conditions. Soil and raw materials must not be used up so fast that scientific progress cannot continually make good the loss by means of new inventions and discoveries... If raw materials are not to be used up too fast, there must not be free competition for their acquisition and use but an international authority to ration them in - such quantities as may from time to time seem compatible with continued industrial prosperity. And similar considerations apply to soil conservation.

Second, as regards population...To deal with this problem it will be necessary to find ways of preventing an increase in world population. If this is to be done otherwise than by wars, pestilences, and famines, it will demand a powerful international authority. This authority should deal out the world's food to the various nations in proportion to their population at the time of the establishment of the authority. If any nation subsequently increased its population it should not on that account receive any more food. The motive for not increasing population would therefore be very compelling."

Page 113-114 - World Army & Massive Upheavals

"My conclusion is that a scientific society can be stable given certain conditions. The first of these is a single government of the whole world, possessing a monopoly of armed force and therefore able to enforce peace. The second condition is a general diffusion of prosperity, so that there is no occasion for envy of one part of the world by another. The third condition (which supposes the second fulfilled) is a low birth rate everywhere, so that the population of the world becomes stationary, or nearly so. The fourth condition is the provision for individual initiative both in work and in play, and the greatest diffusion of power compatible with maintaining the necessary political and economic framework.

The world is a long way from realizing these conditions, and therefore we must expect vast upheavals and appalling suffering before stability is attained. But, while upheavals and suffering have hitherto been the lot of man, we can now see, however dimly and uncertainly, a possible future culmination in which poverty and war will have been overcome, and fear, where it survives, will have become pathological. The road, I fear, is long, but that is no reason for losing sight of the ultimate hope."

I have not read the book and found the quotes posted by someone else. Thought you might be interested.

Hank

[Billthedrill]

I've got it. It's sort of a hoot given where we've gone in the interim. Highly recommended but take yer bucket of salt witcha.

Russell actually did time for pacifism during WWI - technically for making statements that harmed the morale of the visiting Americans although nobody in the American army thought so. Strange times.

[tarheelswamprat]

My response to anyone who says we need to reduce the human population is "You first. Put your money where your mouth is or shut up."

I like to tell them:

"Think globally. Act locally. Off yourself!"