mil-observer, your recent post had several serious errors, and I know that you don’t have time to think at length about these things, so I have taken the liberty of correcting them:

Cheryl: It's total quackery. When checking the growthist/humanofascists' expression, it becomes clearer that they have not made any critical reflection on their own beliefs. They make no case to counter the clear historically fascist parallels with their own zealous exclusivity, narcissism, speciescentricism, regressive utilitarian worldview, and primordial naturophobia.

That means cultish fanaticism and irrational cognition, and when such qualities determine policy, then the results promise mayhem and murder. Consider the profile of typical beliefs of past collapsed civilizations:

- The belief that human activity is above natural laws,that infinite growth can continue forever on a finite planet
- Obsessive fear of presumed “threats” to their own greedy world view and collections of toys
- Vicious and vitriolic attacks on anyone who questions the status quo
- Mythical elevation of “the human world” with no recognition that our economy and lives are subsets of the finite natural world.

Of course, many of these soft-headed petals like to regard themselves as “rightist” too, but even that simple tag bears no close examination whatsoever. On matters of ETS, privatization, artificially inflated prices for utilities and oil, corporatism, and social engineering, these people overwhelmingly support and exalt the kind of ruthless robber barons that represent the most extremely mercenary type of capitalist predators. I think we need to identify a distinction: humanofascists despise the notion that the natural world makes any physical difference to the health, comforts and realized potential for vast numbers of people. They like high-tech to the point of technomania, and their notion of industry is of some unassailable god to whom we must regularly genuflect.

Many historians have identified the fundamental hypocrisies and other inconsistencies in past humanofascism, but such study hasn't prevented these people's repetitions thereof.

That's the kind of humanofascist nutbags we're up against.

And most of them live in large cities and have succumbed to the “city psychosis,” showing once again that misery loves company.

And now the entity spews out a completely anti-historical take on the ideological concept of "fascism". Check the detail of historical precedent and it's clear these people have ticked all the boxes of irrationalism, primordialism and the extremes of high self-regard versus callous indifference to others (especially children). In related OLO threads, neo-Malthusian and aristo-aspirant daggett has already revealed the classic Nazi-style "Blood and Soil" mysticism so crucial to such people's belief system.

In the same way, the genocidalists' inventive absurdities of "growthism" and "humanofascism" reveal the vacuous, apolitical wasteland that is by contrast a fertile ground for such toxic weeds.

Since the birth of our first child, I've had repeated cases of nasty contempt spat at us merely for having children. Their selfish and self-righteous retort in conversation is that they will never have children because "the planet is already so over-populated".

It's profoundly dangerous to this country, because it will leave it so much more brittle and unstable.

Quite right Mil ob. Rick S, you've interprited the world purely through the distorted fish eye of environmental extremism and landed in the 'blood and soil' world of the mythical aryians. So that all progress is regressive, all medicine is bad, all capital accumulation destroys the environment, etc.

God only knows what mean mr Mustard man is on. His argument is more of a round the camp fire, cork hat, ancient analogue of something harking back to a return to nature or the poetry of Banjo Paterson. If you hate progress, no need for a flu shot for you this year. Also, if you want to drive to Alice Springs, you can walk. Want to go to London? Here's an axe and there's a tree. Good one canoe man.

Many years ago Democrat Senator John Coulter ranted about air fuel punching a hole in the ozone layer - just before he boarded a Qantas jet from Canberra to Adelaide.

Some astounding hypocrisy here from the anti-pops. Cargo cult thinking who believe that cars emerge from iron ore fully formed.

It's pretty clear that the self-righteous holier-than-thous have won this particular skirmish, mainly through describing everything they don't like to answer as a straw-man argument, so I'll bow out.

But before I go, one more question to Rick "collapse of civilization" S.

What's this all about?

>>Consider the profile of typical beliefs of past collapsed civilizations:
- The belief that human activity is above natural laws,that infinite growth can continue forever on a finite planet
- Obsessive fear of presumed “threats” to their own greedy world view and collections of toys
- Vicious and vitriolic attacks on anyone who questions the status quo
- Mythical elevation of “the human world” with no recognition that our economy and lives are subsets of the finite natural world.<<

You seem to be saying "it's happened before".

It all sounds very instructive - we should after all always take note of precedents where they are available.

Can you give any examples? Prefererably from this planet.

I have a side-bet with my partner - who incidentally fights the same corner as you, and thinks I'm nuts - that you cannot support this claim, and it's just more showmanship.

There's more than money riding on this.

“It's pretty clear that the self-righteous holier-than-thous have won this particular skirmish…”

Hold on Pericles, if you think they’ve won, then surely you think they have the better argument. That’s all that matters isn’t it?

“You seem to be saying ‘it's happened before’…..we should after all always take note of precedents where they are available.”

I don’t understand. Someone such as yourself would know that the collapse of civilisations has happened numerous times. And you must have pretty good idea of why.

Two of the major causal factors have been overpopulation and a decline in the output of the life-supporting resource base. Either way, the supply/demand ratio has proven to be the critical factor in many cases, if not the vast majority.

http://www.learner.org/interactives/collapse/mayans.html
http://www.learner.org/interactives/collapse/mesopotamia.html
http://www.learner.org/interactives/collapse/chacocanyon.html

The factors are different in each of these examples. But the size of the population compared to the ability of the hinterland to provide food to comfortably support it has been the critical imbalance in each case. It is a pretty fair bet that the belief system elucidated by Rick S was entrenched in each case.

You've said that you are bowing out of this discussion. I thought you and I were doing quite well. We seemed to be on the same track – we both wanted to discuss how to achieve a stable population and sustainable society. Let’s stick at it. It is vitally important stuff.

Pericles, in a nutshell, "A Short History of Progress" by Ronald Wright. Enjoy.

And, sadly, if the growthists have "won" anything, then the planet has lost. It's a very good thing that that is not the case in this "discussion."

mil-observer's and Cheryl's comments are merely inaccurate and rabid vitriol, and certainly not instructive or supportive to the discussion in any way whatsoever (but certainly all too typical of those who wish to destroy this planet).