Posted on 05/31/2017 7:39:30 AM PDT by Kaslin
In 1798, Thomas Malthus wrote "An Essay on the Principle of Population." He predicted that mankind's birthrate would outstrip our ability to grow food and would lead to mass starvation. Malthus' wrong predictions did not deter Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich from making a similar prediction. In his 1968 best-seller, "The Population Bomb," which has sold more than 2 million copies, Ehrlich warned: "The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now." This hoax resulted in billions of dollars being spent to fight overpopulation.
According to the standard understanding of the term, human overpopulation occurs when the ecological footprint of a human population in a specific geographical location exceeds the carrying capacity of the place occupied by that group. Let's look at one aspect of that description -- namely, population density. Let's put you, the reader, to a test. See whether you can tell which country is richer and which is poorer just by knowing two countries' population density.
North Korea's population density is 518 people per square mile, whereas South Korea's is more than double that, at 1,261 people per square mile. Hong Kong's population density is 16,444, whereas Somalia's is 36. Congo has 75 people per square mile, whereas Singapore has 18,513. Looking at the gross domestic products of these countries, one would have to be a lunatic to believe that smaller population density leads to greater riches. Here are some GDP data expressed in millions of U.S. dollars: North Korea ($17,396), South Korea ($1,411,246), Hong Kong ($320,668), Somalia ($5,707), Congo ($41,615) and Singapore ($296,967).
The overpopulation hoax has led to horrible population control programs. The United Nations Population Fund has helped governments deny women the right to choose the number and spacing of their children. Overpopulation concerns led China to enact a brutal one-child policy. Forced sterilization is a method of population control in some countries. Nearly a quarter-million Peruvian women were sterilized. Our government, through the U.N. Population Fund, is involved in "population moderation" programs around the world, including in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia.
The entire premise behind population control is based on the faulty logic that humans are not valuable resources. The fact of business is that humans are what the late Julian L. Simon called the ultimate resource. That fact becomes apparent by pondering this question: Why is it that Gen. George Washington did not have cellphones to communicate with his troops and rocket launchers to sink British ships anchored in New York Harbor? Surely, all of the physical resources -- such as aluminum alloys, copper, iron ore and chemical propellants -- necessary to build cellphones and rocket launchers were around during Washington's time. In fact, they were around at the time of the cave man. There is only one answer for why cellphones, rocket launchers and millions of other things are around today but were not around yesteryear. The growth in human knowledge, human ingenuity, job specialization and trade led to industrialization, which, coupled with personal liberty and private property rights, made it possible. Human beings are valuable resources, and the more we have of them the better.
The greatest threat to mankind's prosperity is government, not population growth. For example, Zimbabwe was agriculturally rich but, with government interference, was reduced to the brink of mass starvation. Any country faced with massive government interference can be brought to starvation. Blaming poverty on overpopulation not only lets governments off the hook but also encourages the enactment of harmful, inhumane policies.
Today's poverty has little to do with overpopulation. The most commonly held characteristics of non-poor countries are greater personal liberty, private property rights, the rule of law and an economic system closer to capitalism than to communism. That's the recipe for prosperity.
As long as the a significant portion of the world is capitalist there is no fear of starvation. Wherever there is a demand, capitalism will satisfy that demand. Probably 90% of the people who starved in the twentieth century did so because of their local political failures; including wars, taxes, and anti-food legislation. (For example, the EU threatened to cut off trade with Africa if those nations accepted genetically modified grain from the US. People starved.)
Why the world population won’t exceed 11 billion | Hans Rosling
Overpopulation is not a myth. When the infrastructure collapses (which it inevitable will) due to nature or man, then we will see firsthand what happens when too many people in a large city tries to escape into too small of a pipeline.
Hillary's flat-out merge with Bernie's Socialist agenda "outed" an oft-overlooked imperative for the Democrat Party's hard, unbending stand on abortion, as declared in the first paragraph of a late-1800's analysis of "The Impracticability of Socialism." In that paragraph, the writer's point seems to be that under Socialism, ordinary human population growth cannot be economically supported.
The following is quoted from the Liberty Fund Library "A Plea for Liberty: An Argument Against Socialism and Socialistic Legislation," edited by Thomas Mackay (1849 - 1912), Chapter 1, final paragraphs from Edward Stanley Robertson's essay, "The Impracticability of Socialism":Note the writer's emphasis that the "scheme of Socialism" requires what he calls "the power of restraining the increase in population"--long the essential and primary focus of the Democrat Party in the U. S.:
"I have suggested that the scheme of Socialism is wholly incomplete unless it includes a power of restraining the increase of population, which power is so unwelcome to Englishmen that the very mention of it seems to require an apology. I have showed that in France, where restraints on multiplication have been adopted into the popular code of morals, there is discontent on the one hand at the slow rate of increase, while on the other, there is still a 'proletariat,' and Socialism is still a power in politics.With the Democrat agenda, isn't this the choice we must make--a path to tyranny or a possible path back to freedom in America?
I.44
"I have put the question, how Socialism would treat the residuum of the working class and of all classes—the class, not specially vicious, nor even necessarily idle, but below the average in power of will and in steadiness of purpose. I have intimated that such persons, if they belong to the upper or middle classes, are kept straight by the fear of falling out of class, and in the working class by positive fear of want. But since Socialism purposes to eliminate the fear of want, and since under Socialism the hierarchy of classes will either not exist at all or be wholly transformed, there remains for such persons no motive at all except physical coercion. Are we to imprison or flog all the 'ne'er-do-wells'?
I.45
"I began this paper by pointing out that there are inequalities and anomalies in the material world, some of which, like the obliquity of the ecliptic and the consequent inequality of the day's length, cannot be redressed at all. Others, like the caprices of sunshine and rainfall in different climates, can be mitigated, but must on the whole be endured. I am very far from asserting that the inequalities and anomalies of human society are strictly parallel with those of material nature. I fully admit that we are under an obligation to control nature so far as we can. But I think I have shown that the Socialist scheme cannot be relied upon to control nature, because it refuses to obey her. Socialism attempts to vanquish nature by a front attack. Individualism, on the contrary, is the recognition, in social politics, that nature has a beneficent as well as a malignant side. . . .
I.46
"Freedom is the most valuable of all human possessions, next after life itself. It is more valuable, in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health; but good laws, justly administered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the only thing that law can secure. Law cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of equality, all that law can do is to secure fair play, which is equality of rights but is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Individualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with that Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we may, is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, and that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the abnegations of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove." EDWARD STANLEY ROBERTSON
Sam Kinison still cracks me up 32 years later:
“There wouldn’t be world hunger IF YOU WOULD JUST MOVE TO WHERE THE FOOD IS!!!!!!!
So why do billionaires like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and George Soros fail to realize that the more people, the more disposable income? Maybe because expertise in making money is not the same as demographic competence?
Yes, but if one is a Leftist and looks around at one's compatriots, it is easy to see how one might draw that mistaken conclusion. :)
See what happens when Africa’s population hits 4.5 billion in 2100. It is not going to be pretty.
According to you “Overpopulation is not a myth”.
What is your solution?
Wait a minute - we didn’t all die in the ‘70s?
We do not need more population here. Name a city that would be better with more population, or more traffic. Name a suburb which is in desperate need of becoming sprawlier. Name a rural area desperate to become more urban. The same democrats screaming about global warming are desperately importing people who will increase the resource consumption by orders of magnitude and will bring as many family members and breed as many children as possible. They use thousands of percent more resources than they otherwise would have and create no value or nee resources in return. They are not the ones creating the next science breakthrough. Soon with native populations outbred the world will become Venezuela, and when there are no more powerful countries left to grow food for billions of people the cities will burn with 7 billion people killing each other over the final scraps that once were produced by free and capitalist peoples
The Left looks for any and every excuse for totalitarian global government. “Sustainability” is one excuse they are using whether referring to “overpopulation” or earth’s “limited” resources, both of which are gargantuan lies. For example, one flight over any significant part of land makes it plain that probably 80-90% of the earth’s land is void of human population. But Hitler, the Left’s counsel in absentia, said that if you repeat a lie enough times, they’re likely to believe it.
We on the Right need to show ourselves smarter than these Leftist snakes. When it comes to earth’s resources, we don’t have to constantly point to circumstantial evidence to prove they’re wrong because once in a while what they say may actually appear right. We on the Right have to KNOW THE TRUTH and use the TRUTH which doesn’t change, more than fact which is changeable, to defeat the Leftist lies.
The truth is, God made the earth to be populated and filled with mankind and made the earth wealthy, rich, and sustainable to support mankind for eternity. In its current state, earth’s support of mankind is sustainable for countless millennia. There is also much evidence of resource regeneration in the earth as well.
The battle is really a spiritual battle between freedom and faith in God (supported by mountains of evidence), versus totalitarianism and fear of “unsustainability” - Agenda 21 code word - (supported by little-to-no evidence, but a great deal of fear in some and a great lust for power in others). Faith versus fear - that’s the battle we’re in. May God give his people faith, wisdom, and knowledge now and in the years to come to defeat the Lying left. Amen.
That's the problem
Look where Africa did function slowly disappearing
I had this book...how non prescient
The three, now four revolutions tend only to tyranny.
The Agricultural Revolution - acts of enclosure in Great Britain and manuring fields - ancient feudal/manorial land-sharing arrangements thrown out, Irish potato famine while agriculture was profitable for foreign landlords exporting cash crops, the Ukrainian Holodmor, deliberate starvation of 3 million in the midst of East Europe’ bread basket.
The Industrial Revolution - profitable and stable Cottage Industries were gutted because they were “inefficient”, populations were turned off their own lands to staff Dickensian factories, Parliament advocated burning on the docks oversupply factory output unsalable in foreign markets to keep productively occupied workers who couldn’t afford to buy goods they produced.
The Information Revolution - traditional peoples had ample life lessons in their heritage lore, as soon as newspapers started publishing, they spread lies and disinformation, GK Chesterton, The Man Who Knew Too Much https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Knew_Too_Much_(book)
The Fourth Revolution - Robotic/Algorithmic - False promises of leisure, slavery to machines.
Overpopulation is not a hoax. We’re full.
Living like ants drives people insane. People all over the developed world are desperately looking for ways to escape overpopulated cities. Keep trying to stuff more people into a smaller area, and we’re just going to end up with more civil unrest and totalitarianism.
There are things in life you can’t put a price tag on. Peace of mind is one of them.
The Population Zero plan of 50 years ago did not work because even Liberals who were pushing it did not adhere to it. They continued to have children, too. Otherwise, what would account for the number of Liberals today?
...though I do believe that there is extensive politically liberal human overpopulation - I also believe that those who extoll the dangers of overpopulation help the planet out and make an exit post haste. Lots of states have help to speed you on your way
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.