JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T TAKE DARWIN SERIOUSLY DOESN'T MEAN THEY CAN'T:

Wish you weren’t here: Some top environmentalists say the way to a greener planet is to have fewer people. Is an environmentalism without humanity the answer? (Brian Lilley, 18 April 2009, MercatorNet)

I would have thought that Jonathon Porritt might not be invited to many parties, what with calling for half of Britain’s population to be done away with in the name of sustainability. Instead, Porritt, an English environmental activist and population control champion, is asked to give advice to Prince Charles, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the executives at Marks and Spencers. Perhaps they all want to keep Porritt close to ensure they don’t become targets of the great human cull? [...]

On his blog, Porritt lays out a 12-step program to get the human population to kick the reproductive habit, or at least his 12 arguments of why they should. On his personal website he argues the UK could reduce its population to 55 million by 2050 instead of the projected population of 77 million by convincing all women to have no more than two children and to cap immigration at the same level as emigration.

Yet Mr. Porritt, along with such luminaries as Paul Ehrlich, is a patron on the Manchester based Optimum Population Trust, which claims the UK, should have a population of between 17 and 27 million people depending on the global hectare per person. As for the rest of the globe, “the world population needs to contract to a maximum of 5.1 billion” but “the sustainable population is 2.7 billion.”

Well if some of us have to go, I nominate the board of the Optimum Population Trust to go first.

But that's the point, isn't it? Such folk never mean that there are too many affluent white people. It is the subspecies that will have to go.

Posted by Orrin Judd at April 28, 2009 6:34 AM