Fewer British babies would mean a fairer planet
Alex Renton (pictured above), a writer for Britain's Guardian newspaper, penned a column in this past Sunday's edition advocating population reduction as the only viable means of addressing the planet's alleged limate change poblems.
"The worst thing that you or I can do for the planet is to have children. If they behave as the average person in the rich world does now, they will emit some 11 tonnes of CO² every year of their lives. In their turn, they are likely to have more carbon-emitting children who will make an even bigger mess. If Britain is to meet the government's target of an 80% reduction in our emissions by 2050, we need to start reversing our rising rate of population growth immediately.
And if that makes sense, why not start cutting population everywhere? Are condoms not the greenest technology of all? After all, based on current emissions and life expectancy, one less British child would permit some 30 women in sub-Saharan Africa to have a baby and still leave the planet a cleaner place.
It is certainly true that "fewer people equals a greener planet" is simplistic. In 2050, 95% of the extra population will be poor and the poorer you are, the less carbon you emit. By today's standards, a cull of Australians or Americans would be at least 60 times as productive as one of Bangladeshis."
I know that most of you will read this blog and simply shrug, thinking to yourself, "just another extreme environmental activist crackpot" from across the pond. After all, you know those crazy socialist Brits!
But what if I were to tell you that an individual with similar, extreme, population control opinions, was working in the White House? Would you sit up and pay attention then?
Well then I suggest you sit up and pay attention!
John P. Holdren is presently serving as President Barack Obama's 'Science Czar." Holdren's official titles are: Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy; Assistant to the President for Science and Technology; and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. The longtime Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government,
Holdren is no stranger to controversy. Holdren's radicalism dates back to the late 1960s. (Remember William Ayers and the Weather Undergound?) In 1969 Holdren wrote that it was imperative “to convince society and its leaders that there is no alternative but the cessation of our irresponsible, all-demanding, and all-consuming population growth.” That same year, he and (the now largely discredited) professor of population studies Paul Ehrlich jointly predicted: “If population control measures are not initiated immediately and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.”
In 1971 Holdren and Ehrlich warned that “some form of ecocatastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.”
Viewing capitalism as an economic system that is inherently harmful to the natural environment, Holdren and Ehrlich in 1973 called for “a massive campaign … to de-develop the United States” and other Western nations in order to conserve energy and facilitate growth in underdeveloped countries. “De-development,” they said, “means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.” “By de-development,” they elaborated, “we mean lower per-capita energy consumption, fewer gadgets, and the abolition of planned obsolescence.” "
Holdren & Ehrlich’s 1977 book, entitled Ecoscience, described Holdren's thoughts on this issue as follows.
The mainstream media has been spectacularly silent on Mr. Holdren's background and appointment as "Science Czar" by Presidient Obama. Of course Holdren's post is not an elected one but just the same, our President's choice of administration appointments (and friends) is beginning to scare me! .
I have a very big problem with Obama's appointment of an individual who, for whatever reason(s), thought that the United States Constitution would allow for forced abortions, forced marriages, large scale sterilization of the population, and an accompanying massive campaign to "de-develop" the United States!
Mr. Holdren stated that his previous espoused policies back in 1977 were a result of his being "preocupied" with the problem of population growth in the United States. In light of the Obama administration's continuing grab for power via nationalization of our news, banking, car and health care systems, I ask the following question...
Unlike Mr. Alex Renton, who is simply a columnist for a British paper, Mr. Holdren works at the heart of our national government and answers to the Presidient of the United States! What if he suddenly becomes preoccupied with "population control" again?
Well then I suggest you sit up and pay attention!
John P. Holdren is presently serving as President Barack Obama's 'Science Czar." Holdren's official titles are: Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy; Assistant to the President for Science and Technology; and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. The longtime Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government,
Holdren is no stranger to controversy. Holdren's radicalism dates back to the late 1960s. (Remember William Ayers and the Weather Undergound?) In 1969 Holdren wrote that it was imperative “to convince society and its leaders that there is no alternative but the cessation of our irresponsible, all-demanding, and all-consuming population growth.” That same year, he and (the now largely discredited) professor of population studies Paul Ehrlich jointly predicted: “If population control measures are not initiated immediately and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.”
In 1971 Holdren and Ehrlich warned that “some form of ecocatastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.”
Viewing capitalism as an economic system that is inherently harmful to the natural environment, Holdren and Ehrlich in 1973 called for “a massive campaign … to de-develop the United States” and other Western nations in order to conserve energy and facilitate growth in underdeveloped countries. “De-development,” they said, “means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.” “By de-development,” they elaborated, “we mean lower per-capita energy consumption, fewer gadgets, and the abolition of planned obsolescence.” "
Holdren & Ehrlich’s 1977 book, entitled Ecoscience, described Holdren's thoughts on this issue as follows.
"Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society....It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society."
"Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock."
I have a very big problem with Obama's appointment of an individual who, for whatever reason(s), thought that the United States Constitution would allow for forced abortions, forced marriages, large scale sterilization of the population, and an accompanying massive campaign to "de-develop" the United States!
Mr. Holdren stated that his previous espoused policies back in 1977 were a result of his being "preocupied" with the problem of population growth in the United States. In light of the Obama administration's continuing grab for power via nationalization of our news, banking, car and health care systems, I ask the following question...
Unlike Mr. Alex Renton, who is simply a columnist for a British paper, Mr. Holdren works at the heart of our national government and answers to the Presidient of the United States! What if he suddenly becomes preoccupied with "population control" again?
Peter J. Mahon
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are always welcome!