Why are Progressives ignoring overpopulation?

The Third Reich had a central bank for sure and also a bang up industrial base so why did Germany go so nuts? Obsessive nut cases with lots of media outlets seem to proliferate in a religio-conspiracy world induced by lots of stress and the dynamic of a kind of sick Gresham's Law where crazy emotion that hits certain tribal dna chords drives out sober thought. I can see where a rightwing religiously dominated party-linked weirdly with the atheist Ayn Rand me me me brand, can take us off the cliff without having a clue what they are doing. And on this site we see one ideological manifestation of them, AGW denialists - the modern day flat earthers.

 

Agreed since the flat earth myth is a myth.

Something that doesn't exist is like something that didn't exist. Very good analogy Dingo.

 

LOL nazi's were socilaists dude..They were the National Socialists Party.. They viewed both communism and capitalism with disdain.And they didn't go for religion either.

 

You won't find many progressives who believe that people are cattle to herd and sterilize. All of the progressives that I know believe that everyone has a right to liberty.

I know of many conservatives who try to impose their morality on others, however. A good example is absinance-only education -- insisting that 'sex ed' be all about how to not have sex. With teenagers, this just doesn't work. Now, abstinence-only states in the US have the highest teenage pregnancy rates.

Here is a visual:

\

I'm not sure if this is more the fault of Christianity or GOP ideology (or both?), but there is clearly some correlation -- liberal states are far less likely to be supporting teenage mothers.

 

From my understanding, it was merely a lack of clear goals by their leadership.

 

Try an extremely dysfunctional leadership trying to lead a party full of crazies and ready to take the nation and world down a dark road. And this in a country with a strong infrastructure, broad education, lots of money and yet still ready to commit economic and environmental hari kari, not to mention political consequences one doesn't want to contemplate. You need more than a one liner to deflect that reality.

 

You are welcome to your opinion.

 

wow that's naive, I suppose the Democratic People's Republic of Korea(north korea) is democratic because it says so right there in the name...the "socialist" in the name was designed to attract voter support and not reality, it was a marketing ploy not reality...

hitlers job for the army post ww 1 was spying on socialist parties...the first occupants of the nazi concentration camps were communists and SOCIALISTS, the nazi's hated socialists...the SPD a real prewar socialist party was banned by the Nazi's in 1933, it's leadership(those who weren't imprisoned) and party went into exile and didn't return until 1945, one former member returned from exile and became Chancellor of germany Willie Brandt...

every political organization has some "social" polices even extreme right wing loons like the nazi's and teaparty it does not make them socialist...the Nazi's were hard right fascists something that many right wing americans can never comprehend...claims the nazi's were socialist is merely attempt by the right wing to distance themselves from their nazi counterparts...

 

ROFL,no silly man... Sorry to upset your delicate progressive/liberal, socialist sensibilities but nazi's were indeed socialists.. And right or left does not mean a political party is socialist, communist, or capitalist. Right or left would be describing their conservative or liberal leanings, and not what type of government they are.

You drink so much socialist/liberal kool-aid, you don't know that a socialist government can have parties within the government that would be more right or more left? The nazi's took the concept of socialism and joined with their rising form of right wing nationalism. That does not make them capitalists, despite what you like to believe or were led to believe. Sure they were as right wing as it gets, and they were also as socialist as anybody.

BTW... You need to educate yourself on government before posting on the subject...The word "Democratic" simply means the people are able to participate in their own governance. How they participate or to what level they can, is a different matter. Virtually any modern government can legitimately describe themselves as "democratic" in some sense. But not all democracies can describe themselves socialist, or communist, or a republic. Democracy is a very broad term dude...

 

and with that you lose your entire claim of actually knowing anything about the politics at it's most basic...and all you needed to do to continue your charade of knowledge was consult a dictionary but hubris once again is your undoing...

Democracy does not mean participation it means -"rule by the people" from the greek words Demos-"the people"and kratein-"to rule...there is difference between participation and self rule, every government has participation, north korea is not a democracy it's ruled by a few elites so it's an oligarcy not a democracy...

you should take a poli-sci coarse at any respected uni and challenge prof with your in depth political wisdom that should be fun entertainment worth paying to see..

 

A lot of the steam got taken out of the movement to address overpopulation because of misplaced predictions of mass starvation. The green revolution simply wasn't anticipated. But food technofixes aren't going to happen forever and limits to human growth really do exist. Here are some thoughts on Norman Borlaug, the father of the green revolution and some thoughts on the future.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/16/the-man-who-saved-a-billion-lives/

 

ROFL, Dude, what do you think "democracy" means in context of modern governance? We are considered a democracy, yet we are not completely self-governing. Unbelievable, it's like arguing with a child..

Read something....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/democracy

An entire list of definitions and all of them refer to the exact kind of thing I was talking about.. Representation, election, both of them are the forms of, or manners in which people participate in their own governance.

Now do you want to argue the meaning of the word in the literal sense or in the sense of actual governance and how it pertains to reality and in particular conversation? Either way you go, matters little to me, but only one bears any relevance in this topic..

BTW, North Korea.. It's a socialist republic with a hereditary dictatorship.. Making it a dictatorship. The true executive power rests within one family. They do have some elections, but never for the executive position, those are hereditary or appointed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

Things are rarely so black and white as you seem to think. Best realize that before making absolute claims...

 

That is not at all uncommon, especially since deteriorating conditions and high birth rates are correllated (demographic paradox). In a perfect world overpopulation would maybe not be an issue, but we dont live in one, do we, and population pressures can be very damaging and lead to perpetuation of poverty.

 

But focusing on population distracts people from the genuine sources of the problem in under-liberty, under-justice, under-honesty, and/or under-wisdom.

 

There are no genuine and not genuine sources. They are all equally genuine if they contribute to the problem, including population pressure. Reducing population growth can help with under-liberty, under-justice, under-honesty, and/or under-wisdom, and vice versa.

 

unbelievable is the alternate universe of gslack and the t party/denier world...alternative rules of science known only to them and unknown to the scientific world... the nazi's were socialists and now N Korea is a Democracy...ya if it wasn't for the forum I would've never believed such opinions really existed outside of tv comedies...

 

WOW, you and the truth never do meet do you... If I were you I would try and realize what the words democracy and socialism mean in practice,and not in liberal la la land, because we don't live there, we live here in the real world. The place where democracy and socialism come in many forms.. Sorry buddy but the Nazi's were socialists, BEFORE they became the Fascists we saw later on. They took as much from socialism as they took from anything else.

Before you go and make a bigger fool of yourself best read on Fascism too...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Dude you really need to start reading..

Now the North Korea remark? Really ignorant dude.. We all can read what I wrote, and we can also see, that you think anything that doesn't fit into your liberal socialist view, isn't socialism, and anything not within your parameters of a democracy is not a democracy either...

Here's a clue... A lot of European countries are Monarchies, but they still have elections, and people still participate in their governance. According to you, those are not democracies.. The UK for instance, are what they call a Constitutional Monarchy.. The monarch is hereditary and not elected or appointed. However, the Prime Minister is appointed by the monarch, and they have elections for parliamentary positions. Still a democracy, just not a complete and total democracy...

ROFL..

 

a list of american supporters of fascism and a few of them personal friends with hitler which ones do you suppose are socialists?

yeah that's right none of them...

you see the world simplistically like a child does...

lets look at what you wrote
gslack - "nazi's were socilaists dude..They were the National Socialists Party.. They viewed both communism and capitalism with disdain.And they didn't go for religion either." quite clearly according to your logic they were socialist because it says so right there in their name, , how childishly simplistic...which then must mean in gslack logic north korea must be a democracy because it says so in their name...and oh ya they went for religion in a big way, hitler was a lifelong roman catholic and what was that slogan on every german military belt buckle "gott mit uns"...


then you confirmed it with this gem of gslack logic-"The word "Democratic" simply means the people are able to participate in their own governance. How they participate or to what level they can, is a different matter. Virtually any modern government can legitimately describe themselves as "democratic" in some sense. But not all democracies can describe themselves socialist, or communist, or a republic. Democracy is a very broad term dude... "sorry DUDE!, not in any definition of the word is north korea a democracy...democracy is rule by the people not by the elite

 

Yes, there are, just as some foods are genuine sources of obesity and others aren't.

Nonsense. You could with equal "logic" claim that eating chicken is a source of the obesity problem because it has calories. Sorry, no, that's just false.

That claim would be more convincing if there were any evidence for it.

 

Dude, do you even understand that your list you got from lord knows where, does not even address anything I said? Not only does it not help your case, but it virtually doesn't do a thing to further either point.. ROFL..

Nazi's were socialists with strong right-wing beliefs..Socialism..Isn't "the good guys" any more than any other government..It, like may other forms of government comes in many forms. The core may be similar in many ways,but how they are implemented or maintained my be as different as night and day..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

How many links does that make for me supporting my claim? And how many for you? Oh yeah, NONE...

Face it buddy, the facts and truth lie with me. You are wrong again..

And here is one reason why. You said.."sorry DUDE!, not in any definition of the word is north korea a democracy"

But North Korea and wikki disagrees with you...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_parliamentary_election,_2009

Kind of says it all huh junior...

You don't get to decide what is what or what words mean for anybody but you. You want to play fantasy dictator be my guest, call it whatever you want, but it won't make you correct anywhere but in your mind.. ROFL..

Like I care what your definition of the word is.. LOL

 

Wouldn't matter much.. Many people have religious reasons not to use contraception, some have cultural reasons, some are too lazy or irresponsible, and some just wouldn't want to use them. Giving out "free" contraception is like handing a band-aid to a person with bullet wounds..

I tell my kids, that in the near future, they or their children will have to make some very hard decisions regarding population and resources. They won't have the luxury we have of putting it off or ignoring it. It's not just simple numbers of people, it's numbers of people with available resources, infrastructure and the logistical nightmare so many people will prove to be. It's going to be a very hard existence for some in the coming decades..

 

The most effective contraceptive seems to be female literacy. So yeah, "we" should be giving that out for free.