 |
| Why Johnny can't play |
NPR correspondent Jennifer Ludden profiled some of my work in procreative ethics with an article entitled, “Should we be having kids in the age of climate change?,” which summarized my published views that we ought to consider adopting a “small family ethic” and even pursuing fertility reduction efforts in response to the threat from climate change. Although environmentalists for decades have worried about overpopulation for many good reasons, I suggest the fast-upcoming thresholds in climate change provide uniquely powerful reasons to consider taking real action to slow population growth.
Clearly, this idea struck a nerve: I was overwhelmed by the response in my personal email inbox as well as op-eds in other media outlets and over 70,000 shares on Facebook. I am gratified that so many people took the time to read and reflect on the piece.
Having read and digested that discussion, I want to continue it by responding to some of the most vocal criticisms of my own work, which includes research on “population engineering” – the intentional manipulation of human population size and structure – I’ve done with my colleagues, Jake Earl and Colin Hickey. (more...)
The ivy-league American who wrote this piece would be right at home at the college where I studied in my youth. The milieu at that school was bursting with spooks, freemasons, crypto-Nazis, Frankfurt School gender ideologues and pseudo-denazifiers, sustainable developmentalists, population controllers and every type of anthropologist, sociologist, psychologist, political scientist, and women's studies type who could contribute to the brainwashing of future technocrats. Some of the crypto-Nazis weren't all that crypto. Having discovered that Theodor Adorno couldn't actually deprogram Nazis, the social engineers turned to retooling mass murderers as abortionists and sterilizers... and encouraging them to be patient. You can catch more flies with honey.
No comments:
Post a Comment