Phil Randal wrote:
> The BBC "Green Room" article Rapley refers to is here:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4584572.stm
>
> He stressed there the "tabooness" of the subject:
>
> 'So controversial is the subject that it has become the "Cinderella"
> of the great sustainability debate - rarely visible in public, or even
> in private.'
>
> Like the great god of "economic growth", population issues must not be
> discussed.
>
> What other taboos and "unthinkables" does our society have which
> prevent us from both acknowledging the problems and seeking
> appropriate solutions? And how do we demolish these barriers to
> rational action?
>
> Phil
The "Population Bomb" problem has been around for a long time and is
still being ignored by both the politicians and the media. Paul
Ehrlich coined the phrase when he wrote a book with that title in 1968
and then went on to write a text book "Ecoscience: Population,
Resources, Environment " in 1978 giving a fuller description of the
mess we are in. His description of the demographics of a country like
Mexico versus that in the U.S. give a clear picture of the problem as
the fraction of young people was much greater in the fast growing
Mexican population than it is in the richer, better educated U.S.
where family sizes tend to be smaller. So, 30 years later, we have a
large influx of poor, under educated Mexicans trying to make it into
the U.S. economy. There's no surprise in that, I think. Have there
been ANY discussion in the media or from the politicians about the
population problem in Mexico?
Little as changed in the political arena since the 1970's, except that
there has been a reactionary response by conservatives, especially
from those with strong religious beliefs. The rise of the Christian
Right in American politics is just the tip of the iceberg. A large
fraction of the U.S. population has no understanding of science and
indeed holds to a mystical world view that rejects the scientific
facts that are so clear to those who have taken the time to study
them. About 1/3 the U.S. population sees the Bible as literal truth
and a large additional fraction believes it to be based on the Word of
God. The Islamist view is not much different, in that their Book is
given similar reverence.
History has made any rational discussion of population control very
difficult, after the eugenics movement of the early 1900's and the
associated actions of Nazi Germany. Racial discrimination issues left
over from the U.S. experience with slavery further complicates the
discussion. To control population growth, which some think should be
a negative, major intrusions in personal lives would be necessary. At
the most basic level, the question is: Who is to be allowed to
procreate and who is not? Where there a way to ask such a question
without the previous historical nightmares, an answer would be almost
impossible to find. The discussion has degenerated to questions about
the "right" of a women to have an abortion as we see U.S. candidates
for president lining up on opposite sides. Here's a current example:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/washington/ABORTIONPOSITIONS.html
Notice that there's no mention of population as a problem. Population
control is off the screen.
How do "we" demolish these barriers to rational action? That's been
the basic question for more than 40 years. I see no hope, given the
political situation. So, famine, pestilence and wars will be the
ultimate limits to growth. The unyielding religious fanatics will be
happy with this outcome, as it fits into their world view in which the
wicked will be punished for their original "sin" of being born. Worse
yet, the Armageddon lovers may make it happen, whether "we" like it or
not. There are lots of End Timers out there in Fly Over Land...
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
