START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Population Control's Dark Past


World  (tags: HumanRights, humanrights, ethics, freedoms, politics, government, capitalism, exploitation, impoverishment, poverty, oppression, population, children, women, feminism, women's rights, contraception, abortions, education, economy, economic development )

Simon
- 1795 days ago - links.org.au
A focus on population is a dangerous diversion from the urgent need to transition to a zero-carbon economy. Population control schemes are ineffective, & inevitably treat the victims of social & economic injustice as obstacles to a sustainable society.



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Michael Barth (43)
Friday November 27, 2009, 7:57 pm
Interesting article
 

Simon Wood (207)
Friday November 27, 2009, 8:00 pm
Thankyou Michael : )
 

Naoko I. (259)
Friday November 27, 2009, 8:06 pm
Noted. Thanks for posting this. Think good and important point.
 

Simon Wood (207)
Friday November 27, 2009, 11:22 pm
You're very welcome, Naoko : )

Thanks for your kind words : )

 

Marty H. (119)
Saturday November 28, 2009, 3:37 am
Yes, great points! The new world order, bilderberg group and council on foreign relations, all headed by David Rockefeller! Thanks Simon!
 

Simon Wood (207)
Saturday November 28, 2009, 6:35 pm
You're welcome Marty. It doesn't matter to me who exactly is promoting this authoritarianism and control over people's reproduction. It doesn't matter to me who exactly is scapegoating the victims of oppression, exploitation and impoverishment for their oppression, exploitation and impoverishment. The important thing is that we campaign for human rights, and campaign to address the real roots of humanity's problems.

E.g. corporate and government refusal to lower pollution, and especially corporate and government connivance to put the cost of carbon reduction on teh working class, instead of making the greedy rich pay for it....

And e.g. the concentration of decision-making power in the hands unelected corporate bosses, major shareholders and capitalist politicians who enact thir corporate agenda... and the consequent exploitative economic relations between multinational corporations and the people of the world.
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday November 29, 2009, 7:27 am
KKK???
 

Bill U. (2)
Sunday November 29, 2009, 3:55 pm
except that we really do need fewer people. or at least to stop making new ones
 

Simon Wood (207)
Sunday November 29, 2009, 8:13 pm
Yes, Birdie P., the people in the photo are KKK - with Margaret Sanger, a feminist who sold out. If you read the article (and better yet, the book), you will see that many population control activists are white supremicists and fascists, and some famous feminists sold out women's rights, in the past, by allying with those white supremicists and fascists.
 

Simon Wood (207)
Sunday November 29, 2009, 10:07 pm
Bill U., clearly you did not read the article, not to mention the book.

The problem is not poor people. The problem is capitalism, which destroys the environment, and oppresses, exploits and impoverishes people.

As the article reminded us - surely you have learnt this at school(?!) - economic prosperity and women's access to education reduce the birth rate - and the birthrate is going down.

If we make sustainable development, as they are doing in Cuba, then we can live well without destroying the environment.

It is time for us to change the system. Population control does not work - it only means human rights abuses and suffering. However, democratic socialism is a solution: putting people and nature above private profits and greed, and so ensuring an environmentally sustainable economy with a decent living standard for everyone.
 

Dagmara Scheider (0)
Monday November 30, 2009, 6:08 am
I have one question you should ask yourself how many people can you support? I don't think it would hurt a bit to ensure the next child is born in a atmosphere that can support it. If you can't support yourself don't think you can support another. I personally see no reason that we can't ask if the person who wants a child if they can support it. Children that grow up hungry remain hungry. take responsibility for the life you bring in.

Love you
Daggi
 

Simon Wood (207)
Monday November 30, 2009, 9:12 pm
Hi Dagmara,
you wrote: "I have one question you should ask yourself how many people can you support? I don't think it would hurt a bit to ensure the next child is born in a atmosphere that can support it. If you can't support yourself don't think you can support another. I personally see no reason that we can't ask if the person who wants a child if they can support it. Children that grow up hungry remain hungry. take responsibility for the life you bring in."

First of all, there is no point telling that to us. We, the English-speaking, internet-using privileged minority are obviously wealthy enough to afford to care for children. How about you go and tell your message to the people who you address it to: people who are too poor to take care of themselves. I.e. people who are not privileged enough to have access to a computer and internet, and who are not privileged enough to have learnt the English language.

What you have written sounds "reasonable" to us people born in a capitalist first world culture.

However, I reject what you wrote, for a number of reasons:

You seem to be implying that "rich people have the right to have children, and poor people do not have the right to have children". That is a rightwing, fascist idea. In the real world, people have the right to reproduction, according to the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

You also appear to be blaming poor people for their poverty. I.e. you imply that people who are poor, are that way "because their parents were too poor to raise a child, but had a child anyway".

But in the real world, many people have children when they CAN afford them, and then they become poor becayse there is a drought, flood, hurricane, or other natural disaster (increased by first world countries exploiting Third World countries and using their power to pressure Third World countries to overuse their farmland, and caused by climate change which is mostly due to the first world's pollution).

And in the real world, many people have children when they CAN can afford them, and then they become poor because they lose their job, due to the way capitalism functions at all times (corporations downsize their workforces, or move factories to other countries, to increase profits for shareholders), and people also lose their jobs and farm income due to capitalist economic crises.

Also, in the real world, many people have children when they CAN can afford them, but many parents die (from direct and proxy wars that first world countries force upon them, and from disease because of first world countries using the W.T.O. to force Third World countries to reduce health spending, so that many people die of quite preventable or treatable diseases), and when a parent dies, their children often are raised in poverty.

Plus, in the real world, many people have children when they CAN can afford them, but then the parents separate (due to domestic violence, abusive partners, or infidelity, etc.), and the mothers generally become single mothers, and the fathers often don't pay anything to support their children, so the children are raised in poverty.

Most people in first world countries also don't know this:

In the REAL WORLD, for most of humanity, who have no old age welfare, no old-age pensions or superannuation, etc., people must have children to look after them in their old age. And people must have children to take over their farms. And some children don't survive, so they must have extra children to be sure that some survive. And if they have more children, then they will generally prosper more because those children will eventually become more hands ofr the family farm, and some will perform well at school and get a better job, to help the family.

I.e. poverty and capitalist individualism makes people choose to have more children for their family's prosperity. If you want to reduce that, then the solution is democratic socialist reforms: e.g. a welfare system that cares for old people, and a health care system which ensures that most children survive.

Your advice would be all be great in a perfect world where everyone treats each other kindly. But the fact is, we are not living in that type of world.

Another example of this, is the fact that in the REAL WORLD, many girls and women are indoctrinated in sexist ideologies, have little power in marriage, have little knowledge about their opportunities, about their rights and about contraception... so many women get pregnant as a result. Also, many poor people get raped, and some poor girls and women choose to have that child, rather than risk a the only type of abortion they can afford: a dangerous amateur abortion.

Thus you can see, blaming poor people for poverty ("because they have children who they can't afford to raise") is fascist scapegoating that ignores the main causes of poverty: those who are in power in the first world maintain the capitalist system, which plunders the people of the Third World, and thus is the cause of poverty.
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.