We may be looking at this problem from the wrong perspective.

From global population stats, China, India and Indonesia (#4) make up 40.24% of world population - three major non-Christian nations, including the most populous Islamic nation.

The U.S. is #3 with 4.5%.

26 nations make up 75.11% (of which France, U.K. and Italy are #s 21-23), and thus, excluding the above three second world nations and their 40.24%, the remaining top 23 nations/26 are 34.87%. These 23 include the major European nations.

Oz is #50, with 0.33% (22.6M). (Indonesia is 10.5x Oz pop.)

So, who has what to fear from whom? Is western decadence perhaps almost a thing of the past?

China holds a large chunk of U.S. debt, has aid and infrastructure projects happening all around the world (the developing world), is industrialising at a rate of knots, is conserving its own natural resources, has long term contracts in place for supply of scarce natural resources from Oz, among others, has just built an enormous aircraft carrier and is planning to build several more, and has 19.34% of world population.

It is indeed fortunate that our world's largest nations appear not to be overly aggressive, but who can foretell attitudes when natural resources become scarce and more expensive. Whose foot may then be wearing the boot?

Given the splendid job the current First World (now on a slender thread) has done with the world's natural capital and the world's financial system (and at whose principal interest), someone else may think it's coming time for others to have a go - a joint venture perhaps?

If the west does not try sharing, and embracing our numerous others, it may later have little choice, and, concomitantly, a somewhat reduced status in world affairs. Of course, the U.S. and Russia wouldn't take kindly to being ushered to the backbenches, so diplomacy will have to reach some substantial new highs.

Who is going to feed who?

Saltpetre,

Your point regarding the probable reduced status of the West in world affairs - the backbench status - brought to mind Mr Windy's comment that
"We are the current custodians of human history, science and technology, human rights and justice...."

The key word here is "current" because there is nothing surer than the probability that Western domination will come to an end. A swift glance at history will reveal that after the decline of the Roman Empire, Europe regressed and stalled. It was left to the Islamic world to gather and store ancient knowledge. Much of antiquity's treasures are only now in our possession because of libraries established in places like Islamic Cordoba in Spain and Baghdad, amongst others.

They were then the "current" custodians of human history pertaining to their part of the world.

Col

Leaving aside the question of whether alleviating a huge amount of human suffering is a good thing or not, your stance is not supported by the evidence. If you were correct, you would expect to see higher fertility rates correlating with better access to modern medicine. But a comparison of per capita gdp and fertility would suggest that the opposite is the case.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/correlation.aspx?v1=67&v2=31&y=2004

The only exceptions for countries with gdp greater than $15000 are The Bahamas, Israel, Kuwait, Qatar and The United Arab Emirates. Islamic teaching, like Catholocism, discourages medical contraception, so in the case of Islamic countries at least, it is the case that the population is growing because the use of modern medicine is discouraged. The exception to this is Iran, which has family planning as a national policy. Amongst countries with per capita gdp below $5000 there are high fertility rates, the only exceptions being countries with birth control programs (i.e. modern medicine in action), and those countries suffering Malthusian corrections.

By your reasoning Col, I should be observing the opposite.

The problem Poirot is that this time, the human race is so far into ecological over shoot and our civilistion is so global and interconnected, that political instability and regression of human civilisation will be global.

This time there is no other independnant and insulated civilisation that can take on the mantle of custodian when the west declines.

In fact all other parallel civilisations, such as China, are at even greater risk than the west to collapse and regression.

Was listening to an interesting interview on the 7:30 Report of an American climate change scientist or activist and and Australian climate scientist.....can't remember their names.

One of them commented that the global response to climate change will be like the response to Hitler.

We will collectively dither and deny the problem to the very last possible momentum when we will simply be forced to act in a draconian way.

The American commented that the main participants in dithering and denying on climate change in the US have taken to denying the very validity of science beyond all reason.

This is how it will be with end up being with over population most likely. Instead of family planning and contraception, or even a biological vector of some sort, we will end up with decline of democratic freedom and enforced 1 or 2 child policies across the globe.

*It was left to the Islamic world to gather and store ancient knowledge.*

Hang on Poirot. Last time I checked both Islam and Christianity
have done their share of book burning. The conflicts between secular
and more fanatical religious types have gone on in both religions.

I really don't think that the West needs to go on any guilt trips.
It just seems to be part of human nature that people exploit others
when they can. Just look how the Bantu treat the pygmies in Africa
for instance.

In fact Poirot, if we were in Africa, I might have bought you
for about 10 cows of lobolla paid to your family. I'd be sitting
outside my round hut in the sunshine, smoking my pipe with my
friends whilst you were out tending the fields and doing the work,
life would be a breeze :)