I remember some time ago, someone ran the numbers based on the one child policy throughout the whole world.
Now I know this will be rejected by many countries, but it was a 'what if' paper.
I don't remember the actual numbers, only the surprise as to how quick the world population diminished.
It was such that it was well worth the trial.
It demonstrated that within three generations we were back to approx two thirds of the numbers today, or something similar.
It was quite a telling little exercise if someone would care to crunch the numbers.
But as we all know there are those who for whatever reason just want to keep pushing out kids.
I have said for as long as this CC and GW farcical has been going on, we should have instead put all that wasted CC energy and money into reducing world populations, not CO2.
I suppose there is an irony to the two because if CO2 and it;s continual increase is in fact true, well we need not do anything as the CC or CO2 will reduce the earth's population and we don't have to do a thing.
So it is that it will be a win, win situation.
There, problem solvered!

yuyutsu yes every faith has its killers but why?
Not going to agree with even more people but see you agree lifestyle matters
As it is my view we humans are failing to solve the worlds problems, maybe some one wants us to fail
We will, one day,see the victors of a war, tell us how to live
The task to become a better more equal world can be done
But first we must want to try
Inter race/faith hate will not do it

Answer1-

It's not just dictatorships that are overpopulated. India is a democratic nuclear power and looking at permanent UN membership- and while it's population is stabilizing after 2003 levels it's population is at dangerous levels and still growing. India is currently passing China as the most populated single nation- but as you've alluded the African continent has probably already passed both of them. China made some hard but in my view necessary steps to address their population growth.

The institution of democracy and education is not necessarily correlated with rationality.

Patrick Deneen comments that the institution of Liberal Democracy in it's assumption of a "limitless bounty" is possibly the main cause of Social (population) and Economic (inequality) problems.

Comment2-

Any country that can not feed and house its population is over populated
World population is the biggest single thing we must address
WE are now at peak numbers and must stop growing
If we are again told Capitalism requires constant growth we must find a different form of capitalism

Answer2-

Anthropologists allude to the idea that ideas are cultural and lead to the success or failure in this case of managing their population.

There are also deep seated drives within humans and animals to expand and invade others territory and access their resources. There is some relationship perhaps between these drives and liberalism. Perhaps liberalism is an enabler of unsustainable and aggressive expansion and the negative side of human nature in our current context. There are a few examples of behaviors that enabled stone age survival and "ancient good" cause "modern bad".

There are principles of Liberal Democracy that affect the management of nations that badly manage their affairs in this case their populations.

If the principles of Liberal Democracy are ineffective they need revision.

Liberal Democracy and Globalisation are related ideologies. Traditionalism, Nationalism, Culture and Stone Age Tribalism are related ideologies

Posted by Belly, Monday, 22 April 2019 7:27:11 AM

Comment1-

CM some things can never be ignored, we humans are sometimes not all that bright
Right now we refuse to see overpopulation is driving refugees and migration
Yes too Banana Republic dictators, such as south America, who are starving their own people

John Locke the inventor of Liberal Democracy attempted perhaps to reduce conflict by introducing universal principles. These universal principles appear to have led to interesting complications- perhaps even causing conflict- and perhaps the idea that sometimes conflict and contention is a necessary feature of stability management. This is embodied in the legal system- an imperfect system- but part of the technology of governing. These universal principles aim at objectivity- upon a detailed investigation it's possible to see cracks of arbitrariness in the supposed objectivity- in the history of philosophy a movement advocated a universal "natural law"- many consider that this movement failed in their objective- perhaps Locke's Universal Principles also find this conclusion- as Anthropologists have done with Cultural Relativism- but Liberalists still seem to "keep banging on" trying to "fake it till they make it".

----

It's difficult in the short term to prove whether one culture or another are superior managers. Being "superior" may not matter if the cultural systems are incompatible- but perhaps everyone should belong to a culture- they should maintain their links to maintain their identity and their health- they should nurture their culture and protect it from damage. To mix cultures may cause instability and a failure of management.

To bring incompatible cultures together is to cause conflict.

We need to reward good management and educate and punish the bad ones. As Ayn Rand says if you reward evil and punish good the world will destroy itself- this is what Liberalism is doing.

As one wise mother said "I treat all my children the same- by treating them differently"- based on their natures.

It's the same with countries, cultures and companies.

We need to model our systems on evolution and create opportunities- in the final scene- for them to fail gracefully rather than spectacularly. Apoptosis rather than Necrosis. Sometimes humans need failure to teach them success- allow people to fail small rather than big. This is a somewhat Taoist view

Focusing on ones own culture and sphere rather than global issues enables individuals to control their exposure to instability and manage their society. Also a Taoist principle perhaps- manage the big by managing the small.

National and cultural pride can be a very positive force but sometimes needs to be directed in a sustainable direction.

I see that corporate reliance on growth could reach an immovable object- what will happen?- no one knows- perhaps they will look for increased stability in their investments- this is starting to look like Traditionalism...

Corporatism and Communism are very similar systems in certain aspects- maybe they will die together like Romeo and Juliette. Romeo the archetypical man and Juliette the archetypical woman.
Both representative of the disfunctional worlds they created. ;) .