Quite right Mil Ob, and they will always get hammered as long as they equate people with units. They will be met by people across the political spectrum who find their imperialistic sterlisation programs and far right thinking abhorrent.

The anti-populationists are a seed of thinking that our fathers and grandfathers fought in Europe and Asia. They equate human life with that of ants. They make no logical or moral distinction. They are socio-biologists who side with Mao over Mill.

They have been beaten here and else where by logic and common sense but they won't give up. They are anti-humanist fanatics, bent on not only over throwing capitalism but co-opting women's reproductive rights and placing them in the hands of the state.

They use green politics to creep in to every section of modern life. They are cuckoos who side with the Greens but their intent is insidious and malevolent.

The question of why some countries enjoy higher living standards than others is pertinent. The reality is that a high living standard for an Earth with many billions can only be achieved with advanced technology, an educated population, and substantial infrastructure. The reality is that undeveloped countries with high population growth rates have no hope of meeting the cost of development, and so their populations will remain undeveloped cesspits of misery. If I were to hate such people, I would wish for no more than the status quo. But people like myself, Yabby, Rhian et al do not hate these people. Although we have differing opinions on many things, there is complete agreement amongst us on the issue of the right of people to access contraception.

Accusations of genocide and a debt conspiracy of the developed world as causes of the undeveloped world are the preserve of those not reliant on evidence. The belief that such places produce superior human beings is Nazism on steroids. For the rest of us the corruption, depravity and lack of development, compounded by high rates of population growth, are all too clear as causes.

Sheesh Cheryl, you and MO are not the brightest posters, you really
arn't.

All these little boxes that you imagine. FYI, the far right are
busy preaching abstinence over family planning. Preaching
crossing your legs for Jesus, has been a dismal failure, as the
evidence shows.

MO is actually against capitalism, for his guru believes it leads
to fascism.

Warren Buffet, hardly a paid up member of the greens, can see the
danger of simply too many people, for a sustainable planet.
You have yet to specify how many people the earth should accomodate
at anyone time, how many in Australia. Go on, be a devil, put
your figures on it.

I note that neither of you live in the slums of Calcutta or Bombay.
Go and ask people there, what their major problem is. They will
soon tell you, too many people.

Fact is that the population continues to increase by 80 million
a year and its not sustainable. Its basic biology 101.

MOs guru even believes that your taxes should pay to feed the ever
growing mass in the third world. Are you prepared to pay ever more
tax, to feed the extra 80 million a year?

So there is in fact a simple solution. Stop forcing third world women
to have children that they don't want, due to a lack of contraception.
Let them decide how many children that they want to raise, just
like you and MO can choose.

No forced sterilisation anywhere. More food, education and resources
focussed on those kids who are loved and wanted, a win-win for
all.

Quite logical and rational, but seemingly way above your intelligence
level to understand.

I think you got it in a nutshell, Cheryl (pun intentional - we've shelled these nutters into pathetic diversions and provocations on this one).

On this issue especially, whatever our apparent tactical differences, I heed the lesson that we should never relax our guard when identifying those recidivist types who casually degrade other people as "sub-human" i.e., "ants", "rabbits", etc.

They hang themselves by their own vile attitudes to humanity and civilization.

mil-ob wrote, "we've shelled these nutters into pathetic diversions and provocations on this one."

(I am not quite sure what the 'diversions' and 'provocations' that mil-ob was referring to were, but, putting aside that minor quibble) I think both mil-ob and Cheryl should be congratulated for their magnificent victory on this forum.

It would be small-minded of we recidivist, fascist, elitist Malthusians to not acknowledge that their achievement is all the more remarkable for their having done so having acknowledged or responded to almost none of the arguments put to them by the rest of us.

---

Fester, Yabby and others: I do think that exploitation of Third World countries by the corporate elites, as well as population growth, is a critical factor in the world today.

I recommend you read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" of 2007 to learn more about this. It's a towering work and absolutely riveting on nearly every page as many to whom I have recommended the book have attested.

However, "The Shock Doctrine" still has a few flaws and limitations. One is its disregard of immigration and population growth as a factor compounding the plight of the world's poor. Sheila Newman has written of this in the article "Why is Naomi Klein uncritical of mass immigration to the First World?" of 27 August 2008 at http://candobetter.org/node/686

(The other flaw, although somewhat off-topic in this discussion, is Naomi Klein's failure to acknowledge the overwhelming evidence that the Bush administration, itself, orchestrated the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 - the absolute mother of all 'shocks' in the service of what Klein labels 'disaster capitalism', I would have thought. (Interesting that mil-ob, who has congratulated me in other places for having spoken out on the issue of 9/11, still chooses to label me as a genocidal, elitist, fascist monarchist on most other occasions, including here.) For more information, visit the "9/11 Truth" forum at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=0)

Good to see such recognition for a Stalingrad-style thumping against fascism.

But no response to genocidalists' arguments? Let's recall those arguments again: "finite resources", "breeding like rabbits", and "soon there'll be standing room only". Oh, he means rather that we didn't answer every silly leading question!

Yeah, if the dag-man gets his peerage from them, he'll call us on such flagrant disrespect for his interrogation here: "Ve haff vays of making you talk"!