hey Sarah. Maybe you want to provide some background information on why you think this is relevant, and why you wanted to share this? Just a link to a website and the comment "I thought I had to share it" is a bit of a spam-like message (no offence).
Ok, so here my opinion. I see a website where someone (it seems like a one-person project to be quite honest, started in 1996) write a lot about population growth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth) and is arguing that we all should stop having baby's on a volunteer basis.
In my opinion this is a very short-sighted way of looking to the problems we are facing in the world. Obviously as soon as the "carrying capacity" of an area or the earth as a whole becomes jeopardized there is a problem. But even that is rather an issue of distribution (of space, of food, of resources) than the total amount of people in that area.
In addition, overpopulation is not the root cause of the problems we face in the world (such as the unbalance between economy and ecology, rich and poor, labor and capital, overconsumption, under-education, gender-inequality, lack of health, etc.). Less population does not mean those problems are solved, while at the same time you can indeed argue that the amount of people in the world are a product of such inequalities.
Taking care of the Earth's carrying capacity means we need an integral approach to social relations; how power is distributed. Taking one simple approach as the basis ("overpopulation") can lead to very simplified way of looking at the world which does not help us understanding things. In addition, it also opens roads for despotism and populism and very "evil" things such as population control (See Wikipedia).
Especially when I read their slogan, I get a bit annoyed with the simplicity of their message: "Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth’s biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense."
"Phasing out the human race" does not at all guarantee the Earth’s biosphere will "return to good health". It is a gross oversimplification.
Though. I did like the fact that I saw a classic video again, so thanks for that ;)
Comments
asdf
asdfg
hey Sarah. Maybe you want to
hey Sarah. Maybe you want to provide some background information on why you think this is relevant, and why you wanted to share this? Just a link to a website and the comment "I thought I had to share it" is a bit of a spam-like message (no offence).
Ok, so here my opinion. I see a website where someone (it seems like a one-person project to be quite honest, started in 1996) write a lot about population growth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth) and is arguing that we all should stop having baby's on a volunteer basis.
In my opinion this is a very short-sighted way of looking to the problems we are facing in the world. Obviously as soon as the "carrying capacity" of an area or the earth as a whole becomes jeopardized there is a problem. But even that is rather an issue of distribution (of space, of food, of resources) than the total amount of people in that area.
In addition, overpopulation is not the root cause of the problems we face in the world (such as the unbalance between economy and ecology, rich and poor, labor and capital, overconsumption, under-education, gender-inequality, lack of health, etc.). Less population does not mean those problems are solved, while at the same time you can indeed argue that the amount of people in the world are a product of such inequalities.
Taking care of the Earth's carrying capacity means we need an integral approach to social relations; how power is distributed. Taking one simple approach as the basis ("overpopulation") can lead to very simplified way of looking at the world which does not help us understanding things. In addition, it also opens roads for despotism and populism and very "evil" things such as population control (See Wikipedia).
Especially when I read their slogan, I get a bit annoyed with the simplicity of their message: "Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth’s biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense."
"Phasing out the human race" does not at all guarantee the Earth’s biosphere will "return to good health". It is a gross oversimplification.
Though. I did like the fact that I saw a classic video again, so thanks for that ;)