Supporter, Population Connection

This conversation is closed.

Start talking about the "elephant in the room". Overpopulation is almost never mentioned in discussions about the environment.

There seems to be a taboo against directly addressing the simple fact that each human on this planet has some negative environmental impact. So do other animals, and some plants, but few of them are supported by the complex industrial, chemical, and resource-depleting lifestyles we have come to depend upon.

Politicians are unwilling to touch the subject, for fear of losing votes. Religious leaders want to expand their memberships, and are ignoring the inhumanity of the continued growth of population on the wellfare of future genereations.
Economists largely see more people as more labor, or consumer market, thus money is their concern, and they have a peculiar tendency to ignore any environmental consequence.

Scientists feel it is only their technical ideas they should offer, and never put forth the simple observation that ultimately, if population continues to grow, the best science can only be a temporary, partial solution to environmental decline.

Military leaders want more personnel, stronger armies.

It seems abundantly obvious that if a small percentage of the efforts of all these "leaders" went into developing a sense of personal responsibility to have small families, and to promote this behavior in others, the problem would solve itself.

  • Apr 16 2011: Population growth is inevitable. Especially if you take into account the remarkable increases in life expectancy which are gathering momentum, and becoming a part of reality. The paradox is that it doesnt matter how much we reduce our individual energy use, or carbon output, if population is growing at a greater rate.
    I agree Don, that we require greater identification of this as a potential problem in the future. Almost all technological debates require a footnote mentioning how their development will function when the global population is twice what it is now. While we cannot tell developing countries to limit large families, we can assist these countries through the subsistence phase, as it is then that labour intensive lifestyles are benefited by many children.
    Our values are set to be changed in this century, and we must add this issue to the agenda.
  • thumb
    Apr 16 2011: perhaps its more the fact that we don't know how to deal with it. how do me stop it? we can't is the short answer. its easy for the developed world to come up with ideas for caping populations, but that would extremely hypocritical.

    you have outlined the issue that everyone is aware of, but what are your solutions? the answer is, we can not stop it so we need to turn our efforts to other things.

    it plagues my mind to, but ive admitted defeat.
  • Apr 16 2011: Population growth is often considered inevitable, and unchangeable. This is only true if we believe it is. Awareness of the causation of environmental destruction and education about personal responsibility can replace apathy.

    The more effort we put into this education, the more we can avert the most dire effects for coming generations. People need to learn that the more children they conceive, the greater damage will accrue to all children, including their own.