businessandmedia.org— Paul Watson, founder and president of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society advocates killing off over 5 billion humans and forcing those left to live in isolated communities no larger than 20,000 people.
May 7, 2007View in Crawl 4
@princessangryThe people you complain about are the ones who will not be culled, they are the ones who want to eliminate the "useless eaters", the poor, the uneducated, whatever labels they use. Your utopia will be exactly the nightmare you describe, mcmansions, suvs, private jets, and just enough rabble for the production and labor necessary to provide for the elitist "survivors".BTW, worshipping a rock is pretty dumb. The earth is a planet. We've evolved a little from the days where we worshipped multiple gods, and it would be naive to believe that earth is the only planet that is also a god.
It's a resource DISTRIBUTION problem, ACCESS to resources, not the general availability of resources. Which means, ultimately, greed. People like to control things and accumulate wealth, often at the expense of others.
let's get the records straight: less people, living in pre-definied communities are much easier to control and manipulate to the liking of those who will continue to control the resources ... It's that easy ...
@gnomon,lost of people live in deserts. Irrigation and land reclamation projects are not something mankind is just figuring out, it's been done as far back as the roman empire, the egyptian pharoahs, probably even farther back that that, maybe the last 10,000 years.The most fertile and usable land that isn't already developed has been placed off limits by environmental ninnies. They'd rather see a tree survive, regardless of human suffering.But hey, as long as it isn't ME, I'm all for killing everyone else off, because in my short-sighted little world, that would make my life so much easier, you know?
@junkyarddawgif we changed our social and economic systems to properly address growing populations, if more people were brought up to a level where they were capable of taking part, economically, by becoming producers, builders, farmers, etc, then resource acquisition would rise to meet these growing populations. If we didn't reward small groups for locking down and amassing undue amounts of the resources for their own profit, and allowed for better distribution, it would not be a problem.The problem is one of greed, plain and simple. Sure, you don't want your standard of living to go down, neither do I. However, the status quo never solves future problems. Culling the herd only serves to maintain the status quo. It doesn't solve the problem, it doesn't address the present or future reality of growing populations.Africa alone can support huge populations. The problem is that large amounts are either off limits or owned by large multinational farming or mining interests. Same with Asia, and South America. Even here in the US, there is at least 3 very large regions of very prime land that are off limits, where the population density is low or zero. Plus all the land owned by monsanto/cargill/other large farming concerns that are left fallow and paid to be so by our tax dollars. We have a resource distribution problem, not a lack of resources, nor will reducing the population do anything but serve the people who pay for labor -- less people, less cost.
Yeah, this guy is nuts. He leads a group of activists and throws bottles of chemicals from his ship onto a Japanese vessel to protest its research and survey of whales and when the Japanese shoot warning shots, this guy bitches like a whore saying he and his crew could have been killed... It seems like HE is the menace to this world.
Than he should start with him first!
Isn't it amazing how all these "new order" guys that suggest reducing the world population, NEVER think about starting the process with themselves?
Quite strange, isn't it?
eangelMay 8, 2007
I agree with axiomflash: "you are all idiots. he says nothing about killing people. ie: the population of japan is shrinking because they have a low re-population rate. this is what he has in mind."If you ever get a chance, listen to Al Bartlett's talk, it's excellent: <a class="user" href="http://www.hubbertpeak.com/bartlett/bio.htm">http://www.hubbertpeak.com/bartlett/bio.htm</a>
littlebylittleMay 8, 2007
Xenu is not pleased.
morem7May 8, 2007
This guy is a WACK Job<a class="user" href="http://www.seashepherd.org/editorials/editorial_070504_1.html">http://www.seashepherd.org/editorials/editorial_070504_1.html</a>he doesnt want cars, planes.Would ban cities over 20,000 populationetc.... see above for whole range of ANTI-Freedom tripe this guy wants-and he is the Head Eco-Freak and Founderof SeaShepard...
phillesh69May 8, 2007
@princessangryThe people you complain about are the ones who will not be culled, they are the ones who want to eliminate the "useless eaters", the poor, the uneducated, whatever labels they use. Your utopia will be exactly the nightmare you describe, mcmansions, suvs, private jets, and just enough rabble for the production and labor necessary to provide for the elitist "survivors".BTW, worshipping a rock is pretty dumb. The earth is a planet. We've evolved a little from the days where we worshipped multiple gods, and it would be naive to believe that earth is the only planet that is also a god.
phillesh69May 8, 2007
It's a resource DISTRIBUTION problem, ACCESS to resources, not the general availability of resources. Which means, ultimately, greed. People like to control things and accumulate wealth, often at the expense of others.
eco2012Sep 5, 2010
let's get the records straight: less people, living in pre-definied communities are much easier to control and manipulate to the liking of those who will continue to control the resources ... It's that easy ...
phillesh69May 8, 2007
@gnomon,lost of people live in deserts. Irrigation and land reclamation projects are not something mankind is just figuring out, it's been done as far back as the roman empire, the egyptian pharoahs, probably even farther back that that, maybe the last 10,000 years.The most fertile and usable land that isn't already developed has been placed off limits by environmental ninnies. They'd rather see a tree survive, regardless of human suffering.But hey, as long as it isn't ME, I'm all for killing everyone else off, because in my short-sighted little world, that would make my life so much easier, you know?
phillesh69May 10, 2007
@junkyarddawgif we changed our social and economic systems to properly address growing populations, if more people were brought up to a level where they were capable of taking part, economically, by becoming producers, builders, farmers, etc, then resource acquisition would rise to meet these growing populations. If we didn't reward small groups for locking down and amassing undue amounts of the resources for their own profit, and allowed for better distribution, it would not be a problem.The problem is one of greed, plain and simple. Sure, you don't want your standard of living to go down, neither do I. However, the status quo never solves future problems. Culling the herd only serves to maintain the status quo. It doesn't solve the problem, it doesn't address the present or future reality of growing populations.Africa alone can support huge populations. The problem is that large amounts are either off limits or owned by large multinational farming or mining interests. Same with Asia, and South America. Even here in the US, there is at least 3 very large regions of very prime land that are off limits, where the population density is low or zero. Plus all the land owned by monsanto/cargill/other large farming concerns that are left fallow and paid to be so by our tax dollars. We have a resource distribution problem, not a lack of resources, nor will reducing the population do anything but serve the people who pay for labor -- less people, less cost.
hrf1Mar 7, 2008
Yeah, this guy is nuts. He leads a group of activists and throws bottles of chemicals from his ship onto a Japanese vessel to protest its research and survey of whales and when the Japanese shoot warning shots, this guy bitches like a whore saying he and his crew could have been killed... It seems like HE is the menace to this world.
eco2012Sep 5, 2010
Than he should start with him first!
Isn't it amazing how all these "new order" guys that suggest reducing the world population, NEVER think about starting the process with themselves?
Quite strange, isn't it?