Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Humans Seem Hell Bent on Committing Mass Suicide -- But There's Still Hope

By Fred Branfman, AlterNet. Posted May 15, 2009.


Despite the endless human capacity for denial and self-destruction, the Earth can still be saved. But we must act now.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Nobel laureate Doris Lessing’s 1971 novel, Briefing for a Descent Into Hell, imagines other planets sending volunteers to try and save Earth because its death would threaten them all. The volunteers are first informed of the scope of their mission and nature of the planet’s inhabitants during a "briefing" session.

The basic problem, the briefer explains, is that human beings have not learned that everything is interconnected and "have not yet evolved into an understanding of their individual selves as merely part of a whole, first of all humanity, let alone achieving a conscious knowledge of humanity as a part of Nature."

Believing that an outsider perspective may be illuminating in evaluating today’s news, we imagine here what "the briefer" would tell "a volunteer" about Earth’s present situation.

The Briefer: You are being sent to the United States of America, Earth’s most powerful nation, at a time of great economic, geopolitical and biospheric crisis.

In Is Humanity Suicidal? E. O. Wilson, one of Earth’s leading biologists, wrote: "People place themselves first, family second, tribe third, and the rest of the world a distant fourth. During all but the last few millennia of the two million years of [their] existence ... a premium was placed on close attention to the near future … So today the human mind still works comfortably backward and forward only a few years." This is a precise description of how America and the world have reached its present crisis. Powerful elites have preyed upon the poor and gullible to destroy national economies and even their own companies, enriching themselves at the expense of others. Now, only a dramatic transformation without precedent in human experience—changing from modes of competition to cooperation, consumption to investment and short- to long-term thinking—can save the species.

The Volunteer: The newspapers and TV news on Earth seem focused almost entirely on the collapsing world economy. There are also numerous stories about war and terrorism, particularly a Middle East where medieval fanatics are gaining in Afghanistan and a nuclear-armed Pakistan, extremists have taken power in a nuclear-armed Israel and an Iran which is pursuing nuclear weapons. Is the economy or war the greatest challenge facing the human species at this point?

Neither. Economic breakdown and war are serious matters threatening the well-being of many millions of people. But their most serious consequence is that they divert resources from humanity’s top priority: meeting the threat to its survival from the interaction between global warming, biodiversity loss, ocean destruction and other unprecedented assaults upon Earth’s basic life-support systems. The newspapers you cite reveal just how much humans are in psychological denial about the seriousness of their plight.

How serious is the situation with the biosphere?

Very serious. Humanity will either build new renewable energy-powered economies and live, or fail to do so and die. As in the early days of the Industrial Revolution, people will have to consume far less and invest far more in building a new economy. They will have to live with less now so that they—and their kids and grandkids—will not only live well but simply live. Doing so is technically feasible but politically difficult. America is fortunate to have a new president, Barack Obama, who understands the seriousness of the situation, unlike his predecessor who actually sanctioned biospheric degradation.

What evidence is there for the magnitude of this threat?

The world’s scientists, traditionally competing for grants and laurels like the Nobel Prize, rarely agree. For the first time in scientific history, however, climate scientists have not only reached a near-unanimous consensus that human-made global warming threatens humanity, but have formed a global organization—the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—to try and prevent it. Their most recent report states: "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal. Eleven of the last twelve years (1995-2006) rank among the twelve warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature [since 1850]. ... [Climate change], together with sea level rise, are expected to have mostly adverse effects on natural and human systems [including] ... increased risk of deaths, injuries and infectious, respiratory and skin diseases ... water and food-borne diseases; posttraumatic stress disorders ... increased risk of deaths and injuries by drowning in floods; migration-related health effects."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: environment, economy, global warming, oceans, collapse, biosphere, planetary destruction

Fred Branfman is a writer, public policy activist, spiritual seeker and student of psychology. While directing Rebuild America in Washington, D.C., from 1987 to 1991, Branfman wrote “An Investment Economics for the Year 2000” and “Industry-led Strategy.” He wrote the “strategic investment initiative” for U.S. Sen. Gary Hart’s mid-1980s run for president. As a Cabinet-level aide for California’s then-Gov. Jerry Brown, he wrote the “Investment in High Technology” and “Investment in People” state-of-the-state initiatives. He also promoted renewable energy while directing Protecting Future Generations in the mid-1990s, and authored the state of California’s SolarCal strategy and “Jobs From the Sun” in 1979 while with the Campaign for Economic Democracy.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
get the facts and Calm Down
Posted by: johnwinthrop on May 15, 2009 1:31 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
spending trillions on dead ends that don't affect the temp of Earth will lead to more despair. The UN and its accolytes are true believers-only co2 matters and you can lower earth temp by elimination of current levels of co2. the influence of solar storms and radiation is pooh poohed despite historical evidence that earth's temp has been significantly affected by the sun. let's calm down. taxing everyone to death won't affect the temp of earth. no matter what USA does, China and India will go their merry way, as will rest of Third World. Are we really on verge of huge sea level and temp changes? Doubtful, and co2 but minor factor in longterm global temp changes. Calm down.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need a revenue-neutral carbon tax
Posted by: greenferret on May 15, 2009 3:11 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Solving climate change is our generation's greatest challenge. A revenue-neutral carbon tax is the cheapest, simplest, most effective and most progressive way to do it.

Join GreenChange.org in calling on President Obama and our elected representatives to support a revenue-neutral carbon tax.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Gods Green Earth"
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 15, 2009 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is telltale when self proclaimed Holy rollers spend more time & money on persecuting Gays and Women than caring for the planet bestowed upon Us by the Creator.
Amazing they are willing to refute the unmistakeable proof that the planet is reacting adversely to fossil fuels, coal and nukes. How many decades now have we been discussing the thinning Ozone layer? How many nuclear accidents have claimed lives and made regions Uninhabitable?
What Followers would be so hell bent on destroying 'God Green Earth'?..."Could it Be Satan" Followers. They sure spend more time (and money) disavowing the gift of scientific inquiry into proper Stewardship...Perfer to do battle than spread peace, hoard their cash than share the 'fish & Bread' with those in need, Bear False Witness against others than Love thy neighbor.
Funny these (w)holy rollers take every word of the Bible as gospel- yet fail to recognize the 'Decievers' spewing the antithesis of the doctrines at them from the Pulpit or staring back at them in the mirror .
Regardless if you are a 'God Fearing' Faithful or a hard Core atheist- this is the only planet we have been given- by God or nature. It is our duty as the ONLY Species on the planet capable of management.
Failure to perform this innate responsiblity is not only a disservice to our descendants, but a spit in the 'face' to the miraculous Forces that granted Us this priviledge.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Couple more questions Posted by: Purple Girl
handmjones
Posted by: hughjones on May 15, 2009 5:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The tipping point has been passed if present models indeed represent reality. The oceans which are the principle sink are warming and thus absorbing less and soils, tundra, rain forests and the ocean floor are all giving off more than before. The models do not explain the commencement nor the ending of the several glacial periods in our epoch. Talking humanity into reducing population through voluntary reduction in the birthrate is the only action that is guaranteed to reduce human destruction of the environment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Models represent assumptions, not reality. Posted by: Eddie Van Helsing
Daniel J. Benor, MD
Posted by: DJBMD on May 15, 2009 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fred Branfman cogently summarizes humanity's impending suicide as a race. He notes that humanity fails to connect with awarenesses of being part of the collective ecobiological system that includes all living things on this planet.

Several important factors to add to Branfman's observations:

1. Humanity is not only suiciding, but is genociding all other living organisms on this planet.

2. It is not all of humanity that is behaving in these ways. David Korten, in "The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community" explains this well.

3. There is a meticulously researched body of scientific evidence to support a collective consciousness. Details and references at
Parapsychogy Research

Branfman notes briefly that there are psychological reasons contributing to these behaviors, such as unacknowledged and repressed fears of death. Much more can be said about further psychological issues, particularly the collective post traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) of humanity. This CPTSD has been generated through several millennia of brutality of humans against each other.

It is well known that perpetrators of abuse have frequently been abused themselves. Humanity, having been abused and having failed thus far to clear their individual and collective hurts, fears and angers, has become an abuser.

There are new, rapidly and deeply effective methods for clearing PTSD that can be extended to CPTSD. For details on one of these methods, WHEE: Whole Health - Easily and Effectively, and how to apply this to clearing the CPTSD, see World Healing Through Collective Consciousness

Blessings

Dan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

People come and go on this planet every day. I'm doing just fine !
Posted by: FLYING DOOFUS on May 15, 2009 6:43 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I eat like Garfield the big fat cat everyday and I'm flying high ! If people wanna commit suicide, I say let 'em. I can eat their lunches for them any day. Plus, with less people, the national debt will go down. MORE FOOD and MORE TAX CUTS !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Doofus, I'm sorry to say . . . Posted by: countingdaisies
» RE: Doofus, I'm sorry to say . . . Posted by: Eddie Van Helsing
» RE: Doofus, I'm sorry to say . . . Posted by: FLYING DOOFUS
» RE: Doofus, I'm sorry to say . . . Posted by: Eddie Van Helsing
» RE: Doofus, I'm sorry to say . . . Posted by: FLYING DOOFUS
I am seeing it...
Posted by: QuestionAuthority on May 15, 2009 6:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have seen places that I knew as a child change radically and sometimes disappear due to climate change. I'm talking about coral reefs I used to snorkel over in the Caribbean no longer existing, for example, not places paved over. That has happened too, of course.

My father is still living (in his mid 80's)and he also is concerned. He used to be a conservative Republican, but has tunred his back on that because of the damage it has wrought over the last 30 years.

I have read extensively on both sides of the dicussion and have little doubt that Humanity is in deep trouble. I (quite rationally, I think) fear for the future lives of my grand children. I disagree with some of the details in the article, but overall I think he has nailed it.

If we go extinct, we'll deserve it. Maybe this is what happens to all intelligent life over a certain level: they eliminate themselves?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Roberto Vargas
Posted by: Roberto Vargas on May 15, 2009 7:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Time for Action! Synthesize the article and forward it to everyone you know who has influence. I received my doctorate in public health in 1986, and this challenge to humanity was then called the "World Problematique", the inter-relationship of all the mega-challenges facing humanity. It's real! Let's not waste time on the detail, but recognize we all have a responsibility to move the "great turning" (Look at David Korten's book, The Great Turning"). I believe our inherent human/spiritual nature is "por vida", to be for and of the service to life. So, let's own our courage and creativity and find ways to move the responsible change required in our personal, political and social lives!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shovel-ready dunderheads
Posted by: chance garden on May 15, 2009 8:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So why is the Obama administration spending billions of $$$ on "shovel-ready" jobs spreading ASPHALT, of all things, across the planet, burning more oil and heating up the planet, and making it nicer for ecologically obsolete things like cars and trucks to continue to proliferate?

If anything, the asphalt roads should be torn up, the bridges dismantled, the dams removed, the wind turbine farms never planted, the nuclear plants never built, the airliners grounded, the bomb factories closed...

...the ocean liner cruise industry aborted, sports and amusement park industries shuttered, stock market and finacial vampire industries stopped, holiday celebrations stifled, packaging and advertising industries canned, sub-urban sprawl froze, oil and gas wells capped...

..the list goes on and on of thing we could to to end our wasteful ways etc...

Then...Focus on growing food, planting trees, delivering and cleaning water and oceans, birth control, birth control, birth control, providing acceptable and non-stigmatic voluntary euthanasia opportunities....

...but no, all we get is political bondage to an elite system of global oppression and enforced "communitarianism", and mass environmental degradation to support a global plutocracy of myopic shovel-ready dunderheads!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BA
Posted by: mnstra on May 15, 2009 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article an very informative ,But who cares about 2100?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who cares about 2100? Posted by: Starfall Deception
Human beings
Posted by: Grandma Crabby on May 15, 2009 8:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Taken collectively, human beings are pretty dang disgusting. The earth, as an ecosystem, will be better off once we are gone.

Call my cynical and negative, but I have ALWAYS thought that eventually mankind would self destruct. There are so many different ways we could go. Let's see.....Which will it be?

Enough nuclear warheads to destroy the earth many times over. That's not to say that nukes are the ONLY dangerous weapons. There are tons of ways to destroy ourselves thru military means.

Pollution of the air, oceans and land bad enough to make the earth uninhabitable on many levels. Take global warming along with the destruction of the ozone, the destruction of the ocean and half a dozen other environmental catastrophes and you got one pitifully sick planet.

Economic warfare to starve all us useless eaters.

Economic warfare to deny health care to all of us useless eaters

I could go on and on, but I guess you get my point. OF COURSE mankind will self destruct. there is no other logical outcome.

Good grief, even if EVERYONE was on board with global climate change and we all worked like crazy to make needed changes, it would be a close call and we would probably loose. But no, you still got tons of people denying reality and refusing to get off their fat asses to do a damn thing. What hope is there in that?

And on that cheerful note, I am off to work!

Granny's crazy videos Go get a chuckle!


Luv,
Granny

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, remember Easter Island Posted by: Word Mix
HUMANS ONLY TRULY LEARN THROUGH EXPERIENCE
Posted by: sirios on May 15, 2009 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As long as people see themselves as separate from each other and their environment, there is no hope. No amount of fear based taxation, legislation or education will stop the self destruction. When we realize that we rely totally on the natural world for our physical existence, then and only then will we stop destroying our benefactor. The realization of connectedness to the planet must come, not from "correct information" but from our essence which is common to all and that the planet and all of it's inhabitants are appearing inside of this essence and cannot be separated from it. The very second we see ourselves as separate from the natural world, IT IS TO LATE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» experience is what you get Posted by: hurricane hugo
I cannot begin to cope with the global macro problem.
Posted by: Sojourner on May 15, 2009 9:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, we have become a global community, and so we are dysfunctional at the global level. It is just as much a form of denial to think that we can prevent a massive die-back of our species as it is to pretend it is not likely.

In the US we have chosen contemptible leadership for such a long time now, that our national survival system is inadequate. I would hope that such information might motivate the US to evolve positively toward healthful and helpful national policies. I think that is unlikely.

Only if when the sh*t hits the fan (now? yes, but it can get lots worse) we may happen to have activist leadership on behalf of the people maybe we will accept the changes necessary.

However, we have come to rely on systems of denial (main stream media; entertainment; gambling, etc.) so thoroughly that it may take collapse for us to change. Although the evidence of global warming is recent, the impossibility of the long-term resiliency of our civilization has been evident for a long time. As one who is hoarse from shouted warnings, I am tired. It is good to see such a clear statement as the one published here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Talk All You Want . . .
Posted by: dudelette on May 15, 2009 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It doesn't matter. People are not going to change. Sure, there are a few of us who do or did actually care and made an effort, but the vast majority of people are nothing more than animals who wear clothes. They will not change. They will eat, breed, and pollute themselves into destruction, taking along the few who would make an effort to change the system.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A good, thought-provoking article
Posted by: willymack on May 15, 2009 9:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A bit overlong, but good. The absolute necessity of studying world history is this:
We base our cultural mores and assumptions on what went before us. Previous civilizations have all had their imprint on modern times.
The concept of democracy comes from ancient Greece.
Our system of laws and jurisprudence comes from ancient Rome.
Our time telling and geographical references have their origins in the base twelve math of ancient Babylon.
The concept of self-realization and goodness for its own sake comes from ancient India.
And so on.
One glaring fact about all those great civilations is this:
They're ALL in ruins.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I agree with at least 90% of this
Posted by: badkitty on May 15, 2009 10:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with at least 90% of this article, the best summary I think I have ever seen of what I believe we face, but I am very dubious that we can get out of this situation successfully (i.e., with our environment mostly intact). I am doing whatever I can in my own life to limit energy use, from getting rid of my car to going to bed early to avoid using electricity and reusing and recycling whatever I can, but even those close to me cannot seem to understand the effect of what they themselves do has on our planet. It requires constant consciousness, and I don't think most people will have to the capability to face this until they are up against the wall. Those of us in our 50s or older are the lucky ones, we have seen how good life can be, even if we didn't consume the way others did and have. I think it's all been downhill since 1968, in terms of standard of living, and in terms of American power, economic and military, probably the same. It is so difficult for me, raised when the United States was, without question, the most powerful economic and military power in the world, to see it as a basically second rate nation now, and to know that most people still think we are so successful.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What hope?
Posted by: frankly1 on May 15, 2009 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A good article but with one major flaw.. humans will not change. There is no hope. It is actually stated in the article. There are no signs that any serios action is being taken or will be taken any time soon. Also the word planet and that we are destoying it illustates our collective arrogance and ignorance. We won't destroy the planet. This planet has been through many mass extictions some that elimiated 98% of species. The causes of previous extictions can be disputed but the cause of the next one will be humanity as a whole. Life on this planet will continue to evolve from a new point as it always has and will most probably not include humans or anything like us. Time like duality is an illusion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Current Economic Model = Death
Posted by: Thor29 on May 15, 2009 11:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The current economic model is based on unlimited growth on a finite planet. Notice how a slight contraction in economic growth in the USA sends the whole system into a tailspin. In this system, it is considered a good thing to convince people to buy stuff they don't need. They then toss it in a landfill and buy more stuff they don't need. Most of the economic activitiy of the world is unneccessary and polluting, yet if I want to eat, I have to get a job within this system and help to perpetuate it.

Switching to "clean energy" while still using this economic model will not prevent ecological catastrophe. At best it will only prolong the inevitable.

For a fun look at this fundamental issue, check out the animation at www.thestoryofstuff.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE DOCTRINE OF PERPETUAL GROWTH
Posted by: GUY FOX on May 15, 2009 1:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good article... but it basically ignores the reason for todays's world crisis, the biggest elephant in the room. The author of the article still does not get it!

I am talking here about the exponential growth of the human population on Planet Over-Birth Earth. Why is this being ignored? It is THE No. 1 problem! And this problem is called THE DOCTRINE OF PERPETUAL GROWTH.

THE DOCTRINE OF PERPETUAL GROWTH of the human population and the global economy on Planet Over-Birth-Earth, an extremely fragile HOST ORGANISM of limited space and limited resources, cannot be sustained. Perpetual growth in a closed loop systen (the Earth) is NOT progress. It is cancer! It is full blown cancer!

Two things here!

1. WHERE THERE IS NO INSIGHT, THE PEOPLE PERISH!

2. WHOM THE GODS WOULD DESTROY, THEY FIRST MAKE MAD(off).

Old Coyote Knose... that human beings, if they hope to avoid a major extinction event, will have to abandon outdated religious dogmas (a.k.a.: dog-mess) and the arrogant ethno-racist attributes associated with tribe-all-eeego (i.e.: Zionism, etc.). Failure to do this means that all ewe folks are dead! Especially the ruling class! Your elitist asses are doomed if ewe do not soon come to your senses. Your money and your gold will not save your sorry asses. Old Coyote Knose!

RICHARD RALPH ROEHL (a.k.a.: R.R.R.)
Los Angeles, Tampa Bay, Key West, Havana (Cuba)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wordlab Editor
Posted by: WordLab on May 15, 2009 2:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The observations and remarks about the cancerous logic of geometric growth are well taken. Herman Daly, God bless 'im, referred to the "logic of the cancer cell." Growth-compounded-upon-growth is running afoul of absolute limits in natural systems. In just about every way we can look at our systems, we are approaching profound moments of "bifurcation." Regions of dynamic stability and local equilibrium are... DONE. There is an article that shows the nature of geometric growth, with simple graphs and no numbers, here.
http://www.takebackourlanguage.com/blog/?p=1410
The conclusions are unmistakable and utterly stunning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No mention of overpopulation ?!!
Posted by: evasta7 on May 15, 2009 6:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sheesh, talk about ignoring the 'elephant in the room'! All those words and none about the root cause of our self selected demise- overpopulation. It's the size of our global population that has triggered climate change and that climate change is (as Lovelock etc. point out) further reducing global carrying capacity. You can do all those other wonderful things mentioned in this rambling essay, but if you don't reduce population, all benefit gets canceled out soon, sometimes in mere weeks or months.

We’ve already exceeded global carrying capacity. We are now in “overshoot”. (Visualize a car sailing smoothly, but quite temporarily, through the air after having been driven off of a cliff.)

Global population is nearing 7 billion. Different theorists using different methods seem to end up agreeing that global carrying capacity is probably about 2 billion. (This assumes some level of social justice and a moderate, low by US standards, standard of living. More is possible if you accept a cattle car / Matrix-esque "life".)

In any case, we will get to that much-lower-than-7-billion number the hard way (wars, famine, disease, and their accompanying losses of environmental quality, freedom, and social justice) OR the less hard way (immediately and drastically reducing our population voluntarily). Yes, all of us, yes, everywhere. There is no scenario anywhere in which population growth is a "good thing" long term.

Yes a drop in population would cause problems, but none of those problems are as big as the problems, suffering, and environmental collapse that is certain to occur if we don’t.

I disagree with any argument that there is some “right to reproduce”. If there is any "right to reproduce" it's in the concept that one has the freedom to nurture a child or children and form some sort of family. Biological reproduction is not necessary to do that and there are many in need of this sort of nurturing. I would also argue that there is no right to cause suffering to others, now or on into the future, and that is exactly what having babies does.

This is a global issue with local and nation-state consequences. For example, immigration is a consequence of overpopulation, not a cause of it. Likewise, global climate change and the collapse of ocean fisheries are not impressed by national boundaries.

No technological / "alternative energy" options have the capacity or can be ramped up fast enough to avoid major global calamity. That isn't to say we shouldn't do them. Aggressively shifting to alternative energy is necessary, just not sufficient.

For more comprehensive analysis of all this I suggest: (some links broken up to allow posting)

Bandura etc.
http://growthmadness.org/2008/02

/18/impeding-ecological-sustainability-

through-selective-moral-disengagement/

Albert Bartlett on the exponential function as it relates to population and oil:
http://c-realm.blogspot.com/2008/12

/kmo-interview-with-albert-bartlett.html

Approaching the Limits www.paulchefurka.ca

Bruce Sundquist on environmental impact of overpopulation http://home.alltel.net/bsundquist1/

How Many People Should The Earth Support? http://www.ecofuture.org

/pop/rpts/mccluney_maxpop.html

Carrying Capacity
http://iere.org/ILEA/leaf/richard2002.html

The Oil Drum Peak Oil Overview - June 2007 (www.theoildrum.com/node/2693)


...and of course the classic "Overshoot" by Catton

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

breathless exaggeration and gigantic logical fallacies
Posted by: dayahka on May 15, 2009 6:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One minute you're talking about a breakdown in the economic system and the next you make a gigantic leap connecting this to the extinction of the species, then on and on you go in breathless abandon and commit just about every logical fallacies there is. Please, go study Logic 101, and then maybe try again. It's not worth reading this stuff, for while some of what you say is true, there is no logical connection between the evidence and your conclusions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"There will come soft rains..."
Posted by: jhecht on May 15, 2009 7:27 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,
And swallows circling with their shimmering sound;

And frogs in the pools singing at night,
And wild plum trees in tremulous white;

Robins will wear their feathery fire,
Whistling their whims on a low fence-wire;

And not one will know of the war, not one
Will care at last when it is done.

Not one would mind, neither bird nor tree,
If mankind perished utterly;

And Spring herself, when she woke at dawn
Would scarcely know that we were gone."

- Sara Teasdale

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MUAHAHAHAAHAA!
Posted by: XXX13 on May 15, 2009 9:04 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America is on the decline, and your making it sound like the end of the world. LOL! And as for "overpopulation" Thats just white racist garbage, since you cant take it that the rest of the world is now rising from it's "third world misery" But anyway, it's not as if theres anything you can do about it? I doubt you would have the guts to start a war with a country like China, so bitch and moan all you want. Nobodys going to care about your crying and your stupid computer moders;)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hope is a four-letter word.
Posted by: goodyweaver on May 16, 2009 12:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article was mildly interesting, but somewhat naive. I am pretty tired at this point of people who use all these "ifs" when they talk about what is happening on this planet. "If" we invest in renewable energy... "If" we notice we're actually dependent on life on this planet for our own lives... "If" we reduce our consumption... "If" Obama actually grows a pair... As many others here have pointed out, all these "ifs" are completely meaningless, because none of this is happening.

On the contrary, all you hear from our "leaders" is how we're going to increase growth, increase jobs, increase "prosperity" (which is code for increasing consumption of plastic crap we don't need). I knew I had been a huge sucker when Obama got into office and said pretty much NOTHING about americans reducing consumption, shifting their mentality, or (GASP!) actually downsizing this economy, which is the engine for much environmental destruction (INCLUDING that of China and India, since they are destroying their ecosystems primarily to supply garbage products to western nations).

The fact is, there is no leader bold enough to say what needs to be said to the american people - much less one with the moral and ethical audacity to actually follow through and ACT. Obama is a massive disappointment, whatever pittance he's willing to throw at "renewables." Someone - SOME LEADER - needs to get on the idiot box and tell this country - and the world - that first of all, global warming doesn't even matter. Is it real? Is it caused by humans? Is it a hoax? Who cares? Doesn't matter. The FACT is that even without global warming as a distinct possibility, we are headed toward ecological collapse. We have polluted EVERY SINGLE WATERWAY on this planet. All of them. We have killed off between 70 and 90% of the large fish in the oceans. The remainder are contaminated with mercury and other heavy metals. We are losing something like an acre of rainforest every minute. We are losing species and biodiversity at a rate not seen since a giant space object hit earth and killed off the dinosaurs. All of this is caused by humans, or more specifically, by overconsuming humans. What's worse, those humans who don't overconsume and who live in balance with the non-human communities around them, are being killed off, forced off their ancestral homelands, and incorporated into "civilization" at an alarming rate. Their "right" to exist isn't even really recognized by most societies.

So there's hope? Well, I say we are FOOLS if we sit around choking to death on the pathetic HOPE that Earth's ruling elite are going to suddenly stop doing what they've been doing for the last thousand years. We are fools if we permit these genocidal lunatics to lead us off the edge of an ecological cliff in the name of preserving a lifestyle that not only is unsustainable and sick, not only demands the oppression and resource theft of the world's poor, not only creates constant warfare, not only necessitates the death of most of the non-human life (and much of the human life, for that matter) on Earth - but in the end is proven to create greater dissatisfaction, unhappiness, and psychological distress in the human animal than any other system on the planet.

The question here is not whether there is hope that the elite will suddenly become moral. Of course they won't. The real question is whether humans will recognize that they have been turned into sheep for the slaughter, rise up against these lunatics, and destroy the systems that are threatening to kill their great-grandchildren. My suspicion is, no, they won't - and the people of the United States most especially won't.

I just want to recommend to those who are actually waking up from this insanity the writing of Derrick Jensen, especially Endgame I. Check it out. How much more will you put up with? How far will we allow this to go?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well said! Posted by: countingdaisies
Picture??
Posted by: Scott on May 16, 2009 5:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article like others has a photo hooked to it, where is and how does one view the photo?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the answer is..............
Posted by: dbaker on May 18, 2009 3:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dennis Baker
103-66 duncan ave west
penticton bc canada V2A6Z3
cell 250-462-2771
fax 250-493-3463
dennisbaker2003@hotmail.com
RE : The solution to climate change.
( human excrement + nuclear waste = hydrogen )
The USA discharges Trillions of tons of sewage annually, sufficient quantity to sustain electrical generation requirements of the USA.
Redirecting existing sewage systems to containment facilities would be a considerable infrastructure modification project.
It is the intense radiation that causes the conversion of organic material into hydrogen, therefore what some would consider the most dangerous waste because of its radiation would be the best for this utilization.
I believe the combination of clean water and clean air, will increase the life expectance of humans.
yours sincerely
Dennis Baker

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not to worry, we'll finish ourselves no matter what...
Posted by: L5 on May 18, 2009 8:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If our actions related to global warming don't destroy us, organized religion will accomplish the task.

Acts of violence, carried out in the name of religious related ideologies, have caused more deaths than natural causes throughout human history and will continue to do so unless organized religion somehow becomes devolved from human conciseness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Question
Posted by: marciebarnes on May 22, 2009 2:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Loved reading this, but I think I am missing something - who is interviewing whom? Thanks!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement