Re: Massive Starvation For World Feared Over Myanmar And Chile

On Fri, 9 May 2008, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:

> On 2008-05-09 05:30 +0100, John Holmes allegedly wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 9 May 2008, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> ... While I certainly don't deny the influence of capitalist
>>> machinations in this whole affair, the thing that strikes me mostly
>>> is how painstakingly, through the whole board of the discussion
>>> about food and famine, the subject of overpopulation is avoided.
>>> This goes for the general subject of poverty as well. At the same
>>> time, countries that attempt to implement rational measures to
>>> control their populations, to wit control of births, are scoffed at
>>> (like China) or even hindered (like some African countries). The
>>> Earth is ****ing overcrowded. In rich countries as well as in poor
ones 
>>> (only it is more flagrant in poor ones). The last article
>>> posted by Vngelis claims that global agricultural production is
>>> sufficient to nourish the staggering six-plus billion. Maybe it is
>>> (although one would have to ask additionally: what's "enough"? Is a
>>> bowl of rice enough?). But there's more to life than food.
>>> 
>>> We live in a finite world. As well as everything else, resources
>>> are limited. The more entities resources have to be distributed
>>> among, the lesser each entity has. Not only food, but also energy
>>> and space. Should be simple enough to understand.
>>> 
>>> Yet the Earth's population is projected to grow -- how much? I tend
>>> to forget marish figures -- staggeringly over the next very
>>> decades. Will agricultural output rise fast enough to sup****t twice
>>> as much as today -- and even more? Maybe. But tell me this: when it
>>> comes to the point where the whole biomass is part of the human
>>> nutrition cycle; where each atom is in either soil or fertiliser or
>>> crop or cattle or food or crap, ergo no "nature"; where we all have
>>> to live in six-tatami rooms (if we're lucky) -- when it comes to
>>> this, what the **** are we supposed to live FOR?!
>>> 
>>> Birth control is one of the most critical issues of our time (and
>>> one of the greatest taboo at that). It is generally critical, for
>>> political reasons: scarcity leads to inequality, inequality to
>>> oppression. But is even more critical in our time, for the Earth's
>>> ecosystem is on the verge of being lastingly harmed. Species are
>>> disappearing at a frightening rate. Pollution and desertification
>>> are rampant. If we don't take control over our numbers in our
>>> hands, nature will. If we do not control our births, eventually
>>> nature will control life -- through starvation. No amount of
>>> "regulation" of speculations will change that. And it applies to
>>> capitalist or socialist/communist societies alike.
>>> 
>>> -- DF.
>>> 
>> Does this have anything to do with your advocacy of mass murder in
another 
>> thread?
>> 
>> -jh-
>
> No.
>
> -- 
> DF.
>
I certainly did write this. If your advocacy of mass murder of 
"settlers" in another thread was intended as a "joke," it was in the 
worst possible taste, and was reminiscent of similar "jokes" that have 
been imputed to Stalin by his enemies such as Khrushchev.

-jh-