Do we need population reduction?

[wintler2]

..I've been around an awful lot of people who seem a bit like you. ..
Why are so many alternative lifestyle, nature-worshipping, hippie wannabes such passive aggressive little fucks? ..

Every now and then DEs mask slips. He smears like a plasterer on speed and has a filmstar sized wardrobe of badjackets, its not pretty but its educational.

[Joe Hillshoist]

..I've been around an awful lot of people who seem a bit like you. ..
Why are so many alternative lifestyle, nature-worshipping, hippie wannabes such passive aggressive little fucks? ..

Every now and then DEs mask slips. He smears like a plasterer on speed and has a filmstar sized wardrobe of badjackets, its not pretty but its educational.

I kind of agree with DE on that comment, tho perhaps I wouldn't lump SEGA in that shitpile.

With the little fire twirling fuckwit from Byron Bay (before it became part of the Gold Coast). Who thinks(thought but I doubt his brain has changed at all in the last 10 or so years) that organising a doof in the middle of the bush at a blockade to stop the logging at compartment whatever it was in the Whian Whian forest, is a good idea, and definitely won't upset the native fauna the way those evil bulldozers will. AND can't be arsed composting in his on fucking home, let alone growing some food in his backyard.

But has no trouble yelling at people who do their own thing, including beautiful permaculture gardens, masses of native regrowth and off the grid electricity. And ending it with "I'm out there fighting for the future every day face to face with loggers."

I guess there are arseholes everywhere and in every subculture.

Most of the wannabe hippies like that move on to something else, or end up bitter twisted old hippies, who usually at least have reduced their footprint and are happy to be left alone in their private Edens.

This is a good thread BTW. I think following segas example is a good one, cos it has to start somewhere, and the more people that can live like that and have good meaning ful lives the more the meme will spread.

Me I'm a hypocrite.

I use grid power, (tho its posed to be "GreenPower') drive a car and buy stuff.

But I grow what I can, I also think its a good idea to plant fruit trees wherever you can. Look after them till they are going and then leave them to their own devices. they wiull feed something. And most urban spaces have places you can do this. I have planted a few in melbourne over the years, in the wasteland around Airport West, along the Merri creek and various other places. A few apples, plums and stuff that comes up on its own in various peoples yards. They don't all make it but some would have to still be there.

BTW In answer to the OP title.

No we don't(Tho i wouldn't shed too many tears if the fucking gold Coast was tsunamied out of existence). We either get it right or nature will take care of it in the long run. I don't have any kids and I doubt I will ever have more than 2, however controlling our growth, population wise, and economically is something we probably do need.

BTW wintler ( and any other aussies) notice how the birthrate is up in Australia, since the "baby bonus" came along.

There is a link between economics and birth rates tho its probably more complex than simply the richer your society the less babies get born.

[brownzeroed]

Ah, as much as I like jumping into a fist fight

Some food for thought.

Rich Worlds Consumerism may cause African famines, experts warn

FROM AP:

TAELLBERG, Sweden (AFP) - Food production in developing countries will halve in the next 20 years unless wealthy nations lower their rate of consumption, the Stockholm Environment Institute warned at a weekend conference.

The livelihoods of more than three billion people in the world are being undermined by the wealth of the privileged few, the institute's executive director, Johan Rockstroem, warned.

"The risk is that we might halve ... food production in sub-Saharan Africa because of our lifestyles," he told AFP on the sidelines of an international conference on climate change and sustainable development, held in the Swedish town of Taellberg.

Rockstroem said that as wealthy countries increase consumption they also increase their exploitation of the world's natural resources, and in turn emit more greenhouse gases.

That ultimately speeds up the desertification of sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the world.

According to scientists and experts, greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to rise by two percent a year despite hundreds of environmental agreements, including the Kyoto Protocol.

James Hansen, a climate expert and the director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said tree lines moving north and melting glaciers were not only a consequence of global warming, they were also an accelerating factor.

"Forests are moving forward and that ... amplifies climate change. Ice sheets are beginning to melt earlier in the season. They become darker when they become wet and they absorb more sunlight" which warms the planet's temperature, he said.

As a result, experts have predicted that the world has at least a decade to lower emissions before it is too late.

The Stockholm Environment Institute is one of the world's top five research organisations in climate change and it is pushing for a broader dialogue on social and economic change.

"We have come to the end of the road of sustainable development as we know it today. Science alone cannot deal with this. The risk of environmental refugees, the risk of societal collapse is imminent," Rockstroem said.

"We need to make massive changes in the equity and stewardship of the planet which goes way beyond climate change," he added.

Bo Ekman, founder and chairman of the Taellberg Forum, agreed.

"We cannot continue with business as usual, rather we must change our ways to business as sustainable," he said.

Hansen suggested the possibility of introducing punitive measures to help protect the environment.

"Oil and gas, which are being exploited now and will (continue to) be, are going to take us close to the dangerous level and there are huge reservoirs of coal and unconventional fossil fuels. Countries across the world are continuing to build or plan to build coal-fired power plants and we simply can't do that, he said.

"We're going to have to put a price on carbon emissions," he said.

The Taellberg Forum each year gathers more than 500 political leaders, scientists and aid workers in the resort village of Taellberg to discuss world issues in a relaxed atmosphere, with nature walks and music concerts on the agenda.

Damn Swedes ruining my fun.
Anyone else see the recent public discourse on pop. reduction (not here, out there) as rationalization for what they see as a "necessary", forgone conclusion (not unlike "War of Civilizations" translates to new Indian War for global energy dominance)?
maybe conjecture. dunno.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Anyone else see the recent public discourse on pop. reduction (not here, out there) as rationalization for what they see as a "necessary", forgone conclusion (not unlike "War of Civilizations" translates to new Indian War for global energy dominance)?
maybe conjecture. dunno.

No. They didn't mention it in Australia.

As a result, experts have predicted that the world has at least a decade to lower emissions before it is too late.

At least a decade? Surely they mean at most?

Good article, says a lot i had thought for years.

Seems like western consumerism is always screwing the poorer nations. And putting them in positions where food isn't as viable an option as perhaps coca, or opium or palms for oil.

I guess thats always been the problem. And goes to the heart of this thread.

Anyway feel free to get back into the fist fight.

[Hammer of Los]

This is some funny stuff. Thanks for the laughs guys. Although DE does indeed "smear like a plasterer on speed," , I'm not sure of this "greener than thou" contest;

What I have done to address the situation:

-I purposefully did not have kids
-I am a vegetarian that is trying desperately to eat less animal by product each year
-Learning to grow my own
-Compost my humanure to build soil and relieve pressure on freshwater supplies
-Grey water re-use
-Water harvest
-Bike more than drive
-Do without A/C
-Try to wrap my head around not replacing things as they fail unless they are a hand tool
-Buy used as much as possible
-Live in a house less than 700sq feet

So, DE, what did you do today in order to help grow more food for the mouths you think should be able to inhabit the planet?

Why dont you just commit suicide? Seriously, then you wouldn't be a burden to the planet at all. You could even offer up your remains as composting material. Me, I feel so guilty now for having two kids that I'm going to take myself and them down to my petrol-fuelled car and fix a pipe from the exhaust through the window. I know it'll increase emissions, but at least it'll only be a one-off thing.



I don't think berating the "little people," even of the decadent and materialist West, for their lack of green credentials is any help at all in solving the problems faced by the human race right now.

ps I do live an extremely frugal existence, at least by the standards of the West. But my motivation isn't "saving the planet", it is just that I consider possessions a burden, and the focus on material existence a hindrance to my spiritual development. Oh, and the car is really the wife's, I don't even know how to drive the thing. Besides, I sometimes think the most virtuous thing I do right now is to not pay any taxes to her Majesty's Government, but that's only because I don't have a job.

[MacCruiskeen]

double post

[MacCruiskeen]

Wait a minute! It was DE who started ranting on telling us that TEN BILLION people can live perfectly well on this planet (somehow), without oil-based agriculture (somehow), if we only just all change our ways (somehow) and learn to be content with less, and maybe also somehow SMASH CAPITALISM worldwide, somehow, sooner or later. And it was DE who concluded with the sarcastic killer-putdown-line: "Enjoy your steak".

Sega then demolished DE's arguments and concluded by listing the ways in which he had in fact made an effort to change his ways and be content with less.

And so, DE tells us, Sega is (therefore) a sanctimonious hippy and a "passive-aggressive little fuck".

To which I say: shurely shome mishtake? If merely struggling in an argument is enough to transform DE into NASCAR Man, it does not augur well for the future of this planet when the shit really does hit the fan.

Now please excuse me while I carry on knitting my yurt.

[Dreams End]

Who is "sega?"

[MacCruiskeen]

It's all right, we can all calm down now. At last we have a solution to the global energy crisis: Vivoleum.

[Dreams End]

Hey Mac...I was curious who sega was.

the reason I ask is that if 5e6a is sega that's a little odd...a hippie using leet speak? Or should I say 733t? That's a new on on me.

so is Mr. sega sitting with his dreads, sipping herbal tea and pwning n00bs in world of warcraft?

5uxX0R, d00d.

the post before my question to haXXor 5e6a still awaits you, mac. Despite having been "demolished" by sega, I have actually not seen anyone respond to it yet.

A hippie named sega. I love it. Somebody call Neil Stephenson.


All your base are belong to us.

[MacCruiskeen]

so is Mr. sega sitting with his dreads, sipping herbal tea and pwning n00bs in world of warcraft?

I don't know, DE, you'll have to ask him (not that an answer to this pressing question will make the world any less dependent on fossil fuels.)

So... Is Mr. Dr3ams3nd sitting with his smart shirt and tie in his cubicle at Microsoft, sipping Cherry Coke Lite and playing "Global Capitalism: Day of Reckoning" on the company's time while keeping a sharp eye out for the boss? (Not that an answer to this pressing question will make the world any less dependent on fossil fuels.)

[chiggerbit]

I liked this discussion until DE started mocking 5E6A.

[5E6A]

Seems I've struck a chord. Most likely I've rattled some cognitive dissonant and the only way to keep on trukin' is to lash out at the messenger. Ni Modo.

Some minor points to address: it's a 5 (five) not an S (ess) at the beginning of my name and it is not a phunny way of speling something in english. My hair is as short as a marine. If I conform to any label it's anarchist. If I am guilty of one cliche it is that I wear mostly black. Plagiarise away, it wouldn't be the first time its happened...

Now, telling me I should commit suicide, ethical issues aside, is a poor excuse for debate. My mother calls me fey. She has since an early age. On my end of things, something always seemed awry in this world. My curiosity drove me, from early on, to try and figure out what was amiss. That has driven every decision on that moon unit list.

Alternative? Son, I wish it were. Here's where it's at: In my assessment, mankind will only bridge this century if it learns to adapt a way of life that resembles contact indigenous cultures a whole lot more than post-industrial. Drawdown is a bitch. I was being generous in my asking about how many we can support and did not even get into the water supply issue of widespread intensive agriculture. There are no alternatives. The industrialised will either voluntarily relinquish their infant mind hold on the resource density rattle, and learn to live in consort with the limits of the system that spawned it, or we will spend the next 50 years waging resource wars which, as all wars do, will see use of the full arsenal in existence.

Fond of pinning things on the elite? They only have as much hold as you are willing to engage in their system. That is also what drove all of the decisions that appeared to be more a call for offing myself. Again, fault my curiosity, but once I figured out that the system served only to enslave me, and was also rigged to be resilient to change from within, I sought a way to resist. It's called Opt Out. The less you earn, the less you buy, the less you feed their blood line which is called -ism, the less ability they have of owning the future. That's why I do what I do. It's because I want to live. And brother, the extent to which you feed them is the extent to which you are deprived of truly living.

I'm not sure what purpose the first call for data served, but it certainly appeared repeatedly in lieu of enlightening us as to how we are going to feed an expanding population on an agriculture system which is poised to devolve into a pre-industrial model. I was told that I needed to provide proof that it couldn't be done, which I believe was the crux of my post which caused such a ruckus in the henhouse, and again asked DE to show how a portion of his would version would work. <crickets>chirpchirpchirp</crickets> What we then get is a magnum opus that, to its credit, at least explains forthwith it is off topic. In the end, however, the rest is devoted to DE's decision that it is more productive to have a middle aged reverie, which was little more than an attempt to slide the ad hominem down easier, and call me things that lack verisimilitude than engage in dialogue. Classy.

You'll excuse my indifference to any further posts that serve only to derail the discussion as opposed to being about the reality facing us...

[5E6A]

seems i was writing whilst the slag fest was ongoing. so for clarification its 5 E 6 A, five echo six alpha...

[erosoplier]

a paper










A quote:

The human cost of such an involuntary population rebalancing is, of course, horrific. Based on this model we would experience an average excess death rate of 100 million per year every year for the next 75 years to achieve our target population of one billion by 2082. The peak excess death rate would happen in about 20 years, and would be about 200 million that year. To put this in perspective, WWII caused an excess death rate of only 10 million per year for only six years.