911 was an inside job.AIDS was man made.The Fed is a private entity.Bilderberg secretly rules the world.KBR has built concentration camps all over the US as part of a program in DHS called end game.Privatized water.Genetically engineered food with suicide genes.Big Pharma is turning everyone in junkies.Blah. Death. Blah Doom.
I am now in a complete outrage coma.I can see and hear all the horrible things going on all around me (which is an improvement over most of the brain dead citizenry) but what used to be used to be a knee jerk “Motherf*cker!” reaction has been subdued all the way down to a tired shrug.I’ve been worn down to a nub, and this nub just doesn’t care anymore.
This can happen to any red blooded American progressive these days.For those of us who frequent OPED and other alternative media sites it is easy to assume the sensory overload induced thousand mile stare.But my despair comes from a different terrible knowledge, one that I have surprised in my own psyche for a while.
Now what I’m going to say here is going to be harsh, you have been warned.
There are too many of us.
Overpopulation on a planet with finite resources; that is real truth that no one dares speak.It’s a reality that is hard to accept let alone work towards solving.For to solve it would mean to betray our own natural instincts.To even discuss it is uncomfortable for most people.I’m a bad, bad blogist and so have no reference for these statistics:
Every second 5 babies are born and 2 people die
I just found it through a google search.But you get the point.How is it that 1 million people can die in Iraq and twice that in northern Africa and it hardly registers in the American public’s collective conscience?It’s because life is cheap.If life was a commodity traded in the world markets it would be rated as junk.
Oh, but not all life is created equal.There are many divisions and categories to consider when considering the value of a life.When was it started?Where was it started?How productive has it been so far?How productive is its potential in the future?What is its lineage?And then there are the really stupid but seemingly more important factors.What sex is it?What color is it?What religion does it belong to?What political affiliations does it have?What are its’ sexual preferences?What is really interesting think about is that perhaps we already do, in a manor of speaking, make these value judgments on the value of human life.Workers in Mexico are paid less than workers in America because?Employers prefer workers under the age of 30 because?There aren’t hundreds of thousands of Indians roaming the great plains of Wyoming because? I could go on but you’re already doing it in your own head while simultaneously condemning me for pointing it out.
This brings me to all the atrocities being rote against humanity today…today and everyday from the beginning of civilization in actuality.Because if there really is an all powerful elite class ruling the world from the shadows they most definitely understand how to value human life.Indeed if they do exist, their actions suggest not only that they can equate the value of life but they can also manipulate its price.Is AIDS African or homosexual population control?Is the war on terror Arab population control?Is cancer?Is depleted uranium? War on Drugs? War itself?
Population control can only be accomplished either by not having children or by killing people.Now think about this very carefully, which do you think would be easier for the people of this planet to accept?
And now excuse me while I throw my hands up in the air.
Or were they just meant to seem that way? Energy does not come from oil wells. It surrounds us, engulfs us, and is us.
The elite you speak of have placed themselves in between the people of the planet and their own energy through:
1. Religion. Fork over your soul and your cash.
2. Fiat currency - and central banking in general.
3. Suppression of free sources of energy - such as those proposed and invented by Nikola Tesla.
4. Toys and Transport. We do not need most of the crap we buy and are then forced to charge. There was a time when people were able to get to work without a car.
5. Over-work. As people are stressed and trying to make ends meet, they burn an incredible amount of energy here and are then forced to eat more than they would have to if they led a simple and happy existence. I am beginning to find it crazy that people spend so much time and energy in the "exercise" cycle. It is terribly inefficient. There are much better ways to stay fit and healthy.
6. The consumption of meat products. In some ways, we literally are what we eat. If we choose to consume poorly-treated cows and chicken that can't walk past the first year of their lives, then we will continue to be cattle/sheep that accept that there are "limited resources." We are perfectly balanced with plant life. They are the yin to our yang.
I could go on, but I will leave this a hex to their power.
There is plenty of energy for all.
by
Ferdinand (16 articles, 4 quicklinks, 21 diaries, 193 comments)
on Friday, March 7, 2008 at 5:03:56 PM
This country exists because of atrocities began from the time of first contact with the New World. Europeans rewarded kindness with butchery, sickness and slavery. You can get the story by viewing a series called '500 nations' (available on Netflix). We love to think of us being the good guys....but that is just not reality.
by
Roger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 334 comments)
on Friday, March 7, 2008 at 6:42:25 PM
It's true, if we all decided one day to play nice and be fair their might be enough for everyone. But ... utlimately resources and their consumption are a matter of balance. To accomplish this utopia we would all have to be willing to live a lifestyle of modesty and humilaty. A lifestyle Americans especially would find painfully uncomfortable. And even then we would have to change the social construct of success from personal to the success of human kind. Altruism is only truely attained when we stop being selfish. If everyone on the planet consumed resources like I do (admision of personal hipocracy), resources would propably dry up in a week. I'm just sayin'
by
erik mouse (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 97 comments)
on Friday, March 7, 2008 at 9:05:24 PM
That most of us do not understand this is a measure of our alienation. We don't know who we are. "This world is not my home, I'm just passin' thru..." goes an old folk song. We have been taught the earth is a stop over on the way to Heaven.
We have no respect for other life forms because we don't feel ourselves to be animals and consequently do not respect their right to life. We are overpopulated because we don't value life, not even our own.
All the pious talk about "saving lives" is hypocrisy. We spend more than half our annual budget as a nation for the care and maintenance of a military machine, the sole purpose of which is to kill human beings.
As a species we are completely lacking in the simplest courtesy: allowing for the lives of the other species with which we share the planet.
The measure of manhood is the Marine tossing a puppy off a cliff in Iraq. We deliberately kill those feelings in ourselves that would inform us about who we are.
The population is extremely uncomfortable for many people to grapple with because it exposes oneself to oneself.
We are a species at the threshold of self-annihilation. We are failing as a species because we have not assumed responsibility for our own consciousness. We continue to believe in "the will of God". This is the purest evasion.
Grappling with the overpopulation issue is like pulling on a thread in your sweater. The whole thing will eventually come unravelled. It is a very uncomfortable subject.
But, not to worry! We have not "conquered" nature! Nature has her ways. As George Carlin put it once, she invented us because she couldn't invent plastic. Nature wanted plastic. Now that she has all this plastic, a floating continent of the stuff in the Pacific, she doesn't need us anymore.
Look for plagues, famines, wars. That's how nature deals with overpopulation. Doesn't matter what species overpopulates, they are always and inevitably brought into line.
We've got a ring side seat. The great culling will happen in our life time. We can watch it approach. Is it a variation of the H5N1 flu virus? Could be. 200 million died of flu 1918-1921 around the world. It will probably be a number of diseases.
we are in it and very much of it. The sooner we understand that, the sooner we will be able to act responsibly and live on this planet with the understanding that all of life is sacred. But before we get there, we will probably have to swim in an ocean of our own tears and regrets.
by
Joseph Danison (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments)
on Friday, March 7, 2008 at 10:13:14 PM
I do worry that some men feel it is their responsibility to "God's work" and orchestrate these disasters, though.
Nature could very well do it on her own, but she is a more gentle creature than man. But I guess the human is only a creature of nature.. or is he? In the grand scheme of things, of course we are.
Buy seeds. Learn how to make a fire. Think of what you might do if ____.
Discrimination, alienation, and materialism got us into this - understanding will get us out.
by
Ferdinand (16 articles, 4 quicklinks, 21 diaries, 193 comments)
on Friday, March 7, 2008 at 11:04:27 PM
Absolutely, the earth has limited ressources; the first one that will be in short supply being water. People are beginning to fight over access to water, and it's going to get nasty. And we have not found a serious replacement for oil yet.
Ecologists beat around the bush and do not want to get to the core--population control. They are a part of the big cover up just like corpocracy. What they preach is akin to telling you that 50 people can live confortably in a 2 bdrms aprt provided they do not let the water run when they brush their teeth!
The fact is there was roughly 1 billion 1/2 human beings at the beginning of the 20th century and roughly 100 years later, there are 7 billion plus of them. it's crazy to believe that such an increase can be sustained, or even maintained.
Since human beings want to continue growing and multiplying and stubbornly refuse limiting the number of births, mostly for traditional/religious reasons, the only other options are going to be violent ones.
by
francine (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 295 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 7:10:23 AM
But I would contend that people will not, maybe even can not persue population control in a fair and balanced manor with the premis that all life is sacred and equal. I would further contend that the have-nots would never give up their right to procreate in great part purely out of instinct. Like wise for the haves, but the haves may also be following the will of their instincts. If we are animals, akin to, and ununiqe from all other life, then there are always dominant members of the herd. Perhaps their actions are benevolent if not always self serving first. (he said winking from the rabbit hole)
by
erik mouse (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 97 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 7:59:21 AM
"which do you think would be easier for the people of this planet to accept? "
I think many would rather see people who are already living killed rather than give up their ability to reproduce.Everybody wants their line to continue. It is a form of immortality. Some part of you lives on as long as your line continues. This is especially true for the wealthy and powerful. Kill off all the little, unimportant people, the 'useless eaters' as Henry Kissinger put it, just so long as we have heirs to leave our wealth and power to.
by
Watching (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 314 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 9:15:13 AM
Eric.I agree entirely, and by most assessments, around three billion to many, and it is the lack of discussion that I find most interesting. The human right folks, from deep seated spiritual belief take that the right to life (reproduction), liberty and security are non-negotiable and that world happiness lies in bringing the third world up to our standard of living. There is know serious acceptance what that level of consumption looks like. The environmentalists on the other hand can’t advocate a cull or some other population control measure to bring us into like with a sustainable world or the funding dries up.
I one did a piece on fish farming showing how to feed the world protein in 2050 at fifty billion folks and it is possible but what do you do in 2051.Before we figure out, and we might be able to as Kyle points out, this is the planet that is having trouble getting rid of energy (global warming), how to stager along continuing to consume, we should figure out how to get our selves into some sort of population equilibrium.As for the shrug, from the perspective of a planet sized time frame it makes little difference biologically as if we nuked our selves back to the cockroach evolution has on par been a glorious success and I am thrilled to be here to watch the show.
by
John Hill (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 9:46:35 AM
Not Too Many People, Just Too Many Ignorant People
There are NOT too many people. As has been pointed out, there are too few in control of the system. Energy and resources are all around us but we don't take advantage of them because the masters haven't figured out how to profit from it. We waste more than we use because that's where the profit is. Through religion people have been brainwashed into seeing themselves as separate. This enables the masters to maintain control. That IS the core of our problems. Resources are only finite if we waste them.
by
arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 217 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 10:25:10 AM
If I could digress for a moment and mention that we've all been told by the many so called experts, that Global Warming doesn't exist. If this is so, why then are they spraying barium into our the atmosphere which eventually works it's way back into our bodies? What is the purpose of the barium?
Every second 5 babies are born and 2 people die I just found it through a google search.
If such were true, we'd have population growth of 150% per year; our current six billion population would be 15 billion at this time in 2009 and 38 billion in 2010. Check your numbers again.
by
Dana Pico (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 142 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 11:52:32 AM
. . . and I can see where it might draw the ire of Mr Kall and the site monitors, but from what you wrote, the question must be asked; if you believe that there are too many people on earth, have you done your part and committed suicide yet?
It is very easy for us to say that we are overpopulated, and then offer solutions involving other people, but if the earth is overpopulated, and you are a human being living on earth, then you are part of the overpopulation problem.
You recognized, in a sense, your part of the problem, when you wrote:
Population control can only be accomplished either by not having children or by killing people.Now think about this very carefully, which do you think would be easier for the people of this planet to accept?
Right now, people in the developed nations do control births; fecundity is right around replacement level in the developed world, and below iit in much of Europe. But contraception is an individual decision, freely taken, in just about every place but Communist China, where the government enforces population control via compulsory abortion. Do you believe that the government ought to have the authority to regulate reproduction in the fashion done in China?
Again, I understand that this comment is harsh, very much so, but I hope that you will understand the reason it was made: you cannot claim that there are too many people alive without including yourself in that number.
by
Dana Pico (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 142 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 12:06:52 PM
There are not too many of us for what? If you mean to survive, you are correct. To maintain the average living standard of American's, you are wrong.
Humans many times the current population can survive on this planet, but survival would be the order of the day.
We simply have to look at the quality of life as it presently exists in extraordinarily overpopulated countries and you will get a view of the future of the U.S. should we continue to expand.
So, the question is not, are there too many of us, but rather, at what declining level of existence are you willing to accept to accommodate greater population?
by
Mike Folkerth (120 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 566 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 12:20:02 PM
We Could Do It If We Could Get Past The Brainwashing
I'm afraid I must disagree. Quality of life is as important as life itself. What I am saying is that we waste enough food just in this country alone, to feed the worlds hungry. I am saying there is a continues supply of free energy in methane, created from our organic waste, to supply all the energy needs of modern civilization. I am saying that there is enough open spaces for people to live that there is no need to cut down a single tree to make room. I am saying that with our technology there is no need to destroy the environment in order to supply all the materials needed to build and maintain all of this, and that includes water. All that is needed is for people to let go of their egos and the idea of profit.
by
arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 217 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 2:30:02 PM
That is a good comment. But please consider that in the U.S., our base economy is built on the premise of exponential growth.
The birth rate in America does not provide for that growth. Sooooo, why do we let 1.2 million people immigrate annually into a society that is naturally controlling population? And why do we allow millions to enter illegally? America runs on growth and massive consumption; that simple. It won't work, also that simple.
Interesting enough, we live in a country that would not be plauged with overpopulation from an internal source and therefore should be the envy of the world. So we puposely import the problem. Go figure.
by
Mike Folkerth (120 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 566 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 12:28:24 PM
Jacques Cousteau, the late oceanographer and environmentalist in November, 1991 UNESCO Courier quotes him as saying, “One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladesh. . . . In order to stabilize world populations, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. . . .”
Jacques didn’t say how many days we need to do that, so we don’t know how many corpses would satisfy him, but obviously if one American is worse than twenty Bangladeshis, we should start in Cincinnati. The leaders of this movement advocate “voluntary extinction,” which presumably means suicide. They could establish instant credibility if they committed it themselves, but they prefer that you do it, because, remember, we need them to supervise and they are – let’s face it – superior.
by
Munich (0 articles, 53 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 736 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 12:34:14 PM
Let's cut through the existential crap for a minute
No one's suicide is going to improve human chances for survival, but there can be no doubt that, by virtually any measure, human population growth and its concomitant environmnetial destruction, malice and silliness is a dire threat to our own existence and that of all living creatures. How can any literate, intelligent person doubt that? The signs are all around us. Even our comatose media has picked up on the global warming part of it. I give our existence as a species less than a century before a nuclear holocaust or a vengeful virus or a declining and degraded food supply or the chemical pollution spewed by the US and coveted by developing nations does us in.
Cheers.
by
Sandy Jewell (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 1:20:46 PM
Because of the attitude of the people of the world toward population and controlling it, in the end, 'nature' will correct the problem. One example that most, if not all, is aware of is the march of the lemmings, the mad rush to the sea, and a mass of bobbing bodies.
I read about an experiment where a dozen pairs of rats were placed in a large 'closed environment. They were given a set limit on the amount of food and water and bedding material that was added on a set schedule. In the beginning, this was and Eden. As the population increased, the 'society' broke down. "Gangs" of rats from one 'family' would attack and cannibalize others. In the end, the death caused by starvation (lack of resources) caused disease, and in a matter of weeks, the population was reduced to less than 20 pairs of rats. The whole experiment ran for about a year.
How long before reach this point?
by
kanawah (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 59 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 1:49:27 PM
I am connected to the rat and consider it to be a noble and intelligent creature. Once upon a time, I worked in a lab taking care of all of the rats and mice on whom they were doing experiments - I did all of the "keep them living" part before their heads were removed for examination. I understand our brains have some interesting connections, but we have a very developed cortex, a 5-folded brain capabale of seeing and experiencing a wide range of colors. We should not extrapolate too far..
It is without a doubt that humans will die. Life dies.. duh. I just don't think we need to play an active part in the deaths of any other creatures. Life should be celebrated.
Humans CAN BE incredibly intelligent and loving - the humans who choose to use their brains will change the world and create the future.
by
Ferdinand (16 articles, 4 quicklinks, 21 diaries, 193 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 2:07:03 PM
Sorry I was away for a few (had to go do my taxes he! irony!) but I'm tickled that my terrible un-researched highschool educated self can spark such conversations. To be clear I do infact count myself as part of the problem. But I'm trying to say the maybe it isn't a problem at all. I'm trying to get you to think -what if the Rothchilds and Kellogs of the world are merely fullfilling their place in the human ecosystem. Your looking for an outcome where you live love and breath as equal entities throughout the world. I'm saying what if that isn't even possible
by
erik mouse (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 97 comments)
on Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 4:38:50 PM
