The most revealing and ironically ticklish giveaway came from a very quick succession of neo-Malthusian posts here, discharging both pistols painfully and bloodily into their own feet...

Jon J: "Most of the history of Europe from 100 AD to 1500 is the story of successive waves of invaders from the East, driven west by population pressures, inflicting terrible devastation on the lands that they pass through, knowing that if they stop they'll be crushed by the next wave coming along behind. Maybe that won't happen this time: maybe it will. Let's do all we can to try and prevent it."

followed immediately by

pelican: "I am always amazed at these populate or perish advocates who pick the extreme end of an idea (ie. one child policies, forced sterilisation etc) and tar the whole sustainable population movement with one sordid brush. I suppose it serves its purpose in stopping reasonable and balanced debate in one swoop."

So what could be more extreme than the "extreme end of an idea" as pushed by a neo-Malthusian i.e., "invaders from the East"?!

Fire to the East! The fear of Mongol hordes! What to do? Pre-emptive strike perhaps? a la "let's do all we can to try and prevent it"!

Yet again the neo-Malthusians blurt out their classic fascist tendencies, as explicit in Nazi German and Italian fascist poster and film propaganda. Such premature ejaculation always gives these fetishists away.

I see a lot of posts talking about personal freedom and connecting it with population restriction.

I suspect that your grasp of societal rules and practises that indigenous populations had 'before chhristianity and the resulting industrial revolution' is a slim one. All groups practiced population control either by infanticide or other means that kept the group numbers to suit their envoirenmental needs for survival.

Population control is extremely important in a positive way for society that is not based on ever increasing consumerism as the haves would have us think is the only way to keep them rich and us working our arses off for them only to die sick and unhappy.

"C'mon, the misanthropic neo-Malthusian wingnuts have been threatening mass starvation for over 30 years."

And it's come awfully close. In case you'd forgotten, while we were complaining about expensive petrol recently, the third world was rioting for food, because the overpopulated planet is utterly dependent on cheap oil to transport it.

Food production and distribution has kept pace with population growth because exponential technology development has allowed it. But the tech-curve is now dropping off while the population soars. There will be no new oil, no new nitrogen, and no new natural gas. Nuclear's as close as it gets to a free lunch, and even that consumes too much of those other resources to make it viable in the long term.

The fact that technology has saved us in the past is the only basis for the theory that we'll be fine in the future. But can anyone point to a technology that might even come close to meeting our energy needs in the future? Cold fusion within 30 years, or something similar, isn't impossible, but so unlikely as to be absurd.

You can laugh all you like at the doomsayers, but the fact is that sometimes the world, as it's known, really does end. Just look at the Romans, Aztecs and Armenians.

Of course, we in the West will be shielded from the impact of resource shortages, but only at first. I just wonder if we'll have to adapt to a new world while coddling the fearful conservatives who keep shouting "it's all okay!" with fingers in ears, or if they'll see the damage coming and actually try to help.

But, Clownfish, you DO know your post-apoc fiction tropes. I'll give you that!

...and the Armenians too! [from pseudo-left sancho of the peerage aristo set]

Just admit your fascism folks, save us from wasting so much time reading your dreary posts and their denial of all human agency in all human affairs.

Cheryl: "I'd like to know ... [to] reduce population that didn't take away personal liberty or freedom."

Export Feminism
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Simple... Export feminism to them! Seriously, every time feminism gets more powerfull, from the flapeprs in the 1920's to 2nd wave feminism in the 1970s to now, increased feminism reduces birthrates.

On the flip-side the Baby Boom was only possible because so many men were killed in WWII that feminism collapsed. When there are several marriage-aged women for each desirable man (without missing limbs from the war), feminism tends to take a back seat.

More recently, "the war against boys" (http://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Boys-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849569) has meant that for every 10 graduates, there are less than 4 males.

Who are these six 'professional' women going to marry?
From the four available 'professional' men, one is going to be gay, two are going to marry their secretaries and another is on the Middle class marriage strike... leaving only one available, professional male for the six professional females that graduate each year. http://www.glennsacks.com/have_antifather_family.htm

Any society that treats men and fatherhood as second-class citizens is one that is dying. That is why the Western World is failing to reproduce ourselves.

Thailand
=-=-=-=-=
The other answer is to look at Thailand. For over a decade this country has pushed for smaller families. Handing out free contraceptive implants (that last for 3 years) to women and educating the population that small families mean you can afford a better life and a good education for your kids.

They have succeeded to reduce fertility to sustainable, replacement levels, a GREAT SUCCESS! And one that will see Thailand become a wealthy nation far more quickly.

PartTimeParent@pobox.com

“Kulu - as a geologist, I was taught there is more gold in one cubic mile of seawater than has ever been mined from the ground.”

Bernie old son, I was taught that the extractive industries are the predominant cause of climate change but the industry has certainly produced a few fat cats. In fact we have gentlemen in this nation who’ve been knighted for trashing the planet.

Your leader in WA, Barney Rubble, is looking forward to his corporate connections digging up the uranium in that state therefore, once all the uranium is extracted and the toxic land is tied up for perpetuity, you can move on to the seawater to extract that “gold” you speak of.

Problem is Bernie, your ideology is considered passé for those in the extractive industry are the new “luddites” who remain hell-bent on maintaining the status quo and for that, the industry must have access to the ignorant hordes overseas to do the dirty work there for the pro-population "empire builders."

However, Bernie, a united voice of the indigenous people from Asia, Arctic, Pacific, Carribean, North America, Latin America, Russia and Africa has swept from continent to continent in 37 countries calling their respective governments to stop large-scale mining and other extractive activities (oil and gas projects) in their indigenous lands.

There’s a call for a global moratorium on extractive projects for oil, gold, gas and other mineral resources and they’re also demanding that the World Bank cease funding the merchants of greed in the trans-national mining companies. They've proposed the creation of an international indigenous criminal court that will address the ill effects of extractive industries on the lives of indigenous peoples.

They’re demanding compensation too for damages inflicted upon their lands and lives, and the rehabilitation of their degraded environment caused by extractive industries especially those from Australia, Canada and Britain.

So no more cheap labour for the free racketeers (marketeers?), Bernie old chap. Who now shall we find to carry buckets of ore on their heads all day long for a dollar?