How Many People Must Die to Fix the Planet?

One more excuse in the making for Western elites to wield extraordinary power over the rest of the world

On the 40th anniversary of the first world climate conference in 1979, the journal Bioscience published the ominously titled “World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency.” “Scientists,” the Warning begins, “have a moral obligation to clearly warn humanity of any catastrophic threat and to ‘tell it like it is.’ On the basis of this obligation…we declare, with more than 11,000 scientist signatories from around the world, clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency.” Addressing this emergency, the Warning continued, will require a stunning prescription: “the world population must be stabilized – and, ideally, gradually reduced.”

The Warning itself might have gone the way of most academic editorializing, but the 11,000 “scientists” who added their names and reputations to the effort caught the public imagination. The press picked it up and everyone was off to the races. Right until people started looking at the credentials of the more than 11,000 signatories.

The list includes shockingly few climate scientists. It does include people who describe themselves as “PHD Student,” “MD,” and “Zoo keeper,” though. And those were drawn just from people with last names beginning with A. Critics had a field day with this, but they had more fun with signatories Mickey Mouse and Albus Dumbledore, who also signed on.

That 11,000 academics of any description would sign off this sort of thing is what’s most telling, and most damning. What do the 11,000 suggest? Quickly implementing “massive energy efficiency and conservation practices,” “eating mostly plant-based foods,” creating a “carbon-free economy,” and “reducing population,” among other things, all with the goal of bringing about “major transformations in the way our global society functions.”

Is that all?

Their set of recommendations follows almost perfectly from a strange obsession economists have had for over two centuries, which holds the threat of “overpopulation” imperils humanity’s very existence. In past variants, this threat entailed resource depletion that would supposedly condemn most of the world to misery and starvation.

Today’s scientists have adapted identical reasoning to climate change. In each instance, scholars claiming the mantle of scientific expertise have enlisted apocalyptic fears of a coming “population crisis” to advance sweeping programs of social engineering as a way to alter the course. But curiously, the predicted population catastrophe never comes. We are simply expected to believe that, for some reason, this time things are different even if the prescription is the same.

The root of this idea traces to eighteenth-century economist Thomas Malthus, who began with a simple, intuitively plausible observation: the population of human beings expands at a faster rate than food production increases, ensuring that the typical person’s quality of life ultimately decreases to the point of misery as a result. He was so persuasive on this count that the process became known as the “Malthusian catastrophe.”

While Malthus’s religiosity constrained him from taking this intuition to its full prescriptive end, his followers in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries attempted to mechanize a “scientific” solution by enlisting the powers of the state to socially plan and control population rates.

Before his name became synonymous with his macroeconomic diagnosis of the Great Depression, the British economist John Maynard Keynes attained fame as one of the world’s most prominent neo-Malthusians. “There is no more important object of deliberate state policy,” Keynes wrote in 1924, “than to secure a balanced budget of population.” Indeed, Keynes prescribed population control as a “solution” to the underlying political causes of World War I, to the Soviet Union’s food and political crises, and even to the economic malaise of interwar Germany.

In a heretofore unpublished speech given before the Malthusian League in London in 1927, Keynes contended that a proper population policy must not only achieve population stability but continue to maintain and cultivate a population of a certain character after the growth pattern had been reversed. At first he spoke of birth control, but almost seamlessly slipped into the pseudoscience of hereditary social planning known as Eugenics.

“Within our own lifetime,” Keynes predicted, “the population of [Great Britain] will cease to increase and will probably diminish.” Following Malthusian logic to its end, Keynes thought this both good and necessary, even if the nations of the earth “are now faced with a greater problem, which will take centuries to solve.” The solution? Keynes concluded, “I believe that for the future the problem of population will emerge in the much greater problem of heredity and Eugenics.” As a scribbled line on his notes further acknowledged, “Quality must become the preoccupation.”

What we needed to address the Malthusian catastrophe, according to Keynes, was a smaller and “better” population, cultivated by “the powerful weapon of the preventive check” and administered through a state-directed population policy. This is the ugly intellectual heritage – and hubris – behind today’s population planners in the climate activist movement.

Because this time, they tell us, it’s different. But it would have to be, because when Malthus penned his original prediction more than 95 percent of the world’s population of one billion lived in extreme poverty. That population has grown more than seven fold, but only about one third of it lives in extreme poverty today. The Malthusian catastrophe never came. Instead, we got growing wealth and comfort on a global scale, a process that continues unabated.

Yet according to the 11,000 signatories, a new Malthusian tipping point is approaching. This time the cause is not impoverishing resource depletion itself, but the belief that too many people are enjoying the fruits of prosperity. Electricity, affordable and accessible transportation, and even the consumption of meat are recast from signs of unprecedented global prosperity and into “strains” on the climate. The sky is falling now, and once again governments must turn to seldom-elaborated forms of social engineering aimed at reducing the global birth rate.

And here is where the pedigree of the 11,000 matters. They urge us to uproot nearly the entirety of human life using an argument that has never, in over 200 years, been correct. And they are absolutely unqualified as a group to do so. The ever present danger is that politicians will take cover behind them and their bad ideas, which is not at all a far-fetched concern.

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, in a recent town hall meeting on climate change, went right back to the same Mathusian well. In response to a question on global overpopulation he said that women “in the United States…have a right to control their own bodies and make reproductive decisions. The Mexico City agreement, which denies American aid to those organizations around the world that allow women to have abortions or even get involved in birth control, to me is totally absurd.” Such measures, he continued, were needed “especially in poor countries.”

A candidate for the presidency of the United States thinks it is absurd that the American people should be cautious in inflicting schemes of population control on impoverished nations. What he means but will not say is that he thinks Keynes was right. He thinks that we, in the developed West, need to decide how many and what kind of people should be born in less developed countries.

Because the environment. Because this time it’s different.

Source: American Institute for Economic Research



You may back the site at:




Subscribe
Notify of
guest
21 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

ArcAngel
ArcAngel
1 month ago

“Saving the Planet” is another vile braindead concept/paradigm given to us by the socio-psychopathic Uber EL-ites and their ignorant lackeys.
Just MORE “climate fear-porn” for the masses… the brain dead ones anyway…

But hey, I will “play the game” and answer the title question…
“How many must die…?”
That’s easy… 1-5% of the population and ALL of THEM at the TOP of the Pyramid.
Kill off ALL the socio-psychopathic PARASITES. The Uber EL-ites ie;
Banksters, CEO’s, child raping-baby eating Priests/Cards/Bishops and of course the anti-Christ Papacy. Kings and Queens, Lawyers/Politicians, blood lusting Warmongers. Vatican, London, WARshigton, Brussels. and the UN, to name a few.
Then watch HUMANITY begin to get healthy again.
As far as “Saving the Planet”- how fuckin egomaniacal is that.
I include Keynes and Malthus, and those who subscribe to this disgusting demonic anti-Humanism that should be thrown off the planet (if those two were still alive)

Undecider
Undecider
1 month ago

How many Libtards are there?

Ronnie&MargaretInDementia
Ronnie&MargaretInDementia
29 days ago

They won’t do anything until lots of white people start dying.

Rowdy-Yates
Rowdy-Yates
29 days ago

In the modern world Populations are becoming redundant. The elite can run most economies quite well without much of the population. For example Saudi Arabia does not need her 34 million to run her oil industry and have a progressive economy with no threat of even a debt. She most likely can reduce her population to 9 million and still be a towering Oil giant.

Due to technological advances ranging from Robotics to automation and due to economic policies such as outsourcing a good deal of America’s population are redundant. Not only is this population now simply receiving checks from the government but their capacity as consumers is going down. they are increasingly obese, sickly, older and do not earn enough to remain powerful consumers.

The elite of American can run America’s economy quite well, save on Social Security benefits and cut the debt if say 200 million of America’s 330 million were to not exist. This kind of thinking can apply across the world since technology is making man disposable.

But there are 2 other major forces I would like to mention. the rise of the developing world is seen as an existential challenge to the Western world. The developing world of over 5 billion where the majority are very young have an immense potential to change the entire world. this world of Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Africans, Asians, South Americans is an awakening nightmare to the Anglo Jewish world of Europe who see themselves and their cultures eclipsed by this tidal wave. So limit them at all costs.

On another level is the desire to push alternative energies over cheap conventional energy. Normally a product replaces another because it is better and cheaper. Alternative energy is costlier and to date, not reliable. The only way to promote it over the vast supply of cheap conventional energy is to create an artificial crisis. Sell Alternative Energy based on Fear.

Now if one puts together the desire to reduce the human population due to redundancy and the fear of the developing world coupled with the need to sell a product no one actually needs the end result is a smaller world population sustained by the Sun.

Having stated this one must keep in mind that the true challenge of Mankind is to multiply and meet all the challenges a larger population creates. That is how Mankind advances. Limiting populations is regressive. the Human mind is capable of finding solutions created by an expanding population even if that entails living in outers space. We are the only species that has evolved to leave the confines of Earth and expand to other planets. We maybe the only hope Earth has created if this planet were to meet its doom.

DarkEyes
DarkEyes
29 days ago
Reply to  Rowdy-Yates

Quite strong arguments. Well said.

Rowdy-Yates
Rowdy-Yates
29 days ago
Reply to  DarkEyes

Thank you. There was one other point which stands apart and that is the introduction and spread of Cultural Marxism whose goals were to destroy the family and the nation state. To devolve the values that sustained hope and a vital healthy society. It began in Germany then spread to America. America is now the center for depopulation, promoting abortions, destroying self worth, toxicity of man

I could not introduce that concept since it is too disparate to the rest of my comment.

DarkEyes
DarkEyes
29 days ago
Reply to  Rowdy-Yates

I know from articles about Cultural Marxism the destruction tempo is quite fast in Germany.

Slowly people are waking up and observe, experience their is something not right with their society.

Rowdy-Yates
Rowdy-Yates
26 days ago
Reply to  DarkEyes

The Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism was set up by men like George Lukacs and Antonio Gramsci in order to take down Western societies when Communist revolution failed to take hold. They promoted the destruction of the family unit including the role of Men. Books like “The Authoritative Personality” attacked the role of Men in society. Books like “Eros and Civilization” promoted alternative lifestyles . One of the goals was depopulation but it was not a primary goal

JustPassingThrough
JustPassingThrough
29 days ago
Reply to  Rowdy-Yates

we live in interesting times.

Rowdy-Yates
Rowdy-Yates
29 days ago

Its a blessing.

Garry Compton
Garry Compton
29 days ago

The USG Immigration Laws, prior to the 1965 open/unlimited immigration/refugee, which destroyed the balance, was a set of immigration laws that worked perfectly for the US and the American Dream. It had the right stuff to keep a healthy American population, with an easy pro-european society. It was destroyed by the NY jew lobbyists and the traitors in Washington. The population of the US today would be about 230 – 240 million – and a society that would have been much more united and much less easier to buffaloe , like the Heintz 57 one you have now. Each country should have kept a strict immigration plan – but they too, were taken over by the Zionist destroyers.

DarkEyes
DarkEyes
29 days ago
Reply to  Garry Compton

Indeed, the big corporations are behind the UN Agenda21/2030 Action Plan.
The UN Migration Action Plan is for Europe to absorb 70 million African, Middle Eastern, Eurasian and Asian people. They have to mix with the Whites so nothing White will be left. There will be less resistance, they think. White people are too induvidualistic, the Elites think.

White Europe AND White USA have to be destroyed in other words the Koudenhoven-Kalergi Plan is put in action slowly but surely since around 1960s.
And most politicians and Governments are cooperating with this “onslaught”.
They get their reward for it, 10.000 USD or Euros for every “Migrant” be payed by the UN if a country takes Migrants in.
So, basically we are financing with our taxmoneys our own downfall.

Cheers.

JustPassingThrough
JustPassingThrough
29 days ago

Seems to me that the abortion problem, the overpopulation problem, the various schemes of population control would be greatly simplified if we just started to sterilize the males.

DarkEyes
DarkEyes
29 days ago

There is no overpopulation problem.
There is still a lot of space left on this planet, f.i. in
Australia, Russian Federation, Mongolia, Sahara, Gobi Desert, Canada, India, Greenland, Spain, Greece, etc.

The phylosophy of the Banksters or Illuminati or the Cabal is to keep a permanent fear among the people of the planet. They want us to believe there are too many people on the planet. Who they think they are? God?
They with all their trillions of dollars, want the quiet life with only useful slaves to do the work for them. They have already their robots prepared as a kind of World Stasi.

Fear?
Yesterday it was rising sea level. The day before it was Climate Warming.
Then it was overpopulation. Then it was we are running out of Oil because after puting us all in a automobile running on (their) petrol/diesel we used too much fuel. Today is Climate Change. Too much CO2, which is not a “danger for the planet” because we cannot live without CO2. It is good for the planet.
Every slogan the Banksters launch it means big business for the Elites.

And the MSM have the assignment to drive the people on the planet insane about “we are going under, it is nearly the end”- waffling.

ArcAngel
ArcAngel
29 days ago
Reply to  DarkEyes

Nice!
Of course the idiotic “Chicken-littles” have been, for centuries, screaming “the sky is falling, the sky is falling”
I am still waiting for the “coming ICE AGE” the Uber EL-ites promised us in the 1970’s that would be here at the turn of the century.
According to them, I should be under 50-100 feet of Ice where I live.

JustPassingThrough
JustPassingThrough
29 days ago
Reply to  DarkEyes

“The phylosophy of the Banksters or Illuminati or the Cabal is to keep a permanent fear among the people of the planet.”

that about sums it up. –fear.

thomas malthaus
thomas malthaus
29 days ago

Malthus couldn’t have fully appreciated the current conditions regarding desertification, rapid fossil fuel energy depletion without future replacement, the welfare state, and money printing and debt which has kept the populace happy and alive.

CHUCKMAN
29 days ago

There are a large number of things Malthus did not understand, including importantly what was to be the immense growth of productivity in agriculture and the now-established fact of Demographic Transition in population growth.

See my reference below for just a brief explanation.

SFC Steven M Barry USA RET
SFC Steven M Barry USA RET
29 days ago

My response to Malthusians demanding “population control” is, “Good; we start with you and people like you.”

ArcAngel
ArcAngel
29 days ago

Love it.
My sentiment as well.
Cheers

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!