Antihumanism: Population Control Holocaust

  • Thread starter Thread starter M-Dent
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

M-Dent

Guest
This essay makes important points.
There is a single ideological current running through a seemingly disparate collection of noxious modern political and scientific movements, ranging from militarism, imperialism, racism, xenophobia, and radical environmentalism, to socialism, Nazism, and totalitarian communism. This is the ideology of antihumanism: the belief that the human race is a horde of vermin whose unconstrained aspirations and appetites endanger the natural order, and that tyrannical measures are necessary to constrain humanity. The founding prophet of modern antihumanism is Thomas Malthus (1766-1834), who offered a pseudoscientific basis for the idea that human reproduction always outruns available resources. Following this pessimistic and inaccurate assessment of the capacity of human ingenuity to develop new resources, Malthus advocated oppressive policies that led to the starvation of millions in India and Ireland.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
That is why we must reject antihumanism and embrace instead an ethic based on faith in the human capacity for creativity and invention. For in doing so, we make a statement that we are living not at the end of history, but at the beginning of history; that we believe in freedom and not regimentation; in progress and not stasis; in love rather than hate; in life rather than death; in hope rather than despair.
Click to expand...
thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-population-control-holocaust
Click to expand...
 
A couple of years ago, my son crunched the number and determined that the entire population of the earth could live in Texas, with each person living separately in a 100 square foot room. This would leave the rest of the earth completely unpopulated. There is a spirit that drives these population control ideas, and it seems to have increasing influence, appealing to human egos so as to suppress those which are not yet alive, or have lived comparatively long lives.

Antihumanism greatly accelerated in 1930 for some reason, with mainline protestant communities caving on contraception. Quite naturally, abortion and euthanasia soon followed as workable concepts, with abortion now claimed to be a “right.” All three are practiced in some nations today, during a time when food supply is greater than at any time in world history. I am convinced that, let’s say, a spirit of anti-humanism is heavily influencing thought. This spirit is not just an idea, but rather is a classical spirit that roams this earth.
 
po18guy said:
This spirit is not just an idea, but rather is a classical spirit that roams this earth.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting concept. Do you believe any idea is capable of becoming a “classical spirit” if it has enough people believing in it?
 
colmywaykurtz said:
This is an interesting concept. Do you believe any idea is capable of becoming a “classical spirit” if it has enough people believing in it?
Click to expand...
The ‘spirit’ is pre-existing. Demons, fallen angels, whatever you prefer to call them. The prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel makes reference to them. There are innumeable spirits that are present on this earth. We are called to submit to the Holy Spirit, but worldly spirits are liars and can emulate the Holy Spirit (up to a point), but not His fruits, which are: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, long suffering, mildness, faith, modesty, continency, and chastity.

Spiritual influence manifests itself within man first as ideas or concepts. Fear of overpopulation, starvation, disease, etc are driven by spirits. The holy Spirit crushes fear, while worldly spirits foster it. This desire to eliminate ‘unwanted’ humans has fairly suddenly appeared on a global scale. How can this be, since this idea, this sudden desire, crosses all racial, ethnic, geographic and political boundairies? Its origin is in the spiritual realm.
 
po18guy said:
A couple of years ago, my son crunched the number and determined that the entire population of the earth could live in Texas, with each person living separately in a 100 square foot room. This would leave the rest of the earth completely unpopulated. There is a spirit that drives these population control ideas, and it seems to have increasing influence, appealing to human egos so as to suppress those which are not yet alive, or have lived comparatively long lives.
Click to expand...
This is nonsense, and completely misunderstands the problem with overpopulation. Yes, physically we could all live in Texas, but it is not nessecarily the physical space that is a problem but the massive strain on resources that a high population needs. For example, fossil fuels will soon run out, and high populations have not been helping the situation.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
This is nonsense, and completely misunderstands the problem with overpopulation. Yes, physically we could all live in Texas, but it is not nessecarily the physical space that is a problem but the massive strain on resources that a high population needs. For example, fossil fuels will soon run out, and high populations have not been helping the situation.
Click to expand...
The term “overpopulation”: is the nonsense.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
This is nonsense, and completely misunderstands the problem with overpopulation. Yes, physically we could all live in Texas, but it is not nessecarily the physical space that is a problem but the massive strain on resources that a high population needs. For example, fossil fuels will soon run out, and high populations have not been helping the situation.
Click to expand...
You need to Learn Liberty and the Truth.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
This is nonsense, and completely misunderstands the problem with overpopulation. Yes, physically we could all live in Texas, but it is not nessecarily the physical space that is a problem but the massive strain on resources that a high population needs. For example, fossil fuels will soon run out, and high populations have not been helping the situation.
Click to expand...
No, population has nothing to do with the consumption of fossil fuels. It’s the concentration of consumption by the industrialized countries of the world that determine that.

Many third world countries with large populations consume far less than, say the USA. I dare say we Americans use most of the world’s resources. Still, simply saying that fossil fuels will soon run out is not proof that they will. I heard that mantra back in the 60’s and 70’s–that by now they’d all be gone. Maybe we should rely more on reality than on projections by alarmists with agendas. :coffeeread:
 
Regular_Atheist said:
This is nonsense, and completely misunderstands the problem with overpopulation. Yes, physically we could all live in Texas, but it is not nessecarily the physical space that is a problem but the massive strain on resources that a high population needs. For example, fossil fuels will soon run out, and high populations have not been helping the situation.
Click to expand...
Fossil fuels are a LONG way from running out. If we were close, nobody would be spending so much effort demonizing their use as killing the earth.

The excuse that high populations are using up resources is an excuse that rich cultures use to deflect attention from the fact that it is the rich lifestyle responsible for profligate waste of limited resources, not high population. Ironically the largest users of these resources are often those who publicly claim to be most concerned (I’d love to see a comparison of pounds of fossil fuels burned per person between climate activists and CAF members! Betcha we’re WAY ahead of them). Everybody likes a scapegoat. Those poor brown people having so many babies are so much easier to blame than our jet-set American lifestyle, aren’t they?
 
Meh. We’ll just see what happens. I don’t believe our population is at such a high that we need to do anything (what can we do?), but then again it’s not something I’ve researched and I can believe there’d be some problems with a high population.
 
po18guy said:
It is the initiator of motion, whether cognitive or physical.
Click to expand...
Humans are quite capable themselves falling into evils such as, greed, selfishness and racism to use population as an excuse for all sorts of inhumanity.

We don’t have a population crisis. Though, I would agree we have a need for more responsible people.
 
Della said:
No, population has nothing to do with the consumption of fossil fuels. It’s the concentration of consumption by the industrialized countries of the world that determine that.

Many third world countries with large populations consume far less than, say the USA. I dare say we Americans use most of the world’s resources. Still, simply saying that fossil fuels will soon run out is not proof that they will. I heard that mantra back in the 60’s and 70’s–that by now they’d all be gone. Maybe we should rely more on reality than on projections by alarmists with agendas. :coffeeread:
Click to expand...
Exactly!!👍
 
manualman said:
Fossil fuels are a LONG way from running out. If we were close, nobody would be spending so much effort demonizing their use as killing the earth.

The excuse that high populations are using up resources is an excuse that rich cultures use to deflect attention from the fact that it is the rich lifestyle responsible for profligate waste of limited resources, not high population. Ironically the largest users of these resources are often those who publicly claim to be most concerned (I’d love to see a comparison of pounds of fossil fuels burned per person between climate activists and CAF members! Betcha we’re WAY ahead of them). Everybody likes a scapegoat. Those poor brown people having so many babies are so much easier to blame than our jet-set American lifestyle, aren’t they?
Click to expand...
This is great too. I never thought about the fact that if we were about to run out nobody would need to worry about ending it, that would happen on it’s own.
 
manualman said:
Fossil fuels are a LONG way from running out. If we were close, nobody would be spending so much effort demonizing their use as killing the earth.

The excuse that high populations are using up resources is an excuse that rich cultures use to deflect attention from the fact that it is the rich lifestyle responsible for profligate waste of limited resources, not high population. Ironically the largest users of these resources are often those who publicly claim to be most concerned (I’d love to see a comparison of pounds of fossil fuels burned per person between climate activists and CAF members! Betcha we’re WAY ahead of them). Everybody likes a scapegoat. Those poor brown people having so many babies are so much easier to blame than our jet-set American lifestyle, aren’t they?
Click to expand...
If a poor brown family has 10 kids or 2 kids on the other side of the world it will probably have little to no effect on me. It might have an effect on their economy though

ted.com/talks/mechai_viravaidya_how_mr_condom_made_thailand_a_better_place.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top