Britain must reduce its population for Gaia!
This argument is not an old one, and always seems to resurface every now and then. All the same, I still find it a pretty disgusting idea.
JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.
Porritt’s call will come at this week’s annual conference of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT), of which he is patron.
The trust will release research suggesting UK population must be cut to 30m if the country wants to feed itself sustainably.
Porritt said: “Population growth, plus economic growth, is putting the world under terrible pressure.
“Each person in Britain has far more impact on the environment than those in developing countries so cutting our population is one way to reduce that impact.”
Population growth is one of the most politically sensitive environmental problems. The issues it raises, including religion, culture and immigration policy, have proved too toxic for most green groups.
However, Porritt is winning scientific backing. Professor Chris Rapley, director of the Science Museum, will use the OPT conference, to be held at the Royal Statistical Society, to warn that population growth could help derail attempts to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Rapley, who formerly ran the British Antarctic Survey, said humanity was emitting the equivalent of 50 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year.
“We have to cut this by 80%, and population growth is going to make that much harder,” he said.
… This is part of the thinking behind the OPT’s call for Britain to cut population to 30m — roughly what it was in late Victorian times.
Britain’s population is expected to grow from 61m now to 71m by 2031. Some politicians support a reduction.
Phil Woolas, the immigration minister, said: “You can’t have sustainability with an increase in population.”
The Tory leader, David Cameron, has also suggested Britain needs a “coherent strategy” on population growth.
Despite these comments, however, government and Conservative spokesmen this weekend both distanced themselves from any population policy. ”
This is one of those issues that, to environmental moonbats, just sounds so nice on the surface. Overpopulation is killing the planet! It must be stopped! But when you actually stop and think about it, population control is a pretty scary notion. And it should make a lot of Brits scared that one of their top advisers to Gordon Brown is advocating this… with gaining scientific backing.
So, let’s say that Britain decided that they needed to control their population. Let’s say they decided their population needed to be reduced, and then restricted. How would they do such a thing? The first thing that comes to mind, obviously, is to kill off the excess. But maybe they aren’t that bloodthirsty, and so they do the next most despicable thing. They go for forcible relocation. Half of the residents of Britain would be forced to leave, all for the good of Mother Earth. And where would they go? What could they bring with them? How would they be kept there?
OK, so however they go about it, let’s just imagine that Britain is able to get their population levels back to Victorian era levels, of around 30 million. How will they then keep it there? Will there be laws dictating how much reproduction will be allowed to take place? And what would happen if a family had more children than they were allowed to have?
You see the dangerous ground an idea like this treads on? Yet there is someone whispering in Gordon Brown’s ear that this is something to consider, with members of the scientific community backing this nutjob up. When politicians start talking about a need for population “reduction”, you know that there’s a problem. See, they claim they’re doing this for the good of the planet. But is it really? Or is it just another way to grow a tyrannical government that can oppress and control their people?