3 ms·
"The planet is overpopulated" is ecofascist propaganda—and, these days, at least aligns very nicely with the interests of the very wealthy. There is plenty of
by danaris 4y ago
"The planet is overpopulated" is ecofascist propaganda—and, these days, at least aligns very nicely with the interests of the very wealthy.
There is plenty of room, and plenty of resources, for the people we have, and the people we are likely to have by the time we peak. The problem is not the amount; it's the allocation. So every time you think "this is only a problem because we have too many people," instead of "this is only a problem because there are a few people hoarding all the land/money/resources," you're moving away from being able to effectively solve the problem, because you're not correctly identifying the cause.
- crtified 4y agoJapan imports a great deal of it's energy and food supplies. If reliant solely upon it's own ecological means, the human population it could support would be far less. Does that make Japan a proportional hoarder of the global ecology's food and energy resources, by virtue of it's high population? Or does your concept of proportionality only apply at the individual scale?
- midoridensha 4y agoI disagree: There IS plenty of room and resources (more than enough really) if people can figure out how to live ecologically, in efficient high-density cities. However, if they all want to live like suburban Americans with giant gas-guzzling SUVs and highways and McMansions, all powered by fossil fuel, there's nowhere near enough resources for 8 billion people to live like that.
- danaris 4y agoI mean, you're right, but that's a strawman. No one, to my knowledge, has ever seriously suggested that the standard of living we should be aiming for for everyone on earth is "early 2000s immature American low-end millionaire". It's painfully obvious that the reason you even mention giant gas-guzzling SUVs and McMansions is because those things are self-evidently terrible even in small amounts. McMansions are naked examples of conspicuous consumption, and the classic "giant gas-guzzling SUV" is a Hummer H3, which is also very clearly something that people buy because they want to make a statement (usually one about their manliness and/or hatred of "the libs"), not because they genuinely feel that it's the best car for a particular job. Now, there are genuine discussions to be had about just what level of consumption is sustainable for a population of 8-10 billion people, but they don't look anything like what you're offering here.
- midoridensha 4y agoIt's not just Hummers; any SUV is gas-guzzling. People don't need cars at all, and should be living lifestyles without them. But that's not what Americans want: they want separate houses and cars for everyone, and the planet can't sustain that.
- crtified 4y agoThey usually don't look anything like the actual lifestyles being lived by the people with the luxury and education to have the discussions, either. (not aimed at you! just a general, cynical observation) For example, one of my region's top ecological spokespeople .... years ago, paid my company many thousands of dollars in the detailed designing of their idyllic, hilltop rural mansion and it's sprawling surrounds.