2011: Newspaper Calls For Sterilization of “Man-Swarm” to Tackle Global Warming

In an astonishing editorial the left-leaning West Virginia Gazette (part of the Charleston Gazette) has called for widespread sterilizations to cull “the global manswarm” driving global warming.

Claiming that “Overpopulation is the root cause of pollution and other environmental menaces ravaging the biosphere” the editorial cited as inspiration a recent National Geographic special edition on the world’s seventh billion inhabitant. The National Geographic article was designed to break the “taboo” that supposedly prevents people discussing overpopulation and how to deal with it (a taboo so strict that every newspaper in the world seems to be discussing it now, asking if global warming can be tackled without tackling overpopulation).

It certainly seems to have done that, stirring up deeply unpleasant sentiments from supposedly liberal publications like the West Virginia Gazette which said that whilst white, Western nations were being responsible about reproduction, foreigners abroad were starting to “swarm”, and said “ruthless measures” were needed:

Noticeably, little human growth occurs in prosperous First World societies, where well-educated people have brushed aside church taboos against birth control and keep family size small. But huge expansion continues in impoverished, less-educated, Third World countries, especially in Africa.

China imposed a drastic one-child-per-family crackdown and curbed its runaway upsurge. Bloating India has imposed decades of sterilization, paying low-income men a week’s wage as a bonus if they get quick vasectomies in mass clinics. These are ruthless measures — but necessary.

National Geographic warns that regions of the world will become hellish — “some parts of it are hellish today” — without major action.

More birth control, more sterilization — plus more education and prosperity — these are urgently needed to halt humanity’s lemminglike rush toward misery.

West Virginia Gazette. Editorial. Swarm: Exploding Humanity.

Note the title of the editorial: “Swarm: Exploding Humanity”. That’s how they see those irresponsible people in Africa and Asia. Unlike the nice Western people in America and Europe, who they note aren’t over-breeding, people in Africa and Asia are a “swarm” that is “exploding”.

Whilst many normal people will condemn the calls by the West Virginia Gazette for “more sterilization” and “ruthless measures” seeing it as tantamount to fascism, it is a sign of the sort of moral climate now being generated around the increasingly intertwined issues of overpopulation and global warming that such calls are becoming more and more open.

This is the real face of the Malthusian movement.

11 responses to “2011: Newspaper Calls For Sterilization of “Man-Swarm” to Tackle Global Warming

  1. From Warmists to Swarmists!

  2. There is a connection between overpopulation in energy deprived countries and effects (wrongly) attributed to global warming. In many African countries where there is no real energy infrastructure the population deforests the area to produce charcoal (as well as farmland). This habitat loss causes real environmental problems that the alarmists (like Reuters) then attribute to “global warming”.
    See: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/Deforestation.htm , http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/ReutersAfrica.htm , http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/RS_Sahel.htm for examples

    • Hi Alan, thanks for posting.

      I remember reading about that at the time those reports came out. Strange how none of the papers called for power stations and an electricity grid in these countries. The Guardian (or The Independent) has even gone so far as to attack South Africa for building a coal-fired power station!

      There is such a huge amount of hypocrisy here: in the northern hemisphere, which is heavily developed, the forests are stable or growing: proof that tackling deforestation is best done by investing in infrastructure.

      Cheers,

      HtL.

      • Which could be dealt with by letting rip with free trade and having those poorly developed nations earn their own money and spend it on what they think is relevant.

        Instead the global wealth redistribution caravan wants to more heavily tax developed nations to buy off the third world and developing world Governments whilst protecting local producers and interests.

        Thinking that plan through, even if taxpayers in developed nations paid for African infrastructure, if there are no jobs and no prospects of earning your keep *in Africa* there is a) no incentive to control your own reproduction because you will be provided for whatever happens and b) no income to maintain the infrastructure. It is a global regime of welfare to *keep* poor nations at arm’s length and uncompetitive. It won’t reduce populations without the highlighted population control programmes because those poor nations experiencing population booms will remain poor, but at least they’ll have nice new roads. The false choice we are being presented with is totalitarianism of an obscene nature or global warming thermageddon.

        If they genuinely want the population boom to cease and wish to do it with the least harm they should be all for free trade to the maximum possible extent – including the abandonment of things like the Common Agricultural Policy. It would for a while increase consumption of fossil fuels and other things too which would provide the price signals our betters are currently trying to create with taxation. Their internal Fabian is too strong for them to view things that way.

  3. Pingback: 2011: Newspaper Calls For Sterilization of “Man-Swarm” to Tackle Global Warming «

  4. Barry: The free market funds extractive resource development in those countries since the investment can be recouped relatively quickly. More “permanent” infrastructure has a longer payback term and is thus riskier. However, the NGOs do not want the development of real infrastructure and development or they would be put out of business. Thus they are against the development of energy systems (such as natural gas burning facilities) that could actually help the environment by reducing the need for forest-destroying charcoal. The “aid” NGOs end up causing more problems than they solve. But corrupt officials in those countries like the NGOs because they can (ab)use them for their own ends.

  5. Neo-Malthusianism, anti-humanism and now, as Alan Cheetham and Barry illustrate above, opportunism and profound hypocrisy too. Who would have though ‘environmentalism’ could encompass so much that is wrong?

  6. More birth control, more sterilization — plus more education and prosperity — these are urgently needed to halt humanity’s lemminglike rush toward misery.

    West Virginia Gazette, above

    This is the fundamental lie put about by neo-Malthusians. The word order is tellingly wrong. ‘Prosperity’ should be first in the list.

    Prosperity means falling infant mortality. This invariably reduces birth rates as women do not keep having children unless there is a mortality pressure to do so.

    So much easier to sterilise and ‘educate’ though. Rather than emancipate through wealth. Because this means infrastructure, consumerism, longevity and an end to the death and misery that went before. But that means ‘harm’ to the environment including increased CO2 emissions.

    Which causes a kind of schizophrenia among ‘environmentalists’.

  7. Let’s save the planet a lot of money in the long run;
    Let’s pay for the Sterilization of Liberals and Greenies.

  8. its kinda ok to me but not bad

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s