Climate Change

carbon, you say "we have to convince ALL people, rich or poor, that overpopulation is a large part of our collective problem - and everybody's responsibility".

Don't you think this is what nearly everyone (excepting certain church leaders) is trying to do already? I think we simply have to accept that it is a slow process if it is done in an ethical way. The alternative is some kind (or, worse, several kinds) of coercion, which would be wrong. It must be a process that works through education and democratic freedom.

Not to mention scientific freedom.

Do we want to end up like Chinai?

No, lots of people are in denial about overpopulation too. To the extent that even organisations like Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace etc were scared to bring it up for fear of putting people off. I know this because I wrote to them a while back. I think its getting through more now especially since David Attenborough spoke out and joined "Population Matters"
I think the possibility of coercion can be looked at in another way. If we do not sort thinks out in a humanitarian ethical way pretty soon, then coercion will inevitably happen whether we like it or not.

In America the right wing have poisoned people into believing all sorts of rubbish about the overpopulation lobby wanting to kill off old people and even tried to make out Obama was in favour of this and other horrible ideas. If ever there was a conspiracy it is the one to discredit Obama.

(don't know what you mean by scientific freedom?)

The problem for me is who coerces and who or what gives the coercers the right to coerce?

Orwell, Animal Farm, 1984, anyone? Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot?

I'd rather have the freedom to be obliterated by some natural disaster than live under that kind of regime. I don't believe that the end justifies the means if the means are unethical.

What's that Latin tag about quis custodiet etc: who guards the guardians?

Just because I say it could happen does not mean I am in favour of it. The whole point of my argument is that we need to act soon in order to avoid coercion. Please don't shoot the messenger.

I'm not a violent person!

Act in what way, carboncareful? What action could be taken, urgently, to address the problem of overpopulation, in your view?

Didn't shoot you, carbon; I shot the idea of excessive authoritarianism in government. I'd like to ask you the same question that anagram has asked.

The following from "Population Matters" can explain better than me. Please, please read it if you care what happens on this planet:

www.populationmatters.org/about/policy-goals/our-policy-goals/

I couldn't get past that first paragraph!

How on earth.....?!

Seems to me the people they would aim the 'population control' at, are the ones who don't drive cars!

Isn't this the 'sermonising' they who must not be named are talking about?

Population control was a matter of debate back in the early 70s. India tried enforced sterilisation at the time of Indira Ghandi - referred to as 'the witch' in 'Midnight's Children'. Might still be going on and, like jingl, I assume it was not aimed at the rich and educated.

I think the article makes some good points, but all the 'solutions' they're advocating would cost too much for governments to agree to implement.

I fear people are starting to get rude again but it rolls off my back in any case.

Jeni The post was in response to two requests: from Anagram and Bags - so please don't start accusing me of sermonising (again)

j04 Its your problem, not mine, if you can't concentrate long enough to read an article.
Who are the ones who don't drive cars, what are you on about?
And population control is an emotive phrase used by people who are in denial about overpopulation. "Population Matters" do not advocate control.

carbon, jeni didn't accuse you of anything! She was referring to the article you posted a link to.

Quite!

Have read the article now. All that is being addressed already both by governments and by charities. Also, the better parts of the UN. It takes a few generations to change long traditions and traditional attitudes. Not liking that fact is not going to change it. We just have to keep trying. I have great faith in humanity's ingenuity in solving the problems it finds itself faced with. We always have done in the past; why would that suddenly change.

[optimist emoticon]

What does an optimist emoticon look like? Browns face on being reelected PM?

AArgh!

The Roman Catholic Church's continued refusal to sanction contraception (apart from the woefully risky 'rhythm method') doesn't help, either.

(I think Brown's face, had Labour won, probably would have been more of a 'smug emoticon'!)

That's still an aargh! Poor man. He can't help it.