Contributed by: filbert Tuesday, April 22 2008 @ 03:38 PM CST
So, now comes some of the same argument from a completely different source: a blog for the New Scientist magazine by Fred Pearce[*2] . He takes on “green fascism.” Based on the general tone and tenor of many of my recent posts (as well as my current reading matter documented above) it seems spookily timely:
Most of us breed. And those of us who do have one ecological footprint in common: our offspring. Me included. So all greens have to ask: is having babies bad for the planet?
Fair enough. But there is another question that I find increasingly being asked. Should we be trying to stop others having babies, especially people in poor countries with fast-growing populations?
I must say I thought this kind of illiberal thinking had been banished from the environmental movement. But it keeps seeping back. When I give public talks on climate change, I am often asked if all the efforts in the rich world won’t be wiped out by rising populations in the poor world.
It’s almost like some people can only conceive of two possible futures: one where the developed world is pulled down to the economic level of the Third World by environmental restrictions and regulations; or a world where the entire Third World is left to starve and bake in the globally-warmed world while the environmentally-advantaged jet from conference to conference and from benefit concert to benefit concert, while their lessers look up at them with envy and hatred.
I reject both futures.