NYTimes | In
Mr. Pearce’s view, the villain is not overpopulation but, rather,
overconsumption. “We can survive massive demographic change,” he said in
2011. But he is less sanguine about the overuse of available resources
and its effects on climate change
(although worries about the planet’s well-being could be a motivator
for finding solutions, much as demographic fears may have helped defuse
the population bomb).
“Rising
consumption today far outstrips the rising head count as a threat to
the planet,” Mr. Pearce wrote in Prospect, a British magazine, in 2010.
“And most of the extra consumption has been in rich countries that have
long since given up adding substantial numbers to their population,
while most of the remaining population growth is in countries with a
very small impact on the planet.”
“Let’s
look at carbon dioxide emissions, the biggest current concern because
of climate change,” he continued. “The world’s richest half billion
people — that’s about 7 percent of the global population — are
responsible for half of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. Meanwhile,
the poorest 50 percent of the population are responsible for just 7
percent of emissions.”
To
some extent, worrying about an overcrowded planet has fallen off the
international agenda. It is overshadowed, as Mr. Pearce suggests, by
climate change and related concerns. The phrase “zero population
growth,” once a movement battle cry, is not frequently heard these days;
it has, for instance, appeared in only three articles in this newspaper
over the last seven years.
But
Dr. Ehrlich, now 83, is not retreating from his bleak prophesies. He
would not echo everything that he once wrote, he says. But his intention
back then was to raise awareness of a menacing situation, he says, and
he accomplished that. He remains convinced that doom lurks around the
corner, not some distant prospect for the year 2525 and beyond. What he
wrote in the 1960s was comparatively mild, he suggested, telling Retro
Report: “My language would be even more apocalyptic today.”
7 comments:
BD is certain it never occurred to TPTB to stop cradle-to-grave supporting of parasitic useless [BRExxx] reproducers as their votes are more important than the benefits of reduced population....
It's the "to-grave" support of ashen, wrinkled, old-raisins who've outlived their 4 years worth of paid social security and are now uselessly sucking the life out of Gen X/Y with their unearned and unfunded monthly draw downs, not to mention their ungodly clinging to life and hyperconsumption of medicare-funded, end-of-life services.
To benefit our children, grandchildren, etc., BD would willingly forfeit his Medicare and SS if all other gov't entitlements were similarly forfeited by all recipients (Medicaid, disabilitySS, unemployment, SNAP, eeeBBBttt, student loan subsidies, and the other 80-odd ripoff programs). You see, CNu, IQ-160s have sufficient FTO to responsibly save and invest so that those psuedo-freebies are not needed. Even though the SS bennies can be viewed as an insurance payoff, not BD's fault the premiums were poorly managed/squandered....
And you would see e.g., medical costs, college tuition, etc plunge until costs are down to levels affordable by the customer base. Econ101 price/demand. And all those gov't paper-shufflers would have to go get RealProductiveJobs, e.g. those "jobs nobody wants" that "require" all the illegal immigrants....
You see, CNu, IQ-160s have sufficient FTO to snip!
lol, how would you know what folks that far above your cognitive pay-grade have sufficient of?
Maybe Big Don should provide me with his HICN. I can write an Edit (what business person would make up these terms??) so that his HICN is considered fraud and reject every medical claim sent this way... (so he can put his money where his mouth is)
My Dear Friend CNu:
First a note to you: http://withintheblackcommunity.blogspot.com/2015/06/a-lesson-for-cnu-since-he-believes-that.html
Now back to the article at hand.
I have changed over time.
My expression of opposition to the antics of "Black Racial Services Machine" based on 25 years of watching them in Atlanta used to be expressed with the notion "The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend".
From the year 1995 through 2008 my dear friends and drinking buddies used to have "Knock Down, Drag Out Debates". Of course they made me the "Black Republican" in the debate. Though I have never been a Republican, I took on the role in a quasi fashion just to debate against those who were unabashedly in the tank for the Democrats - as their "Blackness" was fused as such.
When the "Invasion Of Iraq" was building up I was sure that "George W Bush was only bluffing. There is no way that there is going to be an invasion".
When MSNBC and the "Black Racial Services Machine" went on the offensive.............against Bush - again I chose to be the "Devil's Advocate". At that time it was "Patriotic" to support the war and "Communist" if you didn't (per the propaganda of the Right Wing).
BUT THEN SOMETHING CHANGED CNu.
When Obama got into power and the initial (Spike Lee) "We Are Going To Protest In Front Of Fox News To Defend Obama" scheme wore off - I noticed something different ABOUT MY FRIENDS.
Through to today WE NO LONGER DEBATE POLITICS.
They don't want to have to explain Obama. I don't feel like going after them as such.
I now see clearly that THE US GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO "DO WHAT IT DO" and that the fraudulent game of POLITICS is to manufacture a team that is silly enough to CHEERLEAD , as it lives vicariously through the elected combatant.
If you notice - your story talks about Paul Krugman - even critically - but it is limited to the WAR IN IRAQ - the "Bush War".
The more accurate read (and where I stand today) is that ALL OF THIS B.S. IS A CONTINUUM.: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, Mali, Tunisia, Syria - the list goes on.
The only difference between BACK THEN and now is that President Obama is smart enough to WITHDRAW AMERICAN BODIES from direct conflict and use DRONES and "War Of Rendition" (arms and aircraft to Saudi Arabia - OK - I'll include Israel for your benefit) to have it fight the fight without the PR DAMAGE BACK AT HOME.
The flaw in the article is that it does not establish this continuity sufficiently and thus cast Paul Krugman as a bigoted partisan. And to include most of the other operatives LEFT AND RIGHT - especially in the media.
"Washington" and the Press does not want DEAD AMERICANS. Period.
DEATH of other people (especially People Of Color) really doesn't matter - ESPECIALLY if they are killing themselves, again it doesn't matter if American weapons are supplied in the process.
"CORPORATE POLITICAL-MEDIA DECEPTION" might indeed be a good label but I am not sure if this author is interested in noting that IT IS STILL GOING ON TODAY.
Just as I say on my blog about Charles Blow: "A Negro who is allowed to pick and choose his own racial injury is going to always choose those that advance his IDEOLOGY and not his RACE" , the same is true with regard to WAR: Blind partisans in America are going to always condemn their enemies for "American War Dead" but when their team has Blood on their Hands they are going to distract their congregation by focusing away from the blood bath by connecting the would be protesters to a domestic scheme that advances their agenda. (Today "Bruce Jenner" is more important than a focus on the African migrants exiting Libya and being rescued by hundreds as they face certain death on the Mediterranean.
Actually Bro. Feed, I believe a major thrust of the medialens article is the naked hypocrisy centered on the "wash, rinse, repeat" of Iraq perpetrated against Libya - and - the complicity of Big Media as corporatist handmaiden in promoting and sustaining the kayfabe, inclusive of nominally progressive fundamentalist commentators.
Post a Comment