* Jason Brent
* 09 Dec: EoP Re: Jason Brent: Thoughts on Coming Destruction of Civilization
» 08 Dec: Jason Brent: Thoughts on Coming Destruction of Civilization
» 21 Nov: Climate Change Options: EoP Global One Child intl Law or Whom Should Military Kill Genghis Khan Green Reforestation?.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: EoP v Jason Brent / EoP NWO SCO: EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Academia, EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity / EoP v WiP Neg.
From: EoP MILED Clerk <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 1:25 AM
Subject: Jason Brent: Thoughts on Coming Destruction of Civilization
To: Jason Brent <email@example.com>
Jason Brent (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Jason Brent: Thoughts on Coming Destruction of Civilization
Thanks for your essay. I read it in total, published it at 08 Dec: Jason Brent: Thoughts on Coming Destruction of Civilization. I shall now re-read it per paragraph, with feedback.
JB: The purpose of this essay is to convince the reader that humanity must today review, examine, discuss debate, analyze, and evaluate coercive population control and compare every aspect, problem and benefit of coercive control with voluntary population control. You are urged to read this essay to its end and if you disagree with any of the facts, math and logic, you are urged to write me and point out my errors. No authorities are included, because none are needed.
LJ: Agreed Coercive Population control is necessary, voluntary population control does not work. According to Tragedy of the Commons – allow one individual to get away with breeding/consuming above commons carrying capacity limits cheating; and the commons sets in motion the breeding/consumption ratrace; the endgame of which is ecological overshoot, resource conflict, commons collapse – principles; neither voluntary population or consumption control can work to protect overexploitation of the commons. To avoid overexploitation of the commons – any commons, from America to facebook — the commons carrying capacity must be determined, the maximum use carrying capacity boundaries clearly and simply clarified for all commons users, and any violation of the carrying capacity boundary limits must be very strictly punished.
JB: I want to make it absolutely clear that I am not claiming that coercive population control will be more effective in solving or ameliorating any of the problems humanity presently faces. The sole purpose of this essay is to convince the leaders of humanity that every method of population control must be considered, evaluated and compared and that action must be taken today.
LJ: From my reading and understanding I think the claim can be made that coercive population and consumption control will not only be more effective, but the only effective non-violent method of humanely and orderly reducing population to carrying capacity limits. I would say: all methods of population control can be considered but would recommend the following for implementation: * simply explained, so as to be clearly understood by a layperson who will not need to hire an expert to explain it to them; * impartially implemented; so as to eliminate racial or religious claims of bias and resistance to its implementation; thereby reducing amount of resources the state would need to set aside for its implementation; * simple durable effective quality low tech energy investment implementation – example IUD.
JB: 1) Since the earth and the resources it can provide to humanity are finite and limited, both population and economic growth must and will cease.
JB: 2) No action taken by humanity will permit either economic and/or population growth to continue forever into the future.
JB: 3) The human population, according to the UN (medium variant prediction issued in 2017), is expected to grow between 3.8 and 4.0 billion between now and 2100. In 1950 the population was about 2.5 billion. The predicted increase in population between 1950 and 2100 is about 8.7 billion (11.2 minus 2.5 =8.7)
LJ: Not sure I agree. Checked ‘medium variant prediction’ definition and its not quite clear to me, whether they simply consider current fertility trends, without considering how other resource depletion etc trends will affect fertility and/or deaths exceeding fertility. According to NTE climate change scientists, such as Guy McPherson: humanity is toast sometime between 2026 and 2050. If they are wrong: NNR researchers predict economic collapse due to Peak NNR by 2050. Ecological collapse – species extinctions, pollution – etc is also well on its way, and if massive depopulation does not occur soon, may reach death spiral state. Economic collapse and massive climate change, class, race and religious four horses of apocalypse resource wars is gonna cause allot – as in millions – of deaths.
JB: 4) Notwithstanding increasing efficiency, the per capita usage of resources is also expected to increase between now and 2100. This is due to the increasing industrialization and economic growth in the third world nations and those nations have the vast majority of the population on the planet.
LJ: Partially agree. Per capita resources may increase for next few years, but Peak NNR and ecological collapse will put an end to it long before 2100.
JB: 5) A very strong argument can be made that continuing increasing population combined with the continuing increasing in per capita usage of resources will result in the collapse of civilization before 2100. The collapse of civilization will be due to wars over decreasing resources, most likely with weapons of mass destruction.
LJ: What is your definition for ‘civilization’? industrial civilization? Democracy? Collapse of the State? Depending on your definition for ‘civilization’ I doubt it exists in many countries, and will last much longer than 2025, if that.
JB: 6) There are three and only three ways that population growth can cease—a) War, disease, starvation and other horrors; b) Voluntary population control; and c) Coercive population control.
JB: 7) Since no one desires war and other horrors, that method of population control must be excluded from consideration. Voluntary control includes every action that could be taken by humanity, short of coercion. Coercion can range from social exclusion to criminal penalties.
LJ: Partially agree. From my experience: a significant number of beings, particularly individuals in industrial countries with pension plans or stock options, profit from farming human cattle in other countries; and then slaughtering them for profit; with ‘shock and awe’ like wars. Another large segment of the population – alleged peaceniks – say they do not want wars, but given the opportunity to ‘turn off the root ‘right to breed/consume above carrying capacity limits’ clauses of international law root causes of overpopulation/consumption, resource depletion and resource conflict; they are not ready to walk their peacenik talk.
EoP Scientific and Cultural law ‘fully informed consent’ cultural law principles allows individuals to engage in fully informed consent activities with other adults; which would include cannibalism: for those with such interests [Barcroft TV: Interview with a Cannibal]; or fight clubs for those who identity is ‘macho warlike’; or BDSM sexual activities, and so on. Allowing individuals with ‘extreme’ or ‘non-mainstream’ hobbies or addictions or lifestyle preferences to engage in those preferences with other fully informed consenting adults in private venues, means they get what they want, and those who do not want what they want, get what they want. Racial and religious moralists similarly may engage in their racial or religious moralist lifestyle preferences with other fully informed consenting adults, in private venues or in their cultural law territory.
JB: 8) In reality, no one on the face of the earth is today considering coercion as a method to reduce population growth. HUMANITY IS GAMBLING ITS SURVIVAL ON THE ABILITY OF VOLUNTARY POPULATION CONTROL TO REDUCE POPULATION GROWTH TO ZERO IN TIME TO PREVENT THE COLLAPSE OF CIVILIZATION.
LJ: Not sure I am interpreting you accurately. Do you mean no-one as in no government official, or no-one whatsoever? I imagine there are government officials who are considering coercive population control; just not publicly. There are citizens – not many, but a few – recommending coercive population control.
Will continue and respond to the rest tomorrow.