July 26, 2007


Courage About Population Needed (Froma Harrop, 7/27/07, Real Clear Politics)

"Population Explosion" was a call to arms for American environmentalists 40 years ago, amid fears that baby boomers would have big families. That didn't happen, but hyper-population-growth is occurring now due to large-scale immigration.

California has just projected a population of 60 million by mid-century, up 5 million from its forecast of only three years ago. We're talking about a 75 percent leap between 2000 and 2050 -- by any measure, a population explosion.

That's the truth, but one that has sent many environmental leaders into hiding. Most of California's population growth will come from immigrants and their relatively high birthrates, but the Sierra Club refuses to touch the matter. Once a tiger on U.S. population growth, it has retreated behind calls for a global approach that, it contends, will reduce the demands to immigrate to the United States.

Problem. Despite great strides in reducing birthrates in many poor countries -- Mexico is one of the success stories -- the world's population is still expected to jump to 9 billion from 6 billion by 2050. Mass immigration to the United States, if anything, eases the pressure on other governments to promote family planning.

Not a few Sierra Club members have challenged the group's spineless response to a spiraling American population.

Mr. Ehrlich's despicable book was written in 1968, when the US population wasn't yet 200 million. Today we're over 300 million. Find someone who thinks Americans -- nevermind eastern Europeans, Africans, etc. -- had better material circumstances in the 60's than they do today and we'll show you an idiot.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 26, 2007 1:34 PM

I haven't ever regularly visited, but I thought Real Clear Politics was a conservative site (real conservative, not the Pat Buchanan type)? So what's with this nonsense?

Anyone who thinks the world, country, or even California is facing an overcrowding problem REALLY needs to get out more.

Posted by: b at July 26, 2007 2:06 PM

The number of blogs worth reading is steadily declining.

Posted by: erp at July 26, 2007 2:34 PM

She's a libertarian, monstrous selfishness is to be expected.

Posted by: oj at July 26, 2007 2:49 PM

OJ, at least Froma Harrop isn't shy about stating what 95% of the immigration debate is about: The ruining of California by too many of "those people". And "those people" can be either liberals or Mexicans to your average conservative. And to liberals, "those people" can mean just people.

And since California is the bellwether state....

Posted by: Brad S at July 26, 2007 3:27 PM

Actually, Brad, I think "those people" means "anyone else" to a population alarmist.

Hey, I was born - you can all stop now.

Posted by: Mikey [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 26, 2007 3:36 PM

Actually, I believe California was ruined by the Supreme Court's "one man, one vote" abomination. Unintended consequences, and all that...

Posted by: b at July 26, 2007 3:43 PM

I think that a return to only male, property owners being able to vote is a good start.

Posted by: Pete at July 26, 2007 5:54 PM

Plus a poll tax--if you get more from the government than you give your vote has already been bought.

Posted by: oj at July 26, 2007 8:51 PM

Indeed, plus while we're at it, why not have the property-owning pater familias get one vote for each of his dependents. That'll do for those unwilling to reproduce, as the voters in Boystown, the Castro, Provincetown, Fire Island, Chelsea, etc will be swamped.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at July 26, 2007 11:14 PM


They run Froma Harrop in my local paper -- she isn't a libertarian. She's a liberal who, by constantly railing against immigration, is maybe 10 years ahead of her liberal friends.

Posted by: Matt Murphy at July 26, 2007 11:58 PM

RCP owners are conservatives (or at least center-right) and do a pretty good job of putting up the aggregate zeitgeist.

Population control is so 1970s. They must have linked it just to show their absurdity.

Even the EU (pronounced eeewwwwwwwwwww!) knows it needs more people.

Posted by: Bruno at July 27, 2007 1:14 AM


Yes, that's the definition of an aristocrat and why you have to have a poll tax. Otherwise, the state itself control multiple votes.

Posted by: oj at July 27, 2007 6:45 AM