How to quell overpopulation?

[Maou]

Where am I telling you it's uncommon? I drag liberals and conservatives almost equally - they both represent shooting for the lowest results. Conservatives also want a nanny state just as much as liberals, only the topics differ.

But you make it sound as if all the criticism you receive is completely unwarranted and unearned - that's what is most annoying. Telling you that is also not disrespectful, regardless of what you believe - I know many conservatives and their perception of the level of respect they are receiving from others, is the most common complaint among them. The accuracy of that perception is not relevant.

Critisism is fine, but Liberals tend to do it from a position of moral authority, higher intellect, and arrogance. The fact they do not see everyone as equals should tell you more about them, than anything else. No one should be so absolutely certain of what they believe, because it represents lack of internal analysis and self awareness. That is the true nature of the problem. Also, I think what you say about "shooting for the lowest results" is true, but I see it as the fault of the Deep state, and not the average voter. Its those in washington who refuse to uphold the values the American people voted for. Should have seen my face when that one paper labled Obama a conselrvative. It is really all smoke and mirrors, why is why I tend to follow politics through the lens of figuring out how they are using both parties to benefit the rich in an impressive global masquerade.

I personally do not think I have seen you drag on that many Liberals but I believe you. I can see you doing it more than a few others.

Also, I am not a "Conservative", I just vote that way. Though I am drifting farther away from Libertarianism as I am attempting to synthasize all good aspects each party has to offer over time. I am technically a old school right leaning Liberal. Like, I am not against affordable health care, just every proposition is absolutely retarded that comes out, with the intentional loopholes put in by the rich indirectly through connections in DC, to make more money.

 

[Maou]

So whom is owed respect first? Do you offer respect and expect to garner respect or if none of your looked for respect is forthcoming, do you simply deign to not respect others as you feel others did not respect you?

One should always be respectful, and and gardner respect. As Coriolis says, "Anything can be discussed civilly" (might have paraphrased that a bit) I for one know I tend to speak from a neutral position, unless I start getting attacked for the subject material, and then my character for even suggesting it as a discussion. I find that strange, that more people cannot hold back their feelings to have a civil discussion. But alas, I am human too and become embittered.

 

[ceecee]

Critisism is fine, but Liberals tend to do it from a position of moral authority, higher intellect, and arrogance. The fact they do not see everyone as equals should tell you more about them, than anything else. No one should be so absolutely certain of what they believe, because it represents lack of internal analysis and self awareness. That is the true nature of the problem. Also, I think what you say about "shooting for the lowest results" is true, but I see it as the fault of the Deep state, and not the average voter. Its those in washington who refuse to uphold the values the American people voted for. Should have seen my face when that one paper labled Obama a conselrvative. It is really all smoke and mirrors, why is why I tend to follow politics through the lens of figuring out how they are using both parties to benefit the rich in an impressive global masquerade.

I personally do not think I have seen you drag on that many Liberals but I believe you. I can see you doing it more than a few others.

Also, I am not a "Conservative", I just vote that way. Though I am drifting farther away from Libertarianism as I am attempting to synthasize all good aspects each party has to offer over time. I am technically a old school right leaning Liberal. Like, I am not against affordable health care, just every proposition is absolutely retarded that comes out, with the intentional loopholes put in by the rich indirectly through connections in DC, to make more money.

Serious question - are you a Qanon believer?

Incidentally I've read Mike Lofgren's books, I don't disagree with much of his assessment.

 

[Maou]

Serious question - are you a Qanon believer?

Incidentally I've also read Mike Lofgren's books, I don't disagree with much of his assessment.

Qanon is silly, even by my standards. There have been incidences of FBI leakd on 4chan though, so I would not be surprised if the original one was real, but the other stuff just seems like cultish bullshit.

 

[Coriolis]

Also, I am not a "Conservative", I just vote that way.

Likewise, I am not a "Liberal", I just have often voted that way.

 

[ceecee]

Qanon is silly, even by my standards. There have been incidences of FBI leakd on 4chan though, so I would not be surprised if the original one was real, but the other stuff just seems like cultish bullshit.

Then you are just familiar with and believe in the "deep state"?

The reason I'm asking is because there is a tremendously marked difference between what GOP and Trump sycophants call "the deep state" and what the person who created the phrase classify it as. I hear some use this term frequently so I started asking if they had read Mike Lofgren's essay or books.

 

[Maou]

Then you are just familiar with and believe in the "deep state"?

The reason I'm asking is because there is a tremendously marked difference between what GOP and Trump sycophants call "the deep state" and what the person who created the phrase classify it as. I hear some use this term frequently so I started asking if they had read Mike Lofgren's essay or books.

My definition and belief in the deep state is entirely organic, and from my own experiences and understanding of politics. As I think its common sense to assume manipulation in everything human, especially when it comes to power. I did not aquire the idea from anyone else, and had it since high school. I had not read Mike Lofgren's book, as I do not tend to consume political media as I strongly prefer to form my own conclusions with the information I aquire myself. I feel there is enough evidence to prove the deep state exists too, eventually it will come to light.

 

[ceecee]

My definition and belief in the deep state is entirely organic, and from my own experiences and understanding of politics. As I think its common sense to assume manipulation in everything human, especially when it comes to power. I did not aquire the idea from anyone else, and had it since high school. I had not read Mike Lofgren's book, as I do not tend to consume political media as I strongly prefer to form my own conclusions with the information I aquire myself. I feel there is enough evidence to prove the deep state exists too, eventually it will come to light.

Mike Lofgren - Wikipedia

I wouldn't call this "political media". At all.

I want you to be taken seriously but for most people, when you say you blame the "deep state" that's an automatic conspiracy theory crazy tag. Therefore it's helpful to understand the the phrase that you use rather frequently in your posts here. Because the actual "deep state" as a theory is anything but crazy conspiracy Alex Jones drooling gibberish.

 

[Maou]

Mike Lofgren - Wikipedia

I wouldn't call this "political media". At all.

I want you to be taken seriously but for most people, when you say you blame the "deep state" that's an automatic conspiracy theory crazy tag. Therefore it's helpful to understand the the phrase that you use rather frequently in your posts here. Because the actual "deep state" as a theory is anything but crazy conspiracy Alex Jones drooling gibberish.

Is there any appropriate label other than that? Maybe shadow government, or the 1%? Maybe rich oligarch nobles? Conspiracy theories or not, I think it is a nice word to describe it.

 

[ceecee]

Is there any appropriate label other than that? Maybe shadow government, or the 1%? Maybe rich oligarch nobles? Conspiracy theories or not, I think it is a nice word to describe it.

Plutocracy is a better definition, more truthful and very concrete.

 

[Maou]

Plutocracy is a better definition, more truthful and very concrete.

Oh, I seen you or someone else throw that around earlier, That does seem like a good word. If I remember I will use it in place of Deep state.

 

[ceecee]

Oh, I seen you or someone else throw that around earlier, That does seem like a good word. If I remember I will use it in place of Deep state.

Great. It's not a political word either. It's existed for centuries.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Some posts in this thread have simplistic logic in them.


Overpopulation isn't simply related to the number of people born. Instead it is more of a equation that involves the number of people born, their lifestyle and amount of resources that are available. Therefore in theory you can have 0 births and still have pretty obvious overpopulation.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Lark]

Some posts in this thread have simplistic logic in them.


Overpopulation isn't simply related to the number of people born. Instead it is more of a equation that involves the number of people born, their lifestyle and amount of resources that are available. Therefore in theory you can have 0 births and still have pretty obvious overpopulation.

Yeah, the planet can support the masses of third world people living third world lifestyles that most people worry about in the developed world no problem.

It probably cant afford too many more billionaires though.

 

[Nicodemus]

It might suprise you, but I care a lot about the enviroment.

Then how can you support a president who rips apart all measures to protect it?

 

[Maou]

Then how can you support a president who rips apart all measures to protect it?

Because I also do not feel it right to destroy the livelihoods of people to do so. A lot of "green" policies hurt the economy, instead of striking a balance. I feel much of the solutions are just there to make people feel like thy did the right thing while the Plutocracy laughs all the way to the bank with government subsidy money. A good example is California's straw ban. The "alternatives" still come in plastic, and more at that. Then cannot forget the blackouts and what it did.

I have seen some green laws that worked wonderfully though. Such as commercial fishing only being allowed for a few hours during the migration in alaska to allow wildlife to thrive, instead of being over fished by the boats. I have seen new inventions to clean up trash in the ocean in the past two years too. These are the green things I like, and I also support renewable energy, but only if its cost effective without permanent government subsidies. The point of a subsidy is to get it off its feet, not keep it going.

As for Trump, I feel he simply dismantled an economic bottleneck on enviromental factors that were not as bad as people thought. Carbon emmissions are not as much of a concern as deforestation. Fracking and drilling doesn't cause as much damage as strip mining for lithium. Sure everything we do harms the enviroment, But I don't feel we should kill our selves trying to do everything. Planting trees and having more marine reserves is the best option, while cleaning up trash. Also, India, Africa, and China are severe pollutors and should be helped in learning to maintain a clean enviroment.

 

[The Cat]

Oh my fucking goodness. Goodnight everybody.

 

[Nicodemus]

Because I also do not feel it right to destroy the livelihoods of people to do so.

That is a false dilemma.

 

[The Cat]

Historically it's usually ideology that handles a lot of population control. Also fashion. Especially in the last few centuries. I'm thinking now we're adding fake food and socially manipulative entertainment into the mix. It's still Largely ideological aspects that really get people to arm themselves against each other though.