Replacement Theory Is Everywhere. Here’s Why.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 тра 2022
- On May 14, an 18-year-old gunman opened fire at a Tops grocery store in Buffalo, NY, killing 10. All 10 were Black, something the gunman specifically sought out. As it was revealed shortly after, in his writings, he ascribed not only to white supremacist ideology, but identified himself as an “eco-fascist,” falling into not only a growing trend but also into something very uniquely American. The Replacement Theory has been in headlines since the Buffalo shooting and, while its been attributed to the current crop of the right in this country, it’s actually something that underpins much of U.S. history, as well as modern development work. In this episode of “Backspace,” Sana delves into the nefarious origins of the overpopulation myth, how the media continues to promote it, and how it doesn’t have any place in the conversation and coverage around the climate crisis.
#ReplacementTheory #Overpopulation #Climate
Subscribe for more videos: ajplus.co/subscribe
Sign up for subtext, our newsletter about the people and movements driving change in our society: ajplus.co/ekdv4
Follow us on Instagram: / ajplus
Like us on Facebook: / ajplusenglish
Follow us on Twitter: / ajplus
President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”
Scapegoating, domestic terrorism, and social murder are all things that happen.
Yep. They claim democracy but have zero say in where their governments spend their money. Funding the military industrial complex.
nice red herring, but what's your actual fukn point ?
Source, please?
@@HarrieBaken you have the internet try Google
I worked at a grocery store and watched these people throw away day old food in the garbage. And homeless people would get arrested for digging in said garbage for said food
Very true, but this video is, in part, disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
@@scottcharney1091 You are still producing carbon, take it a step further.
@@dansmith1661 👏🏻👏🏻
We don't have an overpopulation problem, we have an overconsumption problem.
The world has enough for everyone’s need, but not for everyone’s greed.
And underpopulation problem.
@@luiso2166 You don't need to exist.
I don't understand why people always need to upgrade their phone every time a new one comes out.
more like a waste problem as we waste alot of stuff that can actually be used such as food.
No, there's definitely too many people.
When your parents could afford a house on one income, but you can't. Of course.
Ah yes, the great feminist lie using
" women can have it all " to literally halve wages but double the tax base. Crafty.
I was in genetics 101 class and that morning an earthquake had killed a lot of people in India. I only knew this because the professor interjected the story in class. Not sure why, but I do recall him saying that it wasn’t a bad event, in fact it was good for population control. This was late 80’s, today that wouldn’t fly.
Nature has ways to control the population too. COVID killed millions, and more greater diseases will be occurring soon to slow our population.
Absolute sociopath. Typical anglo-saxon subconscious racism. I wonder if he would have said that had an earthquake killed 10,000 Canadians.
If he's so worried about population control, perhaps he should have had no kids. See, problem fixed.
Yikes.
You want to get? What do abortion, rationing of meat,food etc. Have you not heard that the government said we could stand to lose a few people because the world is overpopulated? They count you and me in that equation EXCEPT THEMSELVES!!!🤔😳😊🤢🤮👿🖤
I meant the first sentence to read: You want to bet? Excuse my grammatical error. Thanks
It baffles me that people think the world is over populated when it’s badly managed and living resources are then use to make profit for a select few
Right! When natural resources are privatized then of course we create struggle. No one has a right to their life, they must participate in the system just to afford some water.
@@DelainatheDisciple yes it’s horrible how this system works but we have to try and make small difference and empower one another for the better
@@elrey6154 we have to empower each other to stand up against mega corporations who commodify resources. The government should declare water free and we should come together for that.
Why does it baffle you? The western world is fed nonsense that poor countries are impoverished, because of their own doing, and the western world are successful because they are superior. Also we are taught the western world are the greatest contributors to improving the world.
...for the few" A good point and a reason for lots of waste and inefficiency.
However, I don't believe that we can say for sure the world is or is not overpopulated. How exactly do you define that? If it means that you have more than that which could be indefinitely sustained far into the foreseeable future, then I would say we are overpopulated. All that waste and inefficiency IS how our populations live. A population can be in population overshoot for quite some time before is realized. By overshoot I mean the maximum number of a population which can be indefinitely sustained. Sometimes it takes generations for it to be realized. You can have a gradual decline after overshoot or a sudden collapse or varying degrees of both. The populations' use of resources will determine whether it is in overshoot or not. A wasteful population which quickly becomes less wasteful and less consumptive may move from overshoot into a sustainable place, provided it is done soon enough and rapidly emough.
Perhaps the decline in average life expectancy in the US in recent years is a sign it is overpopulated, given the current living patterns.
We have only one child and one car. I'd like to ve rid of the car, but how do I insure sufficient access to employment without it? I can only do so much to make my family more sustainable and less consumptive when society and its systems push us in the other direction.
Now I'll have to go and mow the grass before the city gives us a fine. Don't worry, only my own energy to make the mower work. No gas, no electric, no emmissions during operation.
I think the "population control" argument really flies out the window when some, wealthy, countries make it extremely difficult for segments of their population to control their family sizes. Going so far as to deny sterilization to some and forcibly, coercively, or silently sterilize others.
I feel like this is the part that doesn’t get talked about enough. They tell people to have fewer kids, but it’s usually the brown people they direct that energy at. The moment young white people say they don’t want kids you get the opposite reaction where they tell them in a panic that they’re ‘too young’ to make that decision and whenever white women want to get sterilized (often even after they’ve already had children!) they’re denied and told that they’ll change their minds someday and that these doctors are ‘saving them from themselves’. Meanwhile, brown women have often routinely been given hysterectomies and sterilizations without their knowledge or consent in order to keep them from ‘breeding’.
It just goes to show that they don’t actually care about population control as a whole, just that the ‘right’ kinds of people are breeding and the others are not.
The true agenda behind the veil over the world! Eugenics. Freedom and prosperity until these begin to serve to better the lives of the undesirables, then wham!!! fascism and hardliners step up. Unfortunately for the undesirables, they allowed those who deny them justice to control the narrative on their fight for dignity. Now they've been lumped in with gender confusion and other immoral causes. Thus allowing the self declared chosen to self righteously and stubbornly deny justice to the end even calling their unjust fight divine thus condemning many on both sides of the debate. Thus world will burn with fire
Which wealthy countries are controlling access to condoms and a gajillion birth control methods?
I mean if we are being honest its not as if humans reproduce asexually so people still do have full control over their family size.
@@grantwithers The US
“The Earth has enough resources for our need but not for our greed.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
This episode was shot back in November 2021, before the Buffalo massacre. The gunman in that shooting identified himself as an “eco-fascist.”
Be sure to check out the Backspace with Sana playlist for more: ua-cam.com/play/PLZd3QRtSy5LPARSmHiuVuhwCj6KU55W6p.html
Thank you for this. We need more of this from you.
The Birth Dearth
{PROVISIONAL: }I know that most of the folks here would rubbish this half-hour Special( longest duration of an episode in this series, so far) as just-another "[rich ]white people bAd" or mock it as one of those neolib overscrutiny as "mathmatics perpetuates Āryan supremacy" but as a..
...Non-white cisman with presumably "Āryan" bloodline: This episode from my most-favourite series of this new journalism "channel" has compelled me to feel conflicted.
I've gotten over my qualms, in spite of not being yet-another 'Anonymous Coward #_____' to concede that: This has made me feel very conflicted.
As somebody who has contrarian scepticism of "[pop-]History" as a science, I have to confess that I leaned moderately towards "population control" solution, maybe subconsciously because of some conditioning covered in this episode but most consciously, because of the former. At the same time, I'm now shamefully shocked that the part which makes me disgusted at the OG Nāzīs the most: Exterminating "incurably sick"( gives me nausea!) people, instead of because they majorly targeted Jews( "Shoah"), upto the point of kick-starting Aktion T4 after "on-ground testing" on the former.
But as my personal _mantra_ goes: Nothing non-theoretical across the cosmos can be binary. And that's why, while this episode is far from perfect( some of the books lying beside her!) - I am hopefully working to resolve this cognitive-dissonance. And I know I'm a _sucker_ for doing it, given the clear-majority won't.. But hey, that's just me. I'm somehow "easily persuaded" yet I have "enough of time and calm-mind" on my hands to process it through.
That's some overcomplicated story you present, the answer is very simple, if you can't afford to have kids, then don't have them, nowdays even in europe or the us it's hard to have a family of 3, 4 or 5 kids, in africa they can go up to 10..... where people make multiple times less money, and then what? Who's to blame when their kids die? Again, overcomplicated and twisted story.
And btw, yes when someone is asked who should have less kids, they don't say french, polish or canadian, because there's no notorious poverty, meanwhile in specific countries of africa there is, someone have to be trully twisted to say that everyone should have less kids regardless of their financial situation.
@@user-ch3ck7ir7c "that are going to decide there are to many people in Africa"
Sure, but then don't blame anyone else when you have 5 kids in the house looking like skeletons barely alive, the parents are to blame, and also don't ask for donations, because that money should be spent on people which want to build something, not scammers that make kids which they KNOW that they can't feed them, and then they want to find a fool to pay for them, harsh truth.
Let's not forget the largest "forced sterilized" population on earth was in Puerto Rico and it was conducted by the US government with cooperation from the Catholic Church.
The US government were also forcibly sterilizing prisoners in the US, you know, many of whom are PoC who were the victims of targeted policies and policing.
No.
This is shameless propaganda and utter faction.
The Catholic Church pushes unlimited population growth at all costs as "virtue."
Well, they can keep their "virtue!"
@Giovanni Garcia there are many ways to commit genocide and forced sterilization is one of them something that wasn't a tactic for the mass genocides you are referencing
@Giovanni Garcia someone being killed and someone forced into sterilization is a little different
Did you know that the forced sterilization is still going on in some rural areas in India even now.
Hold the elite responsible.
That would just be called anti semitic hate speech.
@@nunyabizness9955 what if Someone said, the arab muslim elite could feed total muslim refugees but refuse to do so, would that be Islamophobic
The Vanguard Group
Black Rock Investments
I've often said; an "environmental vandal" is just someone who wants to build a house by the beach, and a "conservationist" is just someone who already has a house by the beach!
So true. 5 sisters 2 are wealthy. Two own holiday places by the beach
so gore bernie obama and clinton
So Marvel movie where the villain killed most of the people is based on the myth of population and less resources
exactly! the story gives insight of the mind of the story writer
Thanos was a G though. Even with his flaws.
@@iviwemajola3167 lmao Nihilism 🤣 is the beta/sigma male of philosophical thought .
@@luiscastaneda5250 people who throw out beta/sigma/alpha male labels makes me cringe like I’m being forced to watch the worst episodes of SNL
@@ShivamSharma-dq4pu That story was written in 60 years ago by Stan Lee.
Prince William also complained about population growth in Africa. Apparently, African population threatens the wildlife he so values. I don't think he thinks about animal life anywhere when he and his fellow toffs go hunting.
@@CosmicHyperborean Then why wildlife keeps attacking white people. I never heard of any other race that keeps getting mauled or killed by animals then people like you. It seems that people like you are afraid of becoming an minority but in the population of the world, white people are the minority. Barely making 10% of the population. Leave other countries alone and deal with your own fears.
@@CosmicHyperborean የሸርሙጣ ልጅ።
@@CosmicHyperborean With that being said, if there was something unecessary to Africa or lets say on the planet, I will just flush the toilets over you
Go tell your mama
lol right on. his dad and grandpa be the same. runs in the family except maybe w Harry?? Idk but lol that incestuous family needs to populate less themselves
Prince Williams ain't do it right, if you ask me
'Cause I was him, I would have married Kate and Ashley
Interesting. One thing dough, normal that nordic countries are using more energy because it's...cold, no? As a Canadian Native and French I know that in both cases we use to live in ''mud houses'' or under ground houses I should say. We now have to heat our houses and we cannot simply live in huts or tents like in warm countries. Both parent are also working and life goes fast, running all the time, we need to produce, don't have time to make our own food from farming, hunting and gardening, we have to buy it, that's why we use so many plastics.
The problem is not overpopulation but the population increasing faster than our ability to improve that population's well being.
Cope
When I was at Texas Christian University I had a sociology course where the professor (an Asian American male) defined "White Privilege" as not having more advantages in life, rather having fewer disadvantages/discriminations in life (so opposite of what it sounds like). Essentially, in our country's history, Caucasians (with few exceptions) have not faced the multiple generations oppression that most People Of Color (particularly African Americans) have faced, resulting in fewer disadvantages for them today. Sure, if you're a wealthy Caucasian, you are better off than all average/poor people in the U.S., but if you're a middle class Caucasian, you still have better chances to succeed in life because you don't have the systemic disadvantages that African, Asian, Hispanic, & Native Americans at a similar social class level have. Finally, when a non Caucasian does become successful in the U.S., it isn't because of "Reverse Discrimination" as some Caucasians argue, rather it's because they have managed to overcome the disadvantages that they faced that many of their Caucasian counterparts didn't have to face.
God I hate the term "causasian" hahaha you're right though
That was a colossal waste of miseducation. You would have been better off learning a skilled trade. Academics like that belong picking lettuce in chains.
@@lostvarius “Caucasian” is what people say when they’re too afraid to just say “white”
{PROVISIONAL: }I know that most of the folks here would rubbish this half-hour Special( longest duration of an episode in this series, so far) as just-another "[rich ]white people bAd" or mock it as one of those neolib overscrutiny as "mathmatics perpetuates Āryan supremacy" but as a..
...Non-white cisman with presumably "Āryan" bloodline: This episode from my most-favourite series of this new journalism "channel" has compelled me to feel conflicted.
I've gotten over my qualms, in spite of not being yet-another 'Anonymous Coward #_____' to concede that: This has made me feel very conflicted.
As somebody who has contrarian scepticism of "[pop-]History" as a science, I have to confess that I leaned moderately towards "population control" solution, maybe subconsciously because of some conditioning covered in this episode but most consciously, because of the former. At the same time, I'm now shamefully shocked that the part which makes me disgusted at the OG Nāzīs the most: Exterminating "incurably sick"( gives me nausea!) people, instead of because they majorly targeted Jews( "Shoah"), upto the point of kick-starting Aktion T4 after "on-ground testing" on the former.
But as my personal _mantra_ goes: Nothing non-theoretical across the cosmos can be binary. And that's why, while this episode is far from perfect( some of the books lying beside her!) - I am hopefully working to resolve this cognitive-dissonance. And I know I'm a _sucker_ for doing it, given the clear-majority won't.. But hey, that's just me. I'm somehow "easily persuaded" yet I have "enough of time and calm-mind" on my hands to process it through.
Thank you for sharing this explanation. It's valuable and much appreciated.
This substantiates what I have always believed about the push for antiabortion laws in the US. 🤔
The push for antiabortion laws is often led by clergy who want to maximize the birth rate of their flocks.
Its mostly white women bring nex generation but black women bring new labor? This is against everything I believe in!
Exactly
Anti-abortion laws were pushed to artificially keep the white birth rate high.
That, and the desire to punish people for having sex.
Overpopulation is not a myth. We do need to have family planning, but by choice, and we have to be very careful to make sure family planning is not driven by eugenics. It is a difficult line to towe, but I witnessed how significantly my family's quality of life improved thanks to my parents' choice to only have 3 children, were as my grandparents' generation had on average more than 5 children. Ignoring either the dangers of eugenics or the dangers of overpopulation are equally dangerous.
The 1st minute of this thing was tough to listen to. There aren't food shortages because there's not enough food or because there's too many people there are food shortages because greedy tyrants must maintain the status quo of haves & have nots in order to be in power over someone. We waste enough food in America every day to feed a country every month.
How do you suggest Ethiopia feed its 120m population which is rising at a ridiculous rate.
There’s a lot of food waste in nyc from restaurants. Much of that food is not spoiled at all.
@@Sinusoid- how are you going to get that food all the way to somalia?
@@moonie1825 The Somalians are in the process of moving to developed countries. And as fast as one moves to New York or elsewhere, his relatives back home replace him with two more babies: future refugees and migrants.
All true, but this video is, in part, disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
The last little bit about how rich countries have an outsized contribution to pollution and overconsumption, i have really observed this coming from a south east asian nation and going to north america for higher education. There is almost a callous disregard of single use plastics and over packaging things in the name of hygiene and/or convenience.
While i am not reversing it and putting the blame on them to solve the climate crisis on their own, i have long believed that the climate crisis is due to over production more the population or consumption issues. After all, how much goods are just perishing in supermarket shelves across the world, and unsold material goods, all for the sake of looking fully stocked? The problem is not that there is not enough food for everyone, its just it doesn't get to the mouths it could feed...
There is no climate crisis....did you not pic up the cues of the video....same goal different fake crisis to justify it
Very true, but this video is, in part. disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
Except for China and India have the worlds’ biggest carbon footprints. The West has significantly reduced its carbon footprint. Nations like China and India show up to climate meetings but virtually change nothing
You're describing eco-fascism.
Well done, this is a topic rarely covered.
A road less traveled, perhaps unfortunately
@@The.Kyle.Scott. klaus Schwab is doing it well
@@The.Kyle.Scott. 74 mil fewer Americans would free up a good deal 🤪
It pretty much is economic fascism in the US now.
@@maryeverett2266 There is no institutionalized fascism in the US.
Telling people to use less, surrounded by hundreds of capitistically created nick nacks and books. Way more than I've ever had in my life. Good work.
That is her point
"capitalistically created"....lol. Making & selling things is a human endeavor, not "capitalism".
Business does not equal capitalism, whoever tells you otherwise is dangerously deluded. Capitalism is a political control system, not productivity. That's how lost folks are today thanks to RW propaganda. This is the part where somebody calls me a Commie....
Books. They're called 'books'.
@@joemck74 CLUTTER, IN AGE OF DIGITIZATION, THEY ARE CALLED 'CLUTTER'.
🤣FCUK Ha-Joon Chang and Ban Ki Moon! What has Korea ever done for us - except iMac screens and TV and that Netflix series! Name ONE thing other than those 3 things - 5 things...
As a male of 77 years, I resist the pressure framed in the suggestion that seniors are burdens. Of course nobody is forever young. Do you remember "Logan's Run"?
people think infants, children, teens, adults, elderly are each a separate class of human being, almost like each category is a different species, not like it's stages of life every human goes thru. Very strange.
Death race 2000 was also similar the disabled and elderly were run over by cars.
A boomer is in support of providing more help for boomers, color me shocked.
Can I just have the ability to work, go home to my family and to have a normal life without all this idiocy affecting my experience as a human being? 🙄 Hate is such a waste of time..
no buddy they don’t want us to live
Sorry no. We're living in late-stage capitalism. You're lucky you can still afford food and rent. What you want is a reasonable and sane world and our trash planet just isn't like that.
It is divide and conquer …
dont worry, when ww3 kicks off, america is going to get blown off of the planet, problem solved
@@brothergigawatt2116 American rot is a symptom of a larger global rot. We're all guilty and we're all going to pay as our paradise becomes an unlivable hell hole. The good news is that future sentient species will be cockroach-based, or whatever species will survive our stupidity and shamelessness.
The Kellogg cereal man, he was really into Eugenics also.
Yup. And against w@nking. What a bore.
male and female circumcision
Yeah, cornflakes are supposed to suppress sexual desires according to him.
Every sane and intelligent person is and was.
@@grmpEqweer and against various consensual relationships apparently
She literally opens the video with "What if we killed everyone?"
This video is a classic example of miss direction and scope creep. She begins talking about population vs resources and ends talking about race. The discussion about population and resources can be had without ever talking about race.
With a smaller population, we would have less mouths to feed, but also proportionaly less work force to feed people. So the food problem is not due to the size of the population, but due to inequality. Natural degradation also do not disapear by reducing the population. It would be only decelerated.
Technology can fill the gap if labor is needed to make food. But we are competition with other animals for food. That is why you got wildlife raiding your trash cans late at night.
@@godzillamegatron3590 if animals are eating what is in the trash that isn’t competing for food.. since we are not planning on eating it out of the trash.
We in the West work too many long hours that goes into the military. Why not work 33% fewer hours and spend the rest of the time socializing, reading books, watching documentaries, etc...
The problem is that one human species shouldn't take half of the world resources. So inequality, overconsumption and overpopulation are all problems
Yeah. What I wanted to say is that the food problem is not mainly due to the size of the population, and that natural degradation will only be decelerated if there is a reduction in the population, due to the technological needs. But that does not mean we should keep the population so big, take all earth resources for us and degrade so fast. The ideal would be to reduce population and also reduce the waste of resources through banning or combating planned obsolescence and the practice of d3stroying unsold products (for example, Amazon burns tons of unsold products weekly, including TVs and other expansive items, to avoid a reduction in the prices).
"Like a lot of bad ideas, the idea for [ insert anything here], came from an economist." - Yep. The moment the guy who's job was to figure out my taxes decided that made him qualified to talk about social policy, the world tanked. The idea that an economist is an expert on everything because he knows how money works is about as absurd as letting a dropout computer science engineer run a social science experiment... which... oops... I guess we're doing that one too.
Economics falls under sociology. An economist might try and suss out something about people in groups based on their spending and trading. They occasionally generate a useful concept, but they're only experts in measuring money and guessing how people think based off that.
Who is the dropped-out computer science engineer student running a social experiment?
B-g
We don't even need to redistribute between countries, if we just let go of the *C I T I E S* and adopt a more human-scaled development, we could listen to each other and take the good part. The yeast of hypocrisy and the yeast of Heron would have less influence over our humanity, if we just spread out from _New Babel_ and inhabit the planet, all together.
@@aloha_penguin Meta.
The minute you said “Asia, Latin America, and Africa” I knew this was going to be another blame the white person episode.
Isn't that every video now?
Ended well in the 30s when it was the "blame the Jewish people, " movement... What could possibly go wrong this time around?!
So, you don't think that a white supremacist ideology and myth should be challenged?
Maybe stop playing victim and take some responsibility for your life ahmed@@debojitchatterjee5657
Maybe stop playing victim and take some responsibility for your life ahmed@@debojitchatterjee5657
Because of basic math. If average western woman has only one child and at the same time millions of migrants every year, you are replaced.
As someone who was born with Muscular Dystrophy, eugenics has always been a tricky subject. While I think it is wrong to deny someone the right to reproduce because of their skin color or national origin, I *don't* feel that its wrong to discourage people who carry genetic diseases from reproducing because life would be more difficult for their children.
My father had cancer of genetic causes, and I agree with you. We're not hating on people who carry genetic problems, the problem is the bad genes and not them as people. We *are* them.
Eugenics is not a tricky subject. It's just a heavily uncomfortable subject that people don't wanna discuss. Like shit Iceland virtually eliminated Down's Syndrome through eugenics. Like bam, it aint happening there anymore, it's the rest of us who may be born with it or have a child suffer from it. Not them.
Are they evil? Do they hate the disabled? Are they on a warpath across the planet to eliminate anyone with a cold? No. They were smart enough to treat themselves the same way we treat everything else and they're permanently better for it. Nothing tricky about that.
What's tricky is accepting the fact that a lot of us have problems we'd rather not, and the way to prevent it from continuing is (possibly) sacrificing our lineage for the good of the species. If your kid has Downs, abort and try again. Confirmed effective.
Another uncomfortable discussion is that we dismiss the practice of eugenics as evil while making a business out of suffering. How much money do we spend battling our genes? How much is an epipen running for these days? Insulin? Yay money!
The problem is that eugenic policies creates an institution the can decide who can and can not bread and no institution can be trusted with such power. Any institution you try to put in charge of such decisions will be driven to use said power for their own goals, a democratic institution will fear monger and expand the ideal of who can’t bread in return for support from the population, a dictatorial system would expand its own power without the scrutiny of democratic processes, private companies would make decisions purely on what’s profitable with no concern for ethics, religious institution would make ethical decision based on unproven claims, even an ai would be influenced by the biases of those who coded it as we see today with facial recognition software
At the end of the day it should still be their choice and before you'd even ask, my wife had MD and her & I chose not to. The key word there is "Chose".
So why are you still alive, then, mate?
Believing "too many people" are the problem is correct, but not the people they are talking about. we have too many billionaires.
we have enough food, drinking water and other ressources for 9+billion. poverty and pollution are a policy *choice*, not a product of overpopulation.
If poor people lack food and drinking water, do you think billionaires really eat or use much more water than an average person would?
Facts
@@UltraBoner don't play dumb.
The Environment needs to be cleaned up!
@@tomasmccauley569 there’s nothing wrong with having a big family, some cultures value big families and are social security in countries like in Africa or in India where there’s no government support
No one should have the right to determine which people to live or die.
Ghengis Khan disagrees
We should have the right to determine which people reproduce tho.
Otherwise, the dumb people will outnumber the smart ones.
My math teacher for the last 3 years of my schooling always talked about how over population was false and the numbers provided to us never added up in real world scenarios. She would always talk about Info in Info out Models. If you put into your model only the data you want then you will get out exactly what you want from your modelling.
The models provided are biased and are designed to energize the push to their agenda.
Remember the original COV-ID-19 Model that turned out to be over exaggerated but had the exact reaction wanted, realized. Which was FEAR.
I love my math teacher. She always said for us to study the data and to search for the data that was NOT put in......
As I get older I am realizing that all this is not about over population but about population control. There is a huge difference between the two.
Congratullations!! You had a great teacher.
@@WilliamSantos-cv8rr OK. That, and the fact the sana saeed critter in this video is a straight up transvestite. 😆🙅♀
Your maths teacher is some kind of capitalist who wants more consumers. He is wrong. And people don't just want food, do they?
@@stratoleft aaahhhh So what you 🤡
@@chriswatson1698 She not a He. Read 📚 .
WoW how did you get Capitalist from the above. She does Math. And the Math shows we are NOT overpopulated but very badly managed.
Bad people management
Bad food management
Bad polution management
Bad immigration management
We are not overpopulated we are just very badly managed by greed, indifference, racism, poor judgement, selfish intentions etc etc.
Capitalism dosent even come into the picture. Its bad management and nothing else..... Educate yourself rather than regurgitating what others say.
Soo the conclusion is life supports billion but not billionaires.
Thank you!
Because of this eugenics craze In 1937 the US imposed Law 116 onto Puerto Rico that legalized sterilization on the island under the belief that Puerto Rico was too overpopulated. The US government institutionally supported the spread of sterilization on the island by having health workers perform door-to-door visits, subsidizing the procedure, and by industrial employers on the island favoring sterilized women of childbearing age in their hiring process. Men were also sterilized. This happened during the years of 1937-1960. The Procter and Gamble family had ties to this. On another note Cornelius P. Rhoads an American pathologist, oncologist, and hospital administrator. (Recognized by Time Magazine and hospitals that bear his name) injected cancer into Puerto Ricans and experimented on them in the 1930's without their knowledge. He left a letter gloating how easy it was to kill Puerto Ricans... The The Rockefeller Foundation was to thank for this. Today these elitist and racist acts take on so many other forms as you stated. Thanks for this video. NEVER FORGET!
Yeah this is what I was saying in my comment! 🤙🏾🤙🏾This history is so prevalent and for so many of us it hits home bc our families have experienced these policies head on and were told it was for their benefit. What the Americans did in PR was and remains a crime they never atoned for
This explains why those non-mixed race European whites always try to harm Latinos or make a mockery out of Latin American people. They just want the properties and want to wipe out the people to make a new colony in such areas. They enjoy hurting innocent people.
Yes. They did the same to non-white populations within the continental US as well.
Reminiscent of the Tuskagee syphilis experiment
@@stunner8481 UA-cam is intentionally hiding your comment from view when I check a few seconds ago.
very glad to see this brought up, conservationists still havent stopped forcing indigenous people out of their 'parks' btw, i am very concerned with wildlife conservation and the rights of the rural poor so it hurts me
True, but this video is, in part. disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
@@scottcharney1091I give thanks to your vasectomy too, another sucker off the game board
Interesting video AJ+. This presentation really makes you think about government mandated medical campaigns. Especially the sterilization story from India. After watching this I’m sure there is no way corporate entities could be involved in those campaigns or have their own agendas. I feel confident that these organizations would be truthful and honest with their intentions and have no ulterior motives. There is no way a private corporate health entity would use the guise of something like global health to advance its own agenda.
Never would they do that
Big pharma live by the slogan what would Jesus do?
Indeed, I think you took the right message from this video.
Oh brother. All suspicion and belief, no credible evidence.
Careful though, a lot anti-vaxxers use that reverse-psychology to justify their ignorance.
Did you know that WWII Black veterans and descendants are STILL not allowed GI bill benefits? Can you imagine teaching WWII and GI Bill and not mentioning that 1 million Black veteran were excluded. There is a bill in the house and senate to change this. Authentic CRT seeks to uncover and remedy these inequities caused by systemic racism. .
Same with Hispanic veterans
These are people who don't want change!
@@bonnierobinson8684 and why would they. White supremacy is the system of benefits for the white race at a expense of the non-whites
@@imrankh68 Hispanic were not around in WW2. Hispanic label was created in 1980. They people who fell under their precieve racial make up
@@godzillamegatron3590 That's just semantics. There is a whole documentary about Hispanics or Latinos veterans systematically not getting their benefits.
Wait wait wait... I was mostly on board, but when you say "shifting the attention away from the choices that you're making", you lose me, because shifting the burden to individual responsibility was exactly what fossil fuel companies did to shift the gaze away from themselves. The problem of climate change is much more of a systemic problem than an individual one. Not to say that our own choices make no difference, but those choices don't happen in a vacuum, they happen in the environment in which we live.
Take for example personal transportation. The "individual choice" would be to use a vehicle that doesn't produce as much carbon emissions. A bike is a good example for that. But not everyone can use a bike. Bikes don't protect people from the elements, and it's often more difficult to carry a large number of items on a bike, as families regularly need. On top of that, in North America, in the US particularly, people live in car-centric areas that are inhospitable to walking, biking, or public transit. The individual solution would then seem to be that people need to buy electric cars. That's still a highly consumerist solution, that more can't afford than can, that still pollutes but in other ways. The real solution when it comes to transportation is a very well developed public transit system, and a redesign of cities and small towns to avoid sprawl and make distances manageable without owning a car.
I know how to power combustible engines that emit 100% clean exhaust in which the exhaust itself also creates a value added product (or second use). My process also purifies the water ways as I capture and store my initial energy source.
@@kaltwies Hydrogen motor?
@@wandererstraining compressed air from a trompe .
@@kaltwies What kind of fuel?
Shifting the responsibility to the individual is the World Economic (resource distribution) Forums goal. I.e. white supremacist digital control via 6g, carbon credits, the internet of things, human computer integration (rfid, neuralink), id.me facial recognition and contact tracing. As long as non-whites are kept in an individualist mindset we will not see the shrinking white population's control mechanisms being sprung upon us so they can maintain power.
hmmm
i definitely think eugenics and ecofascism is a problem
however, i also do think overpopulation is an issue as well--the lack of planning, proper distribution, etc. IS still a valid problem to consider when thinking about if we as a species can support the number of people that we bring into this world, and not just the amount of resources that we have mined from the planet.
i know many people who are born into this world as a way to save/force marriages, to satisfy cultural expectations, really all sorts of reasons other than being ready to give to a new child's development. i don't think this is a thing unique to any one culture, it's a human one.
The problem with this story is.. and what she forgot to mention...
1. We are an animal, that is outside the balance of nature. We all use to lunch recources from natural world that belongs to our share world and out animal friends, and Forrest's.
2. Birth control is more about health (and she didn't go into what health is a big spectrum) and again our general footprint NOT carbon, but water, minerals, chemicals.
3. Capitalism struggles that everyone must be and will be in the same positions for eg. The US which has come along way read (H. Rosling) those is aöl normal I'm capitalism that in my mind is a horrific political system for the inviroment itself. When people in the US has 3 cars per person why should it not be the right of an Indian person to have it too? You get the math. And of course it's totally wrong that a US person should have it to start with.
4. Water crisis is a real thing today, private companies out billions into buying up water because today / not before science know! Water recources will be more valuable then oil in the coming 100 years. Even today some places in south America people pay more for water then house rent.
5. It's all easy math under a capitalistic system that is what she doesn't take up, "everyones free right to make as much money and use as much recources that can, because it's their rights".
It's simple math whatever idiot eugenics did before, that was plain hocus pocus. It's also about women's rights with birth control to not be enslaved at home, no education, left out of sociaty etc. This is a well studied subject. But remember, for every person born their are thousands of threes cut down, million of gallons of fresh water destroyed band millions of animals pushed out, eaten and killed.
This ties together decades of “um, why do I feel uncomfortable right now” moments. I’ve been both in solidarity with and yet terrified of rich environmentalists since I was a kid. Yes, children can feel fear in response to the racist animosity of adults discussing policies that say, “there should be fewer kids like YOU.” It’s the chill in your bones that you feel every time someone-even a courageous young person like Greta Thunberg-says “the global south”.
But we can’t just intuit the details, and that’s why I personally find this video essay / deep dive so valuable: I didn’t know how much is explicitly directed at India. Heartbreaking.
The "global south" is also vague and inaccurate. Australia is in the South but somehow does not count as the "global south", and Russia has a lower average income than India (if I'm not mistaken, but either way, relatively low) and is often without thought included in the "global north".
With most low-income countries, I think it would be more accurate to call them overexploited nations, because it's honest and lays the responsibility with the ones who created and perpetuate the current global inequality.
@sasentaiko Cool. Now imagine the chills of being replaced in your own country.
@@readmycomment3707 Ok I imagined it. Cool story bruh. For white people in the U.S., It's imaginary.
@@readmycomment3707 I'm assuming you're refering to the white genocide conspiracy theory? Stop using shit ideas that were literally invented by the Nazis.
@@readmycomment3707 Replaced by whom? The Blacks?
If you think that the problem is overpopulation and not big corporations, you need to revisit elementary school.
Both are problematic. More people chasing a fixed resource lead’s to racing to the bottom.
Big corporations want you to think overpopulation isn't a problem, as that expands their potential market and reduces the cost of labour.
Both are problems pal, pitting one against the other is an odd thing to do.
Ok, but revisit elementary school for what? Since when in elementary school, or anywhere, do they teach about the reality of fabricated scarcity?
@@BallyBoy95 you misunderstand. Overpopulation isn't a problem but corporations are, regardless of their astroturfed campaigns. We don't necessarily want the opposite of what big corporations support. Yes they are trying to maximize profits but that doesn't mean that overpopulation is a problem just because they want us to think it isn't. We don't necessarily want more or fewer people. The point is that we should not support genocide.
it relative, you can't have a big corporation with a small population, but it's also not an ether / or , we can reduce the population and regulate big coporations at the same time, both need to be done.
The lesson from this video: If there needs to be population control, it needs to begin with rich Americans.
if something is happening how can it be a theory?
I really like this story. The truth is there plenty of resources to feed an provide for basic needs of people. The real problem is how we are constantly using "economy" as an excuse to be wasteful and the systemic excess of the insanely rich and powerful. The "foot print" of waste alone is enough to easily feed provide for at least 2/3 more people i would estimate from things ive seen. The problem is how systemic and cultural the nature of solving the problem is. You cant just ask or even tell people who flat out avoid or ignore facts to change. Also the laws wont change because the same people are rewarded for creating the problem are having the most control how voting to change problems is done. People will say its a failure of democracy but how is it even a democratic process if people aren't even properly educated and allowed to change important rules for the common good? I dont think that means give up but for the people who do want to change things the strategy must be different to reaching people in ways that are defined more by exciting pop culture the media they just ignore out of boredom.
The problem isn't feeding people. Carrying capacity of any species population is dictated by the limiting resource. The limiting resource for humans is the (carbon) climate buffer. And that is very much running out.
@@cjohnson3836 by carbon do you mean a specific type of carbon or usage of such? I agree with you in a sense because as human civilization has grown to a point to depend on certain things and style of living but i would say needing and wanting are to very different things. Cultures of the past believe more heavily in ways we now have forgotten and taken for granted. The culture of people saying they need things they merely want has definitely taken a toll on supply and demand as a whole but its definitely not sustainable and leads to changes and a break down what was and often is the norm. People think they need technology and i really do feel a lot of technology helps but its not exactly the solution often it can lead to people wanting using and wasting more then would likely need others if there cultural perspective was that of being sustainable 1st. The earth and the biomes on it change mostly due to human acts they will and are changing to accommodate there life not ours. The new biomes immerge will find balance even despite a self destructive nature of species that Cannot. Its my prediction that humans will struggle until we find that finer balance with the biomes interact with technology will and can help but cant overwhelming replace what is far beyond its capabilities and humans should create cultures that are freer from strife and likely given them better happiness and quality of life as a result.
Meaning you want everyone to live a miserable, ascetic, minimalistic lifestyle, as long as everyone is equal.
@@MH-be6hr no but displined ones people dont need to stress out over junk they dont need. In the end does it make people happy or just spoiled distracted and under educated to meet a better sense of happiness that is sustainable for most if not all there lives... The solution to most problems is that not distractions and giving in to addictions.
@@MH-be6hr plus i think we all know total equality is at all possible we have to balance even in even our own diversity so we can have stable civilizations. What i am really suggesting is a finer balance...
brilliant presentation look forward to an episode that focuses on the military impact on the climate crisis that includes super fund military base pollution and destruction of people and resources, refugees, corporate control of poor populations causing internecine war, etc.
The DOJ would be successful before that, my "doomy gloomy" prediction tells.
Uh-huh, "@@thesultanofveracity9943"?!?
Well..
That demographic change is why the U S of A has managed to remain the Superpower of this one-&-only Planet.
Also..
Those whom you define as “Indians”, are not entirety indigenous to India - either.
But given the indescribably atrocious "Manifest Destiny" humbug, I guess the parallel fits.
Of course it would be hard for you to concede.
Nevertheless..
The "development"/"progress"( fluffy words for: Industrialisation) has come the most from immigration, such as US winning the nuclear arms race( "Manhattan Project").
I suspect as a child you had nothing.
You're literally telling me Bangladesh and India would not benefit from birth control, lol.
Save Europe
You can't do anything 🤣😂
@@Elijah.Ben.BENJAMIN54 he said as he posted his 3rd comment of the day
@@user-rs1iq3kt6l save europe from what?
@@user-rs1iq3kt6l there is no scientific proof to the critical race theory
This needs serious fact checking
👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
Thank you for making this! I first had to confront American eugenics in college in the 1980s. It still amazes me how misunderstood and far reaching it is. Spreading understanding of how much is based on this is so needed, so we can move beyond it!
Try 'Telltale' and 'Telltale Fireside Chat' for more INfo.
Really? You think this is still going on? You think that planned parenthood is some kind of eugenic program or what?
Let’s not forget how early American Racist pseudoscience and Eugenicists helped inspire the holocaust.
@@Social_Pugatory So what is the message here?
America bad then = America bad now?
Therefore America bad?
That is what it sounds like you are saying? Is that what you meant?
Is there any doubt that your shtick is that you try to get everyone to agree that mankind needs superpowers to push these "American racists" into the dirt forever and make sure they're never spoken of again, and that by doing so, you're keeping India the way it was when Hinduism was invented, and that's why everyone beefs with you guys?
America alone throws away enough food to feed all the people currently suffering malnutrition or food insecurity 🤔
70% of Canada's growth last year was through immigration. We cannot simply pretend that this is not going to drive up the demand for housing. Let's also talk about the carbon footprint of immigration.
and me thinking i would never give credit to canada for doing a good thing in its history :o
Thx Sana for another myth busting analysis/video that put to rest the trope of "Too many people in Africa-Asia-Central/South America are causing climate change and depletion of resources" 🙏
Who the hell is even saying that? This channel is disgusting racist hate. Are Arabs the defenders of the Africans? Then why are you still enslaving them in the 21st century? How can you talk about gunmen in the USA when there are suicide bombers all over the Middle East and a war raging in Yemen?
@@jeffbrunswick5511 What is your point, beside ranting about an Arabic name, you know nothing about?
In reality if you compare population density then Asia yes is overpopulated, but the next is Europe.
And Africa and Latin America actually have low population densities compared with global
@@KateeAngel Yes. In Asia, India & China account for a population totalling about 2,8 billions people. The concentration is in or near the coastal areas. If China finds a way to solve the desertification problem (West- North West) and win the fight, the population density there will be resolved, by people moving to the new territories. For India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the situation is totally different. The resources are limited and first they have to lift the population out of poverty, improve the infrastructure and conditions of living of millions before pretending to any conquest/conversion of new territories, to habitable/productive ones, within their boundaries, so the concentration of people in big cities can be alleviated. South America is blessed with huge empty space for agriculture development and spreading the population, except mountainous Chile and Peru.
@@KateeAngel So what is your point? Some places are overpopulated, but it's only fair if the entire world is equally overpopulated? All of the world's rainforests and coral reefs can be obliterated, just so long as the % of white people is lower? Let pollution around the world run rampant to the point that our planet is not habitable any more and our entire species goes extinct, just so long as the world is more Islamic and brown first, everything is cool yeah? You need to stop watching Al Jazeera, it's making you dumb.
We don't have a population crisis; we have a resource management crisis. I've always said the rarest commodity in the universe is imagination. We have so many opportunities to imagine solutions to problems, but the biggest hurdle is Capitalism. Resource Disparity is the crux of Supply & Demand. Sadly, capitalism equals convenience, and you'll be hardpressed to get people to relinquish them.
There's a population crisis aswell, it's just not global and highly localized to a very specific set of countries. X amount of land is needed to feed and house X amount of people. Then you have to consider the need for fresh drinking water, emissions, fisheries etc. The way overpopulation is solved currently is through migration but this is not a sustainable solution that is highly unlikely to be accepted in the long run when the effects it has had on Europe is being considered.
There are no solutions, only trade offs. Capitalism feeds wants. You can't force people to want something different. That will inevitably implode as it's always done.
@@Teutathis Try doing that without mass war and death. LOL. You stupid morons are going to kill more than climate change. Depopulation is called DEPRESSION. Try innovation in a depression.
100%, it all starts with capitalism
True, but this video is, in part, disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
The great replacement is just real lol
The population has doubled in my lifetime and is growing exponentially. The planet, however, is not getting any bigger.
BRAVO!!!
This has been the best video on this channel so far. Identifying the problem, analyzing it and then presenting alternative solutions after pointing out the flaws in the existing approaches. Thought provoking stuff
***On a more personal note, over the past few years I always thought the content on this channel and Sanaa were more sympathetic towards the Muslim demographic and their issues, which would invariably cause a prejudice in my mind against it. But on reading the comment section and introspection, I realized that maybe my bias while thinking was also part of the problem and now I am in an ongoing process, trying not jump to conclusions or judge too quickly. THANK YOU for challenging me to do so
( For context, I am nominal Hindu citizen of India and I think the example of disastrous population control initiatives here is not talked about enough. Thank you once again for bringing it up on this global forum. Keep up the great work you all ) ***
Joking about Nazism isn't funny.
Add a little bit of truth to make your agenda taste more palatable.
This channel is clearly playing the famous Victim card.
No humans are same. But this channel conveniently clubs all white people to the worst examples.
But all muslims are different.
Not all they are saying is wrong. But only what they choose to address and how they choose to address it speaks volumes about them.
These are mainly 2 wrongs that don't make right.
No pooijeet the bais was in your mind. And it most probably comes from cow juices.
The word is "biased," not "bias." Anyway, you're right, but this video is, in part, disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
@@saimbhat6243Or it could come from Pork fat 🐖🐷 Abdul. Allah au Akbar 🕋☪️🇵🇰!!!
It’s dam near impossible to be homeless and sober at the same time .
The most substantial polluters and users of resources are wealthy people in wealthy nations. The poor in poor nations do not have mansions, private jets, heated pools, limousines, etc. That said, the problem is more of how in the past all over the world a much lower population meant there was more work to be done than workers to do it. A family could often be supported on a single income. The push for automation underway is reversing all of this. People who have the means to support and raise children to become healthy productive adults should ignore this message of feeling guilty for reproducing. The problem comes in when people knowingly bring a child into a nightmare environment where they will not have stability, food, water, shelter, etc. Not for the sake of the narrative of the 1% to make you feel bad about having a child but at a personal level if you are unable to provide an acceptable childhood for them and properly raise then it is incredibly selfish to put someone in that paradigm.
Of course it it the rich who tell us we need fewer people. Fewer people is not a bad idea, but there is another much better idea: No more rich people, just all the resources for everybody.
While the world is not overpopulated yet, with our numbers rising and our agriculture slowly failing because the way it works today just isn't sustainable, we can see that we might reach a point where global famine becomes inevitable. However, with a global socialist economy that distributes resources according to need instead of according to wealth, that point lies far ahead in the future, and when it is reached, at we will all suffer together, and every family will share the pain of losing loved ones-
The meltdown of global civilisation along with the capitalist economy is very likely, I don't think we will avoid it if it is still possible today. Eating the rich might be the only option we have if we want to survive-
nothing wrong with rich people. the issue is the people who own the rich people that make move to stamp out potential for legislation to better the lives of people and to empower them and instead to enslave them.
@@idealicfool I think that every kind of system in which rich people exist is flawed. in order for rich people to exist in the first place, a lot of other people need to be poor. If we want to end poverty, we also need to end obscene wealth. Just shift everybody towards the middle.
@@elfboi523 which is basically what I just said. Checks and balances in place to prevent people from controlling or owning to much of specific areas.
Read a tale of two cities!
A solution: Reforest using a Federal Jobs Guarantee. This does replace habitat, replaces the source of fresh water to abundance levels all the way inland (look up hydrology), replaces nature's carbon sink, preventing carbon from running off into the ocean where it devastatingly acidifies & is melting the polar caps from below thru ocean convection. So strategic reforesting would start from where forests already exist, working outward from there, but to help the oceans would reforest coastal regions & riparian zones around riversides.
The superior method of reforestation is to just leave the land alone, no manpower required.
@@dionysusnow Apparently you're in the deep south (re Northern Hemisphere) or your mind has "gone south", as they used to say. We don't have 4 seasons to grow up northway here, more like 2 or slightly less. There is a good way of doing it. Mycorrhize the root-wads from as local source as possible. Replace the native diversity, or with a diversity of what will take. It does take stewardship. Where i live the forests are totally unmanaged & a complete mess. So much of what would commence reforestation would be transplanting smaller trees out into open space adjacent to existing forest as part of selection logging that doesn't highgrade.
@@dionysusnow Plus, what you say was true a long time ago, but you-who, here we are now.
@@dionysusnow In addition, i must ask, how can you say that with all the current clearcut logging, so They're hardly "just leaving the land alone". When "manpower" is used in the other direction, donchya think humanepower is needed to counter?
Yes, Malthus and Paul Ehrlich come off looking pretty unprescient in this documentary. But we shouldn't forget that significant scientific advances came along at opportune moments to "pull our chestnuts out of the fire." The mechanization of agriculture and the introduction of chemical fertilizers and pesticides starting with the industrial revolution made it possible to feed a much larger population. The Green Revolution brought about new crops that were far more productive and helped India right when it most needed them. Modern biotechnology including transgenic and cisgenic organisms has also led to significant advances in productivity and hold much promise for improved crop nutrition. Will science continue to be able to pull our chestnuts out of the fire forever? That probably won't be necessary as world population growth is slowing. I am alarmed though by the intense hostility towards modern biotechnology being displayed especially by so-called progressive organizations. Forcing the world to go back to or, in the case of developing countries, to continue primitive "organic" agricultural methods is a surefire recipe for famine.
Theoretically we have the tech to give everyone a comfortable life, it just that power and control of that stuff is in too few hands
If you believe a brief aside made by George Orwell in an essay, this has been true since the 1930s.
It’s a conspiracy of them against us!
Also, the moment the article goes to Hitler and Eugenics, which are two of the "West's" most recent historic blunders, is when I get that this article wants me to be outraged, automatically agree to everything the article says, and basically understand less about the real issue: the question of population pressure on the environment.
@Kay Kronicals @Kay Kronicals I understand your point of view and I agree with it. I just think the article does not put this point of view across, although perhaps towards the end. The article focuses on the painting the former colonial powers and the US as the bad guy, and their abuses are not news. I wanted the article to support its message with more information and less opinion.
@@AndreiGromit The west is the biggest threat to human existence- the capitalist system the control and have spread around the world (the U.S. empire specifically). I don't understand where there's disagreement with that, what propaganda have you been fed?
There is not a shortage of food, the true is food distribution is limited
Unconditional right to stop our own life whenever we want, for all adults
No one is stopping you from jumping off a high bridge.
I used to worry that the world doesn't know what's going on. I rest assure dued to the history of the war of the world, we the people will always recognize the lies. We are bit the rebels or criminal they make us out to be. We are the defenders of the land against the invaders. Thank you so much this is so generous of you.
True, but this video is, in part, disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
I was describing to a sibling about how I had recently read about how MURCA! consumed somewhere in the neighborhood of 25% the world's entire resources. However, it was the TIME of WHEN I spoke to him about this: it was the latter 1980s when I had already graduated college and had been working for a coupla years and was researching about where I was going to go to grad school so I remember that it was around 1988. For those too young to know, but in the 1980s China was a NOTHING on the economic blip and instead it was Japan that was the economic firecracker.
So when I had that discussion with the sibling I was making the argument that if MURCA! with its then 200 million population was consuming 25% of the worlds resources IN THE 1980s *what about if and when the "developing world" "catches up economic consumption-wise" with MURCA!?* Now remember in the 1980s IMPOVERISHED China was an absolute nothing of concern to anyone and was on NOBODY's radar.
Now over 3 decades later China consumes and emits twice that of MURCA!: but, BUT this is based on China having more than 4 times the population of MURCA! AND is BY FAR the world's largest - BY FAR - manufacturing nation on the globe. *And ON A PER CAPITAL BASIS, China still only consumes 1/4 that of MURCA! AGAIN ON A PER CAPITA BASIS.*
*So what happens when China reaches 1/2 or 2/3rds the PER CAPITA of MURCA!? Then is MURCA! and China both together going to be consuming over 50% of earth's resources JUST BETWEEN THE TWO?? THAT DOESN'T LEAVE MUCH WIGGLE ROOM FOR THE OTHER 50%!*
*IMPOVERISHED India RIGHT NOW already consumes and emits just 1/2 of what MURCA! consumes BUT WITH FOUR TIMES THE POPULATION and consumes 1/4th of what China consumes WITH A NEAR EQUAL POPULATION. What happens IF India reaches consumption and emission levels of MURCA!?*
*The numbers just don't add up for the earth's resources.*
Excellent post. That's why socialism is inevitable.
Marx was a visionary. He saw the future. He knew where capitalism, with it's rationalizations about "scarcity" and 'optimal pricing' and 'equilibrium' and 'factors of production," was going. Monopolies would form and eventually it would be a race to the bottom. And that's exactly what we are seeing now. We have a climate crisis as we speak and: India, Brazil, Nigeria and other huge populations are just NOW starting to modernize their energy infrastructure to optimize their political economies. By 2045, the problem will be so gargantuan we will likely be in crisis.
Funny, they never mention how the MURCA!? (hahaha, i laughed out loud reading your excellent post) capitalists used indentured servitude (i.e. NOT the free market) and slavery (i.e. NOT the free market) to build the country. So they built their country not by "laissez faire" mercantilism, but through good old slavery just like the old empires of antiquity (well, some of them at least).
And what did China do? Take the best elements of central planning/Lenin-style communism and mixed it with a hybrid form of state-sanctioned capitalism. China is more or less the worlds most important economy, even more so than America.
The problem is the entire field of economics is sociopathic: maximize utility for every individual; maximize profits for firms; screw the environment and call it a "negative externality" (firms just dump the waste in the lake/river/sea/ocean, destroy the environment - the ocean is acidifying at a spectacular rate - and then bribe politicians to run interference for them).
What happens when EVERY individual wants to maximize their utility in some game-theoretic optimization scheme? What happens when EVERY firm wants to maximize profit?
Infinite growth leads to barrenness. We need a more sustainable model and that will inevitably be some iteration of socialism. Too many people too feed, not enough resources to go around (and Billionaires hoarding everything while crying poor). Socialism is the cure (and no, I do not advocate for a heavily centralized Lenin-style bureacracy, but some form of anarcho-syndicalism).
Capitalism will either innovate (thanks to government funding, i.e. "socialism" which, for instance, gave us the internet) or it will have to move over for more sustainable model. The "greed is good" philosophy has to end. We can innovate our way out of hell (and that's what will happen when the ice caps melt...hell on earth mixed with extreme winters colder than anything we've ever experience in modernity).
@@feynmanschwingere_mc2270 : *I messed up with that "China + MURCA! NUMBERS" BECAUSE I FAILED TO ADD INTO THE EQUATION OF EUROPE.*
True, but please stop shouting.
That opening had me spooked, lol.
Because replacement is everywhere
I can see it walking down the street
becaue its true
Yes and it's good😂🎉
@@Elijah.Ben.BENJAMIN54
Get prepared Trump becoming president in 2025. Things are changing.
@@LimosetheTrump if he wins the election can’t change anything if his party doesn’t control both Congress or the Senate.
@@rodolfogarcia_1 His people can change the makeup of the senate or even restructure how laws and elections work.
People having more kids in poor countries is not causing the problem it's greedy countries First World countries keeping all the food for themselves there's more than enough food to feed the whole planet instead we waste billions of food every day even in America by itself so imagine what the other countries are doing..
👍👍👍
and then they blame the victims of the Western-made poverty.
@@crisproductions336 facts
@@skapunkoialternativeliving6522 also, interestingly enough, the number of children a family has can indeed correlate to their socioeconomic level. it is observed that poorer people tend to have more children. I would say it's because they cannot have a dignified life, and poverty can... kill. So in order for the family to survive, they basically have to play a gamble to see what child will survive into their adulthood. Infant mortality skyrockets when living conditions are austere. But it isn't the fault of developing countries for being poor. Looking at history, and at the material condition on the ground, it is self-evident that imperialism and colonialism *actively impeded* developing countries for centuries. And you know, abusers love to blame their victims.
@@crisproductions336 Again, people that know what's good for them tend to have fewer kids. The issue here is that certain white countries facing infertility and demographics issue are trying to push an agenda which limits the births in non-white nations out of fear of being "out-numbered" by non-whites.
There's truth to that but without a solution. We grow enough food to feed everyone well but we use more of that food to feed pigs and chicken to eat them and their period.
We can all talk endlessly about this but what is the solution? American are not gonna turn socialist vegan in a long long time, forcing them into making those choices is also out of the question based on their politican leaning. You'd need a civil war that could blow out of proportion outside the U.S
That's unfortunately why i think tthe solution remain the same, You need to be strong and create your own wealth and thrive to seek for the top position, because nobody share and everyone isstill stuck in this unfair course for survival.
We also talk as though corporation are the culprit here, sorry to say but the population that cash in buying goods and services to those corporations have a role in this too. they buy this meat without a second thought, should we see them as automatons without conscience that need to have decision made for them for a better world?? It won't happen in democratic free countries because it's against the tenants of these societies.
If you’re worried about being “replaced,” it means that you believe that you have not earned the place that you currently occupy. The people who believe in this “replacement theory” believe, deep in their hearts, that they are not worthy of the privilege and power that they hold.
I agree.
They know they have committed genocide and stole the land.
No one is worthy of a relative way of unbalanced privilege and power.
If people had more humility and humaneness they would share much of their privilege. But ironically the people with the least share the most.
whatever helps you sleep.
I wish replacement theory was real, because then these garbage people would be replaced. Sadly, it's just a fascist meme parroted by rightwing imbeciles.
The thing with this entire theory is the fact that it’s just, well, insane. Why would a country try and replace their population with a very specific racial/ethnic group from elsewhere? No offense, but historically that leads to confrontation between the native populace and the immigrating populace.
Onto the point of immigration/migrants, immigrants want better jobs and more money just like our ancestors did. They’re not here to mess up your life. My family came from Europe because they were, well, poor in Europe. America provided a fine opportunity to them and they succeeded. So why should I judge a person doing EXACTLY what my ancestors did? They’re probably coming here to work their asses off like my ancestors. Also, my ancestors, according to my mom, faced discrimination for being Irish. So why should I be a hypocrite and criticize someone for being Arab, Hispanic, Asian, or African?
Finally, migration has always existed for economic means. There’s not enough of them to affect the economy, and even then, I don’t think they would. Taking a majority role in an industry does not necessarily hurt the economy. Actually, it doesn’t. They’re arguably contributing to our economy by producing goods if anything. They’re workers. Workers produce things that we and others buy.
All in all, the argument is not just racist, it’s hypocritical and racist. The people complaining descend from immigrants who likely dealt with a lot of shit in the past. If it upsets them that their ancestors dealt with stuff, then don’t be the one that unloads it on some guy just trying to hustle like your ancestor.
Like it or not it is not a theory rather than fact. Look at Europe, a 1/3 of UK births are now foreign.
It's funny, as in tragic, that there are so many people who simultaneously proclaim that America is the land of opportunity and you just need to work hard, while also telling immigrants to stay away or to go back "home".
@@crackedhammer4612
That doesn't make sense. Are you saying that Brits in other countries are having more babies than Brits in England?
This vid needs taken down. Every talking point is hirtoricly incorrect.
But, lastly, the birth rate should not be "lowered" by birth control given to poor and/or black and brown women. It should be lowered by improving the status and conditions of women everywhere. Then the birth rate will lower automatically and voluntarily.
Yes, that’s why most people in the wealthy and educated brackets have fewer children. If more women worldwide are given more education and employment opportunities, the population rates will go down.
No, it must be both. Give them birth control and push women to enter the workforce
@@purplemystique8308 Here, here. Turns out that women aren't really that crazy about having 12 kids and being forced to stay home with them and do nothing else--no matter what the religious male leaders say.
@@marykayryan7891 Right on! You should be a media spokesperson on this topic, but they won’t give rational people a chance to be heard
@@purplemystique8308 Thank you for your kind words.
How are under-developed or developing nations being blamed for Western industrialization era? They're the largest carbon emission violators around!
Under developed and developed nations don't have lower carbon emissions due to being more virtuous or because their better stewards of the environment, they're still doing everything they can to catch up or flee to the countries that are.
@@UltraBoner Absurd logic with a hint of racism. First of all, it's a well known fact that US, UK, Europe, Australia, New Zealand have a far larger footprint than developing or under-developed nations. I find it absurd that the harbingers of the climate disaster are now playing innocent!
@@UltraBoner Let's be honest here, which corporate organizations were pushing obvious lead poisoning into the environment for profits? Search up "tetraethyl lead Thomas Midgley.
@@YTChannel344 ah yes, the countries people are dying to live in
@@UltraBoner Speak for yourself, America, Australia, Canada, New Zealand are not white countries by origin.
As an Indian scholar of social studies I would like to clear one thing about our sterilization program.
The reason why many liberal people of the congress party were for family planning and paid special attention to Lower class Indians; OBCs, Muslims, SCs, STs, is because their fertility rate was much higher than upper class and upper caste Indians, often reaching to more than 5 in many areas. The Indian policy at the time was not driven by the goal of eugenics. While racism and casteism was prevalent and would have made family planning more appealing to many people, it was never a priority of the policy makers. India was a country starving most of the time until that point. Unemployment was and is still a big problem in the country. That was a time when policy making wasn't as advanced as it is today. It would have been possible to provide resources with certain policies but that seemed impossible to everyone.
Family planning was forced to elites as well. In the service conduct rules for IAS, IES, ESE and other government officers, restrictions were imposed on the number of children one could have. Additionally, fines were placed which were (and are) followed.
And most importantly, lack of family planning by certain regions of the country has created a big problem in Indian polity. This has to do with the distribution of seats for our parliament. Southern States promoted family planning and their population dropped. Their level of development increased at a much faster rate than the rest of the country. But this meant that Northern States which did not implement family planning policy to the same level resulted in increase of population. This meant that if seats were redistributed according to population of each state then sincere southern states would have faced a penalty for being good at their job. As a result of this conflict, Indian state wise seat distribution has not changed since the year 1961 and is not likely to change until 2031 at least.
The policy of mass sterilization, barbaric by today's standards, still finds support amongst Indians. Yes Human rights were violated and you would be correct to blame the elite and Americans for it. Still, you must understand that the policy was supported by the masses at the time.
What's so illogical about overpopulation? It's math. You can afford to feed 2 kids but not 8. Bingo.
arent birth rates actually decreasing globally? Japan, for one, is in danger if its native population doesn't have enough kids to offset the aging population
Thats been going on for 20 some years. Some nations are underpopulated but the world as a whole is overpopulated.
@@moksha6202 which is where I dont understand her showing Bill Gates talking about population because in that very same video he says as those in lesser developed countries are brought up to level with those in developed countries, the need or desire to have multiple children to help the family will decrease as quality of life improves resulting in people having less children and having them at an older age as they give consideration to their children's futures instead of just trying to get through tomorrow.
Globally, population growth continues. But many countries would be falling in population if not for immigration, including the US and most of Europe. Japan is falling overall because they have an exceptionally low immigration rate.
If the pattern followed by individual countries is shared by the world as a whole, population will eventually start to fall - but not for a long time. It's hard to say when, but somewhere in the region of a century, give or take a few decades.
A falling population creates new problems - current economic systems are predicated upon unending growth, and population growth is part of that. Even pensions are essentially ponzi schemes - if there are too many retirees drawing pensions out in proportion to the working population paying in, the pension scheme just runs out of money.
Well! having 2 children instead 8 means better life for all!
Bikes, buses, and trains. Moving to this lifestyle would kill half of the problem. (but nobody wants to hear that)
Where is the fountain at the start of this video? Any idea. Just curious
Provide liberty and education to a country's female population and lower birth rates happen naturally.
Despite this video's narrative, over population is a very real problem and does affect climate change.
However, the main contributors aren't in India and are definitely not in Africa.
No, cut the population of America and Europe in half and I'm sure we would see a noticeable change in greenhouse gas, pollution, deforestation, etc, etc.
Africa doesn't have a population problem.
It has infrastructure problems, theft of resources problems, poor government problems.
*Africa Don't Create The CO2 And Nuclear Radiation That Threatens All Life On Earth!*
*NEITHER DOES ITS PEOPLE!*
REJECTION OF SOLUTIONS, SCIENCE, AND LOGIC FOR FINANCIAL GAIN IS THE #1 PROBLEM AND REASONS WHY We're in this spiral of extinction.
Good the less Europeans the better!!!!
You're just full of propaganda
Eh, as long as you keep the capitalist behemoths in power, nothing will change. They will only switch countries.
Malthus wasnt really disproven, its just that he didnt account for industrialization.
And the eventual opening of space. If we can colonize space fast enough, may be our population is actually too low.
I was taught in school the problem isn't too many people but a broken system thats extremely wasteful. If we were to change our practices it would enable us to support 8 to 10 billion people in the future. The premise of policing people on how many kids they can have is weird and dreconian. Look at the one child policy in china it worked but so many people and families became broken due to this system.
It is not population growth that got us into the environmental crises, call it climate crises, it is the mantra that corporates and Wall street need to be able to report continuously increasing profit growth. We get told that anything equal to or less than zero profit growth (and that is not zero profit !) is unacceptable. This paradigm has resulted in overproduction and environmentally unsustainable production methods that got us into this predicament. The unsustainabilty lies in the hands of the top 5 %.
I don't think anyone has perfected the knowing-but-patient eyeroll as good as Ms. Sana -- THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THIS
Know 'Second Thought'?
@@slevinchannel7589 The sana saeed critter in this video ain't no "Ms." anything. It's a straight up transvestite. A far cry from these guys here in the looks dept., though. 😆 ua-cam.com/video/qE0HL3bCm_o/v-deo.html
Ok, but she's smug and, in part, disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc.
This is and incredible presentation. It made me reflect on a lot of things that I had not considered beforehand. It's also challenged some truths I had considered to be "absolute"
Replacement is definitely true
@@Bambotb It's like you didn't even watch the video.
@@Bambotb are you for real?
@@Bambotb found the Nazi
@classical
I didn't actually hear anywhere in the video a refutation of replacement. It goes into the history of eugenic thinking and how American Progressivism was inseparably tied in with such notions and how some of these notions linger today in respectable thought, aswell as ecofascism, but no refutation of replacement.
The real challenge is to develop technology that allows all people to have a reasonably wealthy and sustainable lifestyle, not an environmental or population race to the bottom...that's just too easy.
People should adopt more. There are Christians who think it's sinful when married couples don't have biological children. There's a stigma about adoptive parents that shouldn't exist. People say "Oh, so you have adopted kids. That means that they're not your real kids." My cousin and her husband have a beautiful family. They adopted a girl who has chronic health problems, and she might otherwise not be alive today. But people still say "their *adopted* daughter" with a condescending tone. Why don't people say "Their daughter"? My cousin and her husband did something positive to help someone in need, and people don't recognize them as real parents.
Greed & Fear of the FEW are the source of so much suffering for the many.
True, but this video is, in part, disingenuous. There's some important stuff that they leave out: the desire to prevent people from being born into poverty, the desire to prevent people from being born into suffering of any type, the decline in total fertility rates we're seeing in most of the world, etc. I give thanks every day for my vasectomy.
When I see the local fish markets in every suburb here stocked so abundantly with so many marine species I shudder. This is duplicated in hundreds of suburbs throughout the cities of my country.
The discarding of literally tonnes of uneaten food leftovers at numerous venues throughout the cities of my country, I cringe.
How can the planet sustain this waste?
So many of my fellow countrymen and women live in a consumption induced coma. I do not know what solutions there may be, but I am appalled by the conscious unwillingness to recognise our privilege and it’s cost, to the planet to humanity to the future.
Help me to understand how that if you can't feed yourself and your partner,why would you bring a child into that life?
I asked that same question when I was 13 in 1974 - World population was at 3.5 billion and the first "Famine Aid" for Biafra was on TV. Still asking the same question now 2022 I see !
@@rumplestilskinsmum5094 what I find truly amazing is that we can go into outer space but we can't get water and and the means for agriculture to places that need it.There is no excuse for it and we need to do better!
Truly disgusting the number of people who believe overpopulation of people is real, and not overpopulation of monopolies, CEOs and billionaire leeches
We do have overpopulation. We have so many people on this planet that we're razing nature and helping create more diseases for ourselves. Whether or not you agree with me, doesn't matter. The global temperature is rising and will continue to rise. This planet will depopulate one way or another. This isn't sustainable.
Fun fact: the total anthropogenic mass (human made stuff) is now more than all of nature combined. We passed nature in 2020 and we're still building more crap and filling more landfills with plastic.
Spoken as a true anarchist 👍
Corrupt rich media owners and businessmen are the reason racism, wars exist. They have it in their content, they encourage it. People like those ought to be put down for good.
Capitalists find the reality of climate change inconsistent with their beliefs so they pretend it isn't happening. Similarity, proponents of human progress seem compelled to deny the reality of overpopulation. What's the line? They hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest. Is it any wonder that there is no such thing as facts anymore?
I believe it's abolutely real but as nothing to do with replacement. We have evolved to have at least 5-6 kids in order for just a few to survive to adulthood and reproduce. Now, the vast majority of kids will live to adulthood. Reproduction is an instinctual drive, we need to be conscious about it.
Although I agree with everything you've said here (how can I not-it's historical fact), I think we have to take some other factors of a more modern bent into account. When the economic and political position of women in a society improves, the birth rate goes down. That also is a fact. When divorce (often restricted or prohibited by the Big Three Monotheistic religions) is allowed, the position of women goes up and the birth rate goes down. Having very large families is associated with the value of women being placed primarily or even solely on the number of children they can produce (a prime tenet of Nazism, BTW.) Thus, a lowered birth rate is a feminist issue because feminists would like women EVERYWHERE to be defined by more than their ability to produce children. Eugenics be damned. I, for one, have no interest in "preserving the white race socalled. For all I care on that issue, all the "white people" could disappear tomorrow. For the record there is no scientific bases for the idea of race anyway. It is a racist construct made up by the socalled white people in their ongoing effort to prove themselves "superior." But I do want to lower the world population both because it, in fact, would be less hard on the environment (although the biggest carbon footprints are in countries with lower birth rates --another complicated story to examine). But, it would also be linked to the improved social, economic and political position of women. And, for the record, it would be better for children.
In addition, I'll go one step further. Families like the Duggar one shouldn't be subsidized. Families should only have as many children as they can personally manage. When I look at the Duggar family, I don't see that. The brood pair just mate and have offspring. The older siblings are denied their childhood and are forced to become parents at too young an age. This isn't good. Not for that young newborn or for the older sibling forced into that adult role.
There is a limit to parental attention. This is why the firstborn gets the bulk. They're the first. There is no concept of sharing the attention. When the second ones come, we have a problem. Third and that's about it. If you add in other issues that require more active management, we have a problem where one or more of the children are ignored because you have to take care of your severely autistic child. Children deserve that parental bonding experience.. that unique parental bonding experience. The one where you and your mom just do things that you and your mom do. You don't share your mom during that time and you get to build that relationship. Or that time when you help dad and nobody is around. You and your dad get to talk and do something together. It's even when you get in trouble and you feel the wrath of heaven with both your parents yelling at you.
What happens if you don't build those relationships? I'll tell you because I see it. The successful parents may not have successful children. What they do have are children that will move heaven and earth for their mother or their father. In contrast, the less successful parents.. well, those children are researching nursing home facilities and what to do with the burden of mom and dad. They'll even kick their parents out.
So in a sense, I too want to lower the population. It's about quality, not quantity. I doubt that Michelle Duggar knows anything about any of her offspring. She's not their mother. Those older siblings are the mother or the father. All those children deserve to have a childhood and to have that love from their parents.
Besides, i want control over my body. I'm not a broodmare for some religious group or conservative cause. I'm not a thing. I'm a person. If they don't consider me a person, I have a massive problem. We've seen what happens when groups are arbitrarily deemed "not human". I have no problem dehumanizing a person or a group of people based on their actions. I do have a problem dehumanizing somebody because of their skin color, their country of origin, their sexuality or anything that was beyond their control. This is why I think that conservatives aren't human. Their actions show their inhumanity.
@@jenniferhunter4074 I'm probably being stupid here, but who is the Duggar family? (the commentator on this video?) Thank you for your comments about the internal workings (or non-workings) of mega huge families. I agree with much of what you have said. I do not think that large families are always a "choice" by the woman nor even by the man entirely. They are based on a complex set of social, economic and ideological factors that have to be changed before women (or men) are likely to choose to have smaller families. These fascist rulers want to circumvent giving women more opportunity and just force them to be sterilized. I had a Native woman friend who was sterilized without her knowledge or consent after just one child. Obviously racist in origin. That has been repeated hundreds, perhaps thousands, of times. (Here is one example www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/30/california-prisons-forced-sterilizations-belly-beast). Smaller families are good for everyone. Kids, women, men, the planet. It's how we get there that is the issue, I think.
So what do you suggest? We can’t reduce our population growth by much more in the developed world, but reducing population growth in the developing world has consistently come at the cost of women’s reproductive health and freedom. When you casually advocate reducing the human population growth to help the planet you empower those imposing forced sterilization and abortion on the poor of the developing world.
@@lif6737 you just need Economic development, the rest will follow.
@@avinashreji60 Yes ,and education of females will postpone childbirth and limit the number of children. Others see the advantages and imitate the 1 to 3 children. ❤☺️✊⚘This was an excellent documentary by the way .