The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Peter Singer on How Political Correctness Let African Population Growth Run Amok for a Generation
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Princeton philosopher Peter Singer writes on the roots of why the world wasted the last 23 years in not dealing seriously with the looming African population disaster:

Rethinking the Population Taboo

… The outrage evoked by Macron’s remark, however, appears to have little to do with its inaccuracy. Macron violated a taboo that has been in place since the International Conference on Population and Development, held under the auspices of the UN in Cairo in 1994. The conference adopted a Programme of Action that rejected a demographically driven approach to population policies, and instead focused on meeting the reproductive-health needs of individuals, especially women. Population targets were out; rights were in.

That approach prevailed at several subsequent meetings. It influenced the outcome of the Millennium Summit, which set global development goals for the 2000-2015 period, and is reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals, which set the agenda until 2030. Among its 17 goals and 169 specific targets, the SDGs include references to family planning and reproductive rights, in the context of women’s health and gender equality. One searches in vain for any suggestion that it might be appropriate, or wise, to seek to influence the number of children women choose to have, let alone to consider whether continued rapid population growth in some regions may be incompatible with the goal of sustainable development. Since the Cairo conference, such proposals have been portrayed as colonialist and patriarchal, if not racist. White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

 
Hide 69 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    FIRST bitchas!

    Read More
    • Troll: EriK
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/peter-singer-on-how-political-correctness-let-african-population-growth-run-amok-for-a-generation/#comment-1957508
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. AM says:

    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    Actually, they shouldn’t.

    And even if they should, it doesn’t work anyway. We’ve tried that one.

    Steve – the link the post is to the OJ Reuters polling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    If white men are going to find themselves responsible for these babies, perhaps they should have the right to say what they need to say.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. White men should not be telling black women not to have babies

    If white men can handle being told what they can say, I think black women can handle being told what to do.

    Read More
    • Agree: Ace, MBlanc46, lavoisier
    • LOL: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Cuold well be, that white men, who are told what to say to black women tend to shut up alltogether. Maybe the whole problem is, that white men have already become much more of a snowflake than anything else. Maybe the world hasn't gotten yet that being a snowflake is white in a way, that's not to be liked at all.

    If this is all so, how come, isteve still exists. And the brave Singer-man, too, and some wide awoke (C. Oberst) women. Melinda Gates and her family-planing activities in Africa.

    How white is the Catholic church? The pope? How white is it, to be emphatic? Be fruitful and multiply.
    Could it be, that white men, with their atom bombs, are afraid, that their world might not be sustainable, and that therefor they need to sustain an all natural pre-atom bomb seperate reality down there in Africa?

    Philosophical musings on an overcast sunday morning in August, between the lake and the mountains.

    Peter Singer is a lot, but he for sure is no expert in human psychology. That makes him immune to the musings of the SJW-crowd - and vice versa?

    All in all, I praise your optimism; and Singer's witty catch phrase.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Hubbub says:

    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    White Man: For God’s sake, Black Women, do not have any more babies!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. George says:

    Maybe the out of control population growth is a by product of looting Africa. Since all capital will be looted or destroyed children are the only viable investment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @3g4me
    @5 George: We wuz kangz, and evil whitey done stole our stuff. Take a number and get in line, sugartits.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. AM says:

    If white men can handle being told what they can say, I think black women can handle being told what to do.

    White men are letting themselves be told what they can say to a certain extent.

    It doesn’t matter anyway. Wagging fingers about environmental concerns and family size is mostly to wholly ineffective in Africa. It’s probably why the progressive do-gooders dropped it for rights in the first place. It’s not like they’re known for persistence in the face of absolute failure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    In case anyone isn’t clear about this, in context Singer is describing, not endorsing, this viewpoint. The article is largely sympathetic to Macron’s common sense point that Sub-Saharan Africa’s high fertility rates are a problem to be remedied.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.”

    Then don’t expect white men to pick up the tab for them, either.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
    That be racis'.

    Actually, many so-called conservatives, particularly of the religious variety, endorse the high birthrate of Africans. They count on foreign aid and continued improvement in agricultural technology to keep mass starvation at bay. They also call on "freedom" and honest government to unleash the alleged ability of Africans to improve their own condition.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. *Yawn*

    You have bombs, Molon Labe, since you can’t, go eat a nothingburger and mind your own business or better yet have your own babies.

    The lost virility of your men bothers you, I understand, but this projection is starting to come off as womanish.

    Macron, accomplished smart guy WILL HAVE NO CHILDREN, and he’s not alone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Billions and billions of Black bodies grown by Whites with their food shipments and medicine, where will all this go, where will it end? When Will it End? Insanity until Darwin steps in. Will the Good White architects live to see the monuments to their moral virtue? Big piles of Black bodies on the horizon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. utu says:

    Global warming concerns absolve political correctness sins. Even puppies can be blamed.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4757584/Study-reveals-environmental-impact-keeping-pets.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Truth is says:

    Bill Gates bares a huge responsibility for the over population of Africans. Over the last 2 decades the Gates Foundation have poured billions into Africa to help eradicate deadly diseases like malaria, polio, AIDS etc., which served as natural population control for Africa. African women had 7-9 babies each because they expected half of their babies to not survive to adulthood. Thanks to the Gates Foundation and all their good work, the last 2 decades all/most African babies have survived to adulthood. Those first babies saved by Bill Gates are now in their 20s, but found themselves vastly unemployed. Turns out Gates only made sure they survived, he didn’t think what would come next which is they’ll need education and jobs. Oops! This is now directly resulting in the migrant crisis in Europe.

    Old habits die hard. Even now that all their babies are surviving, African women continue to have their 7-9 babies, hence the population explosion. Instead of giving them medicine, Gates should’ve been handing out birth control. Now Europe gets to reap the reward of Gates’ thoughtless philanthropy. Steve Jobs was right about Gates. A man of vision and foresight he is not. Now he should use the remainder of his $90 billions to feed and clothe Africa’s surplus population to all eternity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    Handing out birth control devices in Africa is like handing out guns to liberals. Not much point to it unless there's an epiphany about the uses for either.

    Most if not all of the problems of SS Africa will not be solved by an approach that begins with the words "pretty please." U.S. problems with black dysfunction, illegal immigrants and Muslims won't be either, but that's another story. No matter. Mr. Reality and Ms. Arithmetic will reorder things soon enough. Herb Stein has the story.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Singer is also in favor of infanticide, so I am not looking to him for moral guidance on anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J1234

    Singer is also in favor of infanticide, so I am not looking to him for moral guidance on anything.
     
    Very true. Singer said, "killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living."

    Not exactly the sort of person you want on y0ur side of the population control argument. He certainly must know that someone with pro-infanticide views could only hurt the case for population control. Couldn't he? The stupidity of leftist academics never ceases to amaze me.

    (Stupidity...or deviousness.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Dr. X says:

    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    Unless, of course, those white men are paying for the black babies via taxes and welfare because the baby daddy disappears or goes to prison…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. The stuff I’ve read by Singer reminds me of Ayn Rand. Not because they are ideologically similar (they aren’t at all) but because they seem like they espouse opinions generated by a computer. There’s an inherent “pure” logic to their thoughts leading them to make interesting observations and arguments (like Singer in this case) but their disregard for human norms leads them astray to really weird places (look at Singer’s views on bestiality or infanticide or the way Ayn Rand began her relationship with Nathaniel Bradford to get what I mean).

    Read More
    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    Indeed, I always thought Asperger's syndrome should be renamed Rand's syndrome.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    the way Ayn Rand began her relationship with Nathaniel Bradford
     
    Branden! Branden!

    It anagrams most appropriately to "ben Rand".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    If I read this correctly, what Singer seems to be saying is that white men SHOULD be telling black women not to have babies, but that slightly more manly white men than himself (like Emmanuel Macron) should do the saying.

    (It is and probably should be a shocking fact, but in truth there are many gradations of white men less manly than Emmanuel Macron and even Peter Singer.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    A rare outbreak of common sense amongst the left.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Actually, elitist thinking on this matter, (The Economist magazine is always your bellwether trusty guide), is that Africa’s population growth is the ‘best thing ever’ for boosting global GDP.
    The theory is that *once* the Africans (*all* 4 billion of them) are transported to the magic dirt of Europe and north America, ‘economic growth’ will magically follow, greatly increasing the world’s economic output.

    No. I’m not making this up. It is *THE* current economic orthodoxy amongst the political class, the foolish slaves of The Economist that they are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Antonymous
    Yes I think that's where they're getting estimates of $78 trillion in additional wealth with mass african outmigration. http://worldif.economist.com/article/13532/78-trillion-free-lunch

    How could ANYONE not want to partake in that future? What's unmentioned of course is the $78 trillion from resource extraction flows to multi-nationals and govt/banking elites. And if we're supremely dishonest (and the Economist is), we'll consider unproductive immigrants to be a good thing -- we're wasting money on welfare, housing, education, and prisons, which increases annual GDP! Bravo.

    It's like another Economist shibboleth, the "End of Poverty!", which entails that subsistence farmers and hunter-gatherers on their ancestral lands will be removed, sheltered in make-shift shantytowns. But they'll be earning more than $1/day! How could anyone be against that humanitarian gesture, which happens to repeat the colonial land grabs on steroids? The left is so busy looking in the rearview mirror they overlook the present-day wealth extraction. In fact they side with the very multi-national interests forcing Africans off their lands.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Desiderius
    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies

    If white men can handle being told what they can say, I think black women can handle being told what to do.

    Cuold well be, that white men, who are told what to say to black women tend to shut up alltogether. Maybe the whole problem is, that white men have already become much more of a snowflake than anything else. Maybe the world hasn’t gotten yet that being a snowflake is white in a way, that’s not to be liked at all.

    If this is all so, how come, isteve still exists. And the brave Singer-man, too, and some wide awoke (C. Oberst) women. Melinda Gates and her family-planing activities in Africa.

    How white is the Catholic church? The pope? How white is it, to be emphatic? Be fruitful and multiply.
    Could it be, that white men, with their atom bombs, are afraid, that their world might not be sustainable, and that therefor they need to sustain an all natural pre-atom bomb seperate reality down there in Africa?

    Philosophical musings on an overcast sunday morning in August, between the lake and the mountains.

    Peter Singer is a lot, but he for sure is no expert in human psychology. That makes him immune to the musings of the SJW-crowd – and vice versa?

    All in all, I praise your optimism; and Singer’s witty catch phrase.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Wilkey says:

    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    Fine then. I won’t tell them not to have babies if they won’t tell us we have to allow a huge fraction of those black babies into our countries.

    If you promise me they’ll all stay home then I’ll be more than happy to shut my big fat yap. No more mansplaining nor whitesplaining will I do.

    20 million. That’s the netnumber of people Africa added, on average, each year from 2000-2015. The United States and Europe could take in 20 million African migrants/”refugees” and it would only address one single year of African population growth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The real point is that the power people, those with monopoly control of political power in western nations, The Economist editorial board, the whole goddamn political class in other words, is *absolutely and completely fanatically* DETERMINED to institute 'free', (that is, in plain English, to invite all 4 21st century billion black Africans), into the 'west', because, as they never cease ranting and hectoring, doing so would 'boost world output by trillions of dollars'.

    That is the *real* enemy.
    , @a reader

    20 million. That’s the netnumber of people Africa added, on average, each year from 2000-2015.
     
    That's roughly 55,000 births day in day out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @AM

    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.
     
    Actually, they shouldn't.

    And even if they should, it doesn't work anyway. We've tried that one.

    Steve - the link the post is to the OJ Reuters polling.

    If white men are going to find themselves responsible for these babies, perhaps they should have the right to say what they need to say.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Open-hearted liberal
    As a truly open hearted liberal I do sympathise with feminists and I certainly see the utility of feminism. I am actually a very strong feminist in many situations. Perhaps in Africa.

    Indeed when I hear about feminism I think of the Israel Palestine conflict. Anyway, at root, the conflict is so hard to solve because many Israelis want the Palestinians to disappear and many Palestinians want the Israelis to disappear. There isn't a lot of common ground.

    Now Israel has essentially won militarily and with technology but they cannot actually close the deal. You see the problem is that there were about 1 million Palestinian Arabs in 1948, the year of Israeli independence, while now there are in total over 12 million. They had a lot of kids.

    This means that Israel cannot accept living in the same state with all of them. It would mean their end. 12 million Palestinians would outvote 6 million Israelis and Israel would disappear.

    So I can't help with hindsight thinking, and I'll get to the point, that if the Israelis had been very smart then in 1948 they would have secretly pushed and funded Palestinian feminism. 'Gender equality' 'rape culture' 'equal pay' 'intersectionality' 'trans stuff' - the whole shebang. That would have been really great and I'd be a total feminist for that. It would have been genious.

    As that would mean they the Israelis would probably have fewer than 1 million Palestinians not 12 million to deal with by now and there'd be no issue. The 1948 1 million would have barely had any kids. Look at what is happening and has happened to all countries that have adopted feminism as a reigning plank of elite ideology over the last 50 years. Their people are disappearing and being replaced.

    Israel could then have simply sent in some of their 6 million people as migrants into the West Bank and eventually voted the Palestinian land for themselves while waiting for Palestinians to (not) breed themselves out of existence. Easy.

    So don't dismiss feminism. It is pretty amazing.
    , @Bob Smith of Suburbia
    Rights? For whites?

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

    Welcome to the 21st Century.
    , @Anonymous
    Perhaps, one day, the left will legally mandate that every white man impregnate a black African woman.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @Anonymous
    If white men are going to find themselves responsible for these babies, perhaps they should have the right to say what they need to say.

    As a truly open hearted liberal I do sympathise with feminists and I certainly see the utility of feminism. I am actually a very strong feminist in many situations. Perhaps in Africa.

    Indeed when I hear about feminism I think of the Israel Palestine conflict. Anyway, at root, the conflict is so hard to solve because many Israelis want the Palestinians to disappear and many Palestinians want the Israelis to disappear. There isn’t a lot of common ground.

    Now Israel has essentially won militarily and with technology but they cannot actually close the deal. You see the problem is that there were about 1 million Palestinian Arabs in 1948, the year of Israeli independence, while now there are in total over 12 million. They had a lot of kids.

    This means that Israel cannot accept living in the same state with all of them. It would mean their end. 12 million Palestinians would outvote 6 million Israelis and Israel would disappear.

    So I can’t help with hindsight thinking, and I’ll get to the point, that if the Israelis had been very smart then in 1948 they would have secretly pushed and funded Palestinian feminism. ‘Gender equality’ ‘rape culture’ ‘equal pay’ ‘intersectionality’ ‘trans stuff’ – the whole shebang. That would have been really great and I’d be a total feminist for that. It would have been genious.

    As that would mean they the Israelis would probably have fewer than 1 million Palestinians not 12 million to deal with by now and there’d be no issue. The 1948 1 million would have barely had any kids. Look at what is happening and has happened to all countries that have adopted feminism as a reigning plank of elite ideology over the last 50 years. Their people are disappearing and being replaced.

    Israel could then have simply sent in some of their 6 million people as migrants into the West Bank and eventually voted the Palestinian land for themselves while waiting for Palestinians to (not) breed themselves out of existence. Easy.

    So don’t dismiss feminism. It is pretty amazing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    WTF does feminism have to do with Israel and the Palestinians?
    , @Ace
    You have commendable faith in the destructive power of feminism but while Muslims are stupid enough to embrace Islam (or have a justifiable fear of being killed if they don't) they are not so stupid as to embrace feminism. Only whites are that moronic.
    , @Frau Katze
    Yasser Arafat wasn't stupid. He deliberately encouraged big families, saying they would win demographically.

    However, after a while, Palestinian women (and men) stopped listening.

    Others worried about falling birth rates in their countries include Erdogan (Turkey) and the Iranian leaders.

    Erdogan is particularly concerned that the Kurdish birth rate is higher than the Turks. He hates Kurds. But last I read, the birth rate of Turks hasn't increased.

    The Iranians also have large numbers of non-Persians living in Iran.

    But they are also now facing environmental problems, like running out of water in places.

    There's a lake between Iran and Azerbaijan that's drying up, like the Aral Sea. They've dammed every river in the area.

    And large parts of rest of Iran are deserts. I'm not sure if the birth rate has increased or not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. anon says: • Disclaimer

    So why does Singer get to notice?

    There is a hierarchy of taboos. And Sustainability is at the top.

    I spent some time on a college campus a few years ago, and that was the most striking theme — everywhere there was a course with ‘sustainability’ in its title or subtitle.

    Global warming which is now ‘climate change’ (just in case we get global cooling) is derivative of sustainability.

    It’s pretty obvious that you would ruin the planet if the population of Niger were living large like Americans. Much less the Chinese, who were ‘emerging’ into the developed world’s standard of living.

    Peak oil was part of the hysteria. But that was simply a version of how sustainability is accomplished. Peak oil theory was the notion that oil shortages would inevitably lead to ruinous oil prices with a catastrophic collapse of developed economies. Now it seems like peak oil will be like peak coal. It will just happen without anyone noticing. This year, the UK generates zero electricity from coal. Coal generated electricity has peaked in the US. The rest of the world? We will see — China is still dumping dirty coal based commodities on global markets. Regardless — the story isn’t very compelling without catastrophic resource pricing.

    $140 oil was the story of the 00′s and it was in everyone’s face and couldn’t be denied. $40 oil is the story of the mid teens and hasn’t been digested yet. The Middle East needs markets for its oil more than the developed world needs Middle Eastern oil. Especially the US, which can now easily produce all the petroleum it needs. The Neocon idea was to use force. But the yet to emerge geo political idea is we don’t need them.

    But the key thing is that Africa is unsustainable. The plan to make it sustainable by pushing the ‘rights’ of its women to reproductive health has failed.

    The old sustainability story was the fat, lazy, immoral west led by the US hogging all the oil and producing carbon. And a million variants of it. But really, the underlying notion was ‘sustainability’.

    And additionally, you end up with sustainability — the real issue is just how painful it will be. And Who/Whom.

    A decade ago, people believed that we could get little African school children laptop computers and digital equality would fix something/anything. Now no one under 30 bothers with computers, they all have cell phones — including Africans. And it doesn’t matter.

    Africa isn’t sustainable. We can now shout it. Even better. A lefty philosopher is blurting it out and no one is disagreeing. At least once it gets reframed as Sustainability instead of social justice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    We are on the cusp of a game changing technological revolution regarding 'energy' which has the potential of the 'micro-chip' revolution of the 1970s.
    Likely, next generation batteries will surpass the performance of IC engines, in the next decade or two, and thusly electric cars - which beat hollow conventional vehicles in terms of simplicity, maintenance, acceleration characteristics etc, not to mention emissions, will effectively 'sell themselves' and wipeout conventional cars the same way digital cameras did film cameras.

    Already solar cells have collapsed in price, and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy. Add in wind turbines to the mix.

    Possibly we are looking a largely 'renewable' powered-world, something I would have dismissed as pie in the sky merely a few years back.
    New, safer, more efficient designs of nuclear reactor are also to be considered.

    The potential geo-political implications are enormous.


    The main point is that technological innovation, and certainly not uncontrolled mass immigration, is the *only* driver of economic growth.
    , @Nigerian Nationalist
    Good thing we "huddled masses" have a fuck ton of sustainable space to move into.

    Malthusian enthusiasts like you said same about England, Ireland, France, Asia e.t.c. You are always wrong, but why give up, amirite??
    , @TomSchmidt
    "Especially the US, which can now easily produce all the petroleum it needs."

    Why do we produce only half our needs, then?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Anonymous
    If white men are going to find themselves responsible for these babies, perhaps they should have the right to say what they need to say.

    Rights? For whites?

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

    Welcome to the 21st Century.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. sb says:

    Can this be the same Australian philosopher Peter Singer who once stood as a Green candidate for the Australian Parliament ?
    The Australian Greens are a 100% Open Borders outfit . Never been known to mention overpopulation .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Wilkey
    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    Fine then. I won't tell them not to have babies if they won't tell us we have to allow a huge fraction of those black babies into our countries.

    If you promise me they'll all stay home then I'll be more than happy to shut my big fat yap. No more mansplaining nor whitesplaining will I do.

    20 million. That's the netnumber of people Africa added, on average, each year from 2000-2015. The United States and Europe could take in 20 million African migrants/"refugees" and it would only address one single year of African population growth.

    The real point is that the power people, those with monopoly control of political power in western nations, The Economist editorial board, the whole goddamn political class in other words, is *absolutely and completely fanatically* DETERMINED to institute ‘free’, (that is, in plain English, to invite all 4 21st century billion black Africans), into the ‘west’, because, as they never cease ranting and hectoring, doing so would ‘boost world output by trillions of dollars’.

    That is the *real* enemy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @anon
    So why does Singer get to notice?

    There is a hierarchy of taboos. And Sustainability is at the top.

    I spent some time on a college campus a few years ago, and that was the most striking theme -- everywhere there was a course with 'sustainability' in its title or subtitle.

    Global warming which is now 'climate change' (just in case we get global cooling) is derivative of sustainability.

    It's pretty obvious that you would ruin the planet if the population of Niger were living large like Americans. Much less the Chinese, who were 'emerging' into the developed world's standard of living.

    Peak oil was part of the hysteria. But that was simply a version of how sustainability is accomplished. Peak oil theory was the notion that oil shortages would inevitably lead to ruinous oil prices with a catastrophic collapse of developed economies. Now it seems like peak oil will be like peak coal. It will just happen without anyone noticing. This year, the UK generates zero electricity from coal. Coal generated electricity has peaked in the US. The rest of the world? We will see -- China is still dumping dirty coal based commodities on global markets. Regardless -- the story isn't very compelling without catastrophic resource pricing.

    $140 oil was the story of the 00's and it was in everyone's face and couldn't be denied. $40 oil is the story of the mid teens and hasn't been digested yet. The Middle East needs markets for its oil more than the developed world needs Middle Eastern oil. Especially the US, which can now easily produce all the petroleum it needs. The Neocon idea was to use force. But the yet to emerge geo political idea is we don't need them.

    But the key thing is that Africa is unsustainable. The plan to make it sustainable by pushing the 'rights' of its women to reproductive health has failed.

    The old sustainability story was the fat, lazy, immoral west led by the US hogging all the oil and producing carbon. And a million variants of it. But really, the underlying notion was 'sustainability'.

    And additionally, you end up with sustainability -- the real issue is just how painful it will be. And Who/Whom.

    A decade ago, people believed that we could get little African school children laptop computers and digital equality would fix something/anything. Now no one under 30 bothers with computers, they all have cell phones -- including Africans. And it doesn't matter.

    Africa isn't sustainable. We can now shout it. Even better. A lefty philosopher is blurting it out and no one is disagreeing. At least once it gets reframed as Sustainability instead of social justice.

    We are on the cusp of a game changing technological revolution regarding ‘energy’ which has the potential of the ‘micro-chip’ revolution of the 1970s.
    Likely, next generation batteries will surpass the performance of IC engines, in the next decade or two, and thusly electric cars – which beat hollow conventional vehicles in terms of simplicity, maintenance, acceleration characteristics etc, not to mention emissions, will effectively ‘sell themselves’ and wipeout conventional cars the same way digital cameras did film cameras.

    Already solar cells have collapsed in price, and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy. Add in wind turbines to the mix.

    Possibly we are looking a largely ‘renewable’ powered-world, something I would have dismissed as pie in the sky merely a few years back.
    New, safer, more efficient designs of nuclear reactor are also to be considered.

    The potential geo-political implications are enormous.

    The main point is that technological innovation, and certainly not uncontrolled mass immigration, is the *only* driver of economic growth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Toyota's hybrid version of its conventional Camry family sedan is increasing from 40 MPG in 2017 to 52 MPG in 2018.
    , @Jim Don Bob

    ...and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy ...
     
    Just where is this true?
    , @Jack Hanson
    These are some rather impressive assertions to make sans a single link.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    If white men are going to find themselves responsible for these babies, perhaps they should have the right to say what they need to say.

    Perhaps, one day, the left will legally mandate that every white man impregnate a black African woman.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @anon
    So why does Singer get to notice?

    There is a hierarchy of taboos. And Sustainability is at the top.

    I spent some time on a college campus a few years ago, and that was the most striking theme -- everywhere there was a course with 'sustainability' in its title or subtitle.

    Global warming which is now 'climate change' (just in case we get global cooling) is derivative of sustainability.

    It's pretty obvious that you would ruin the planet if the population of Niger were living large like Americans. Much less the Chinese, who were 'emerging' into the developed world's standard of living.

    Peak oil was part of the hysteria. But that was simply a version of how sustainability is accomplished. Peak oil theory was the notion that oil shortages would inevitably lead to ruinous oil prices with a catastrophic collapse of developed economies. Now it seems like peak oil will be like peak coal. It will just happen without anyone noticing. This year, the UK generates zero electricity from coal. Coal generated electricity has peaked in the US. The rest of the world? We will see -- China is still dumping dirty coal based commodities on global markets. Regardless -- the story isn't very compelling without catastrophic resource pricing.

    $140 oil was the story of the 00's and it was in everyone's face and couldn't be denied. $40 oil is the story of the mid teens and hasn't been digested yet. The Middle East needs markets for its oil more than the developed world needs Middle Eastern oil. Especially the US, which can now easily produce all the petroleum it needs. The Neocon idea was to use force. But the yet to emerge geo political idea is we don't need them.

    But the key thing is that Africa is unsustainable. The plan to make it sustainable by pushing the 'rights' of its women to reproductive health has failed.

    The old sustainability story was the fat, lazy, immoral west led by the US hogging all the oil and producing carbon. And a million variants of it. But really, the underlying notion was 'sustainability'.

    And additionally, you end up with sustainability -- the real issue is just how painful it will be. And Who/Whom.

    A decade ago, people believed that we could get little African school children laptop computers and digital equality would fix something/anything. Now no one under 30 bothers with computers, they all have cell phones -- including Africans. And it doesn't matter.

    Africa isn't sustainable. We can now shout it. Even better. A lefty philosopher is blurting it out and no one is disagreeing. At least once it gets reframed as Sustainability instead of social justice.

    Good thing we “huddled masses” have a fuck ton of sustainable space to move into.

    Malthusian enthusiasts like you said same about England, Ireland, France, Asia e.t.c. You are always wrong, but why give up, amirite??

    Read More
    • Replies: @3g4me
    @29 Nigerian Nationalist: You have to go back. Go home, Nigerian, and preach to your own people.
    , @Ace
    The Sahara and the Congo have enormous potential. I say go for it. Show us how it's done. You'll need white capital and expertise I'm sure but I'm sure something can be worked out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Anonymous
    We are on the cusp of a game changing technological revolution regarding 'energy' which has the potential of the 'micro-chip' revolution of the 1970s.
    Likely, next generation batteries will surpass the performance of IC engines, in the next decade or two, and thusly electric cars - which beat hollow conventional vehicles in terms of simplicity, maintenance, acceleration characteristics etc, not to mention emissions, will effectively 'sell themselves' and wipeout conventional cars the same way digital cameras did film cameras.

    Already solar cells have collapsed in price, and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy. Add in wind turbines to the mix.

    Possibly we are looking a largely 'renewable' powered-world, something I would have dismissed as pie in the sky merely a few years back.
    New, safer, more efficient designs of nuclear reactor are also to be considered.

    The potential geo-political implications are enormous.


    The main point is that technological innovation, and certainly not uncontrolled mass immigration, is the *only* driver of economic growth.

    Toyota’s hybrid version of its conventional Camry family sedan is increasing from 40 MPG in 2017 to 52 MPG in 2018.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I know very very little about sunny Southern California.
    But, I do know, that if the calculations are done correctly, on a sunny day enough sunlight streams onto a 'typical' southern Californian domestic roof to 'power the car'.
    Tesla are moving big time into this by 'inventing' the 'electric roof tile', (an altogether more aesthetic version of the familiar solar array), and by marketing a heavy-duty LiOn domestic storage battery.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Anonymous
    "White men should not be telling black women not to have babies."

    Then don't expect white men to pick up the tab for them, either.

    That be racis’.

    Actually, many so-called conservatives, particularly of the religious variety, endorse the high birthrate of Africans. They count on foreign aid and continued improvement in agricultural technology to keep mass starvation at bay. They also call on “freedom” and honest government to unleash the alleged ability of Africans to improve their own condition.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Steve Sailer
    Toyota's hybrid version of its conventional Camry family sedan is increasing from 40 MPG in 2017 to 52 MPG in 2018.

    I know very very little about sunny Southern California.
    But, I do know, that if the calculations are done correctly, on a sunny day enough sunlight streams onto a ‘typical’ southern Californian domestic roof to ‘power the car’.
    Tesla are moving big time into this by ‘inventing’ the ‘electric roof tile’, (an altogether more aesthetic version of the familiar solar array), and by marketing a heavy-duty LiOn domestic storage battery.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Flip says:

    I am starting to like this Macron guy. I like how he got rid of the general who complained about budget cuts, saying that he was the boss. He is taking on the antiquated labor laws in France.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. @Open-hearted liberal
    As a truly open hearted liberal I do sympathise with feminists and I certainly see the utility of feminism. I am actually a very strong feminist in many situations. Perhaps in Africa.

    Indeed when I hear about feminism I think of the Israel Palestine conflict. Anyway, at root, the conflict is so hard to solve because many Israelis want the Palestinians to disappear and many Palestinians want the Israelis to disappear. There isn't a lot of common ground.

    Now Israel has essentially won militarily and with technology but they cannot actually close the deal. You see the problem is that there were about 1 million Palestinian Arabs in 1948, the year of Israeli independence, while now there are in total over 12 million. They had a lot of kids.

    This means that Israel cannot accept living in the same state with all of them. It would mean their end. 12 million Palestinians would outvote 6 million Israelis and Israel would disappear.

    So I can't help with hindsight thinking, and I'll get to the point, that if the Israelis had been very smart then in 1948 they would have secretly pushed and funded Palestinian feminism. 'Gender equality' 'rape culture' 'equal pay' 'intersectionality' 'trans stuff' - the whole shebang. That would have been really great and I'd be a total feminist for that. It would have been genious.

    As that would mean they the Israelis would probably have fewer than 1 million Palestinians not 12 million to deal with by now and there'd be no issue. The 1948 1 million would have barely had any kids. Look at what is happening and has happened to all countries that have adopted feminism as a reigning plank of elite ideology over the last 50 years. Their people are disappearing and being replaced.

    Israel could then have simply sent in some of their 6 million people as migrants into the West Bank and eventually voted the Palestinian land for themselves while waiting for Palestinians to (not) breed themselves out of existence. Easy.

    So don't dismiss feminism. It is pretty amazing.

    WTF does feminism have to do with Israel and the Palestinians?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

    WTF does feminism have to do with Israel and the Palestinians?
     
    At least as much, if not a whole lot more, than it does with any other aspect of reality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Anonymous
    We are on the cusp of a game changing technological revolution regarding 'energy' which has the potential of the 'micro-chip' revolution of the 1970s.
    Likely, next generation batteries will surpass the performance of IC engines, in the next decade or two, and thusly electric cars - which beat hollow conventional vehicles in terms of simplicity, maintenance, acceleration characteristics etc, not to mention emissions, will effectively 'sell themselves' and wipeout conventional cars the same way digital cameras did film cameras.

    Already solar cells have collapsed in price, and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy. Add in wind turbines to the mix.

    Possibly we are looking a largely 'renewable' powered-world, something I would have dismissed as pie in the sky merely a few years back.
    New, safer, more efficient designs of nuclear reactor are also to be considered.

    The potential geo-political implications are enormous.


    The main point is that technological innovation, and certainly not uncontrolled mass immigration, is the *only* driver of economic growth.

    …and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy …

    Just where is this true?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The UAE, rather ironically.
    , @Eagle Eye


    …and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy …

     

    Just where is this true?
     
    ON SUNNY DAYS: At the top of Mt. Everest, on a satellite circling the earth, on a sailboat in the middle of the ocean, and in similar remote and sunny locations with no PU-241, diesel or gas-powered electricity supply.

    ON OVERCAST DAYS: Only in extreme locations where residual electricity amounts are still useful, e.g. for emergency functions.

    AT NIGHT: Nowhere.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @anon
    So why does Singer get to notice?

    There is a hierarchy of taboos. And Sustainability is at the top.

    I spent some time on a college campus a few years ago, and that was the most striking theme -- everywhere there was a course with 'sustainability' in its title or subtitle.

    Global warming which is now 'climate change' (just in case we get global cooling) is derivative of sustainability.

    It's pretty obvious that you would ruin the planet if the population of Niger were living large like Americans. Much less the Chinese, who were 'emerging' into the developed world's standard of living.

    Peak oil was part of the hysteria. But that was simply a version of how sustainability is accomplished. Peak oil theory was the notion that oil shortages would inevitably lead to ruinous oil prices with a catastrophic collapse of developed economies. Now it seems like peak oil will be like peak coal. It will just happen without anyone noticing. This year, the UK generates zero electricity from coal. Coal generated electricity has peaked in the US. The rest of the world? We will see -- China is still dumping dirty coal based commodities on global markets. Regardless -- the story isn't very compelling without catastrophic resource pricing.

    $140 oil was the story of the 00's and it was in everyone's face and couldn't be denied. $40 oil is the story of the mid teens and hasn't been digested yet. The Middle East needs markets for its oil more than the developed world needs Middle Eastern oil. Especially the US, which can now easily produce all the petroleum it needs. The Neocon idea was to use force. But the yet to emerge geo political idea is we don't need them.

    But the key thing is that Africa is unsustainable. The plan to make it sustainable by pushing the 'rights' of its women to reproductive health has failed.

    The old sustainability story was the fat, lazy, immoral west led by the US hogging all the oil and producing carbon. And a million variants of it. But really, the underlying notion was 'sustainability'.

    And additionally, you end up with sustainability -- the real issue is just how painful it will be. And Who/Whom.

    A decade ago, people believed that we could get little African school children laptop computers and digital equality would fix something/anything. Now no one under 30 bothers with computers, they all have cell phones -- including Africans. And it doesn't matter.

    Africa isn't sustainable. We can now shout it. Even better. A lefty philosopher is blurting it out and no one is disagreeing. At least once it gets reframed as Sustainability instead of social justice.

    “Especially the US, which can now easily produce all the petroleum it needs.”

    Why do we produce only half our needs, then?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Cause I'm talking about oil and gas and natural gas liquids, not just barrels of oil.

    We have excess natural gas. We are starting to export it -- through liquification and pipelines to Mexicoo.

    US refineries get a processing gain of about 6% from refining imported heavy crude.

    We produce over 4 million barrels a day of liquids.

    On a net basis, we could be at zero. And we are even closer to the lower hurdle of North American independence (including Canada and Mexico).

    If it were important, we could run cars on natural gas or propane and balance our usage and production more closely, but it is inconvenient and there is a glut of oil.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Jim Don Bob

    ...and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy ...
     
    Just where is this true?

    The UAE, rather ironically.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Senator Brundlefly
    The stuff I've read by Singer reminds me of Ayn Rand. Not because they are ideologically similar (they aren't at all) but because they seem like they espouse opinions generated by a computer. There's an inherent "pure" logic to their thoughts leading them to make interesting observations and arguments (like Singer in this case) but their disregard for human norms leads them astray to really weird places (look at Singer's views on bestiality or infanticide or the way Ayn Rand began her relationship with Nathaniel Bradford to get what I mean).

    Indeed, I always thought Asperger’s syndrome should be renamed Rand’s syndrome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Jim Don Bob
    WTF does feminism have to do with Israel and the Palestinians?

    WTF does feminism have to do with Israel and the Palestinians?

    At least as much, if not a whole lot more, than it does with any other aspect of reality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. 3g4me says:
    @George
    Maybe the out of control population growth is a by product of looting Africa. Since all capital will be looted or destroyed children are the only viable investment.

    @5 George: We wuz kangz, and evil whitey done stole our stuff. Take a number and get in line, sugartits.

    Read More
    • LOL: Frau Katze
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. 3g4me says:
    @Nigerian Nationalist
    Good thing we "huddled masses" have a fuck ton of sustainable space to move into.

    Malthusian enthusiasts like you said same about England, Ireland, France, Asia e.t.c. You are always wrong, but why give up, amirite??

    @29 Nigerian Nationalist: You have to go back. Go home, Nigerian, and preach to your own people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nigerian Nationalist
    But I am home, and increasingly successful. Unlike a certain people who have been...failing at convincing their people to care about them.

    How sad is it that your own people care more about strangers than they do you?

    I weep my man, truly, I weep for you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Ace says:
    @Open-hearted liberal
    As a truly open hearted liberal I do sympathise with feminists and I certainly see the utility of feminism. I am actually a very strong feminist in many situations. Perhaps in Africa.

    Indeed when I hear about feminism I think of the Israel Palestine conflict. Anyway, at root, the conflict is so hard to solve because many Israelis want the Palestinians to disappear and many Palestinians want the Israelis to disappear. There isn't a lot of common ground.

    Now Israel has essentially won militarily and with technology but they cannot actually close the deal. You see the problem is that there were about 1 million Palestinian Arabs in 1948, the year of Israeli independence, while now there are in total over 12 million. They had a lot of kids.

    This means that Israel cannot accept living in the same state with all of them. It would mean their end. 12 million Palestinians would outvote 6 million Israelis and Israel would disappear.

    So I can't help with hindsight thinking, and I'll get to the point, that if the Israelis had been very smart then in 1948 they would have secretly pushed and funded Palestinian feminism. 'Gender equality' 'rape culture' 'equal pay' 'intersectionality' 'trans stuff' - the whole shebang. That would have been really great and I'd be a total feminist for that. It would have been genious.

    As that would mean they the Israelis would probably have fewer than 1 million Palestinians not 12 million to deal with by now and there'd be no issue. The 1948 1 million would have barely had any kids. Look at what is happening and has happened to all countries that have adopted feminism as a reigning plank of elite ideology over the last 50 years. Their people are disappearing and being replaced.

    Israel could then have simply sent in some of their 6 million people as migrants into the West Bank and eventually voted the Palestinian land for themselves while waiting for Palestinians to (not) breed themselves out of existence. Easy.

    So don't dismiss feminism. It is pretty amazing.

    You have commendable faith in the destructive power of feminism but while Muslims are stupid enough to embrace Islam (or have a justifiable fear of being killed if they don’t) they are not so stupid as to embrace feminism. Only whites are that moronic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Ace says:
    @Truth is
    Bill Gates bares a huge responsibility for the over population of Africans. Over the last 2 decades the Gates Foundation have poured billions into Africa to help eradicate deadly diseases like malaria, polio, AIDS etc., which served as natural population control for Africa. African women had 7-9 babies each because they expected half of their babies to not survive to adulthood. Thanks to the Gates Foundation and all their good work, the last 2 decades all/most African babies have survived to adulthood. Those first babies saved by Bill Gates are now in their 20s, but found themselves vastly unemployed. Turns out Gates only made sure they survived, he didn't think what would come next which is they'll need education and jobs. Oops! This is now directly resulting in the migrant crisis in Europe.

    Old habits die hard. Even now that all their babies are surviving, African women continue to have their 7-9 babies, hence the population explosion. Instead of giving them medicine, Gates should've been handing out birth control. Now Europe gets to reap the reward of Gates' thoughtless philanthropy. Steve Jobs was right about Gates. A man of vision and foresight he is not. Now he should use the remainder of his $90 billions to feed and clothe Africa's surplus population to all eternity.

    Handing out birth control devices in Africa is like handing out guns to liberals. Not much point to it unless there’s an epiphany about the uses for either.

    Most if not all of the problems of SS Africa will not be solved by an approach that begins with the words “pretty please.” U.S. problems with black dysfunction, illegal immigrants and Muslims won’t be either, but that’s another story. No matter. Mr. Reality and Ms. Arithmetic will reorder things soon enough. Herb Stein has the story.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. a reader says:
    @Wilkey
    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    Fine then. I won't tell them not to have babies if they won't tell us we have to allow a huge fraction of those black babies into our countries.

    If you promise me they'll all stay home then I'll be more than happy to shut my big fat yap. No more mansplaining nor whitesplaining will I do.

    20 million. That's the netnumber of people Africa added, on average, each year from 2000-2015. The United States and Europe could take in 20 million African migrants/"refugees" and it would only address one single year of African population growth.

    20 million. That’s the netnumber of people Africa added, on average, each year from 2000-2015.

    That’s roughly 55,000 births day in day out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. J1234 says:
    @Jim Don Bob
    Singer is also in favor of infanticide, so I am not looking to him for moral guidance on anything.

    Singer is also in favor of infanticide, so I am not looking to him for moral guidance on anything.

    Very true. Singer said, “killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living.”

    Not exactly the sort of person you want on y0ur side of the population control argument. He certainly must know that someone with pro-infanticide views could only hurt the case for population control. Couldn’t he? The stupidity of leftist academics never ceases to amaze me.

    (Stupidity…or deviousness.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat
    The Singer quote is not evidence of support for infanticide. Singer was critical of the decision to deny treatment of British child Charlie Gard's condition.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Ace says:
    @Nigerian Nationalist
    Good thing we "huddled masses" have a fuck ton of sustainable space to move into.

    Malthusian enthusiasts like you said same about England, Ireland, France, Asia e.t.c. You are always wrong, but why give up, amirite??

    The Sahara and the Congo have enormous potential. I say go for it. Show us how it’s done. You’ll need white capital and expertise I’m sure but I’m sure something can be worked out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nigerian Nationalist
    Thanks, Mate, the negativity on here can get tiring. You'll, of course, have to restrain you do-gooders, who to be frank ruin a ton.

    As for "white capital", you mean like the sort the US got? Besides, you'll get your returns on investment, so I fail to see the point...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. IBC says:

    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.

    Is Xi Jinping considered white when he attends these conferences? We know that China’s family planning efforts have had some negative and perhaps preventable side effects, but doesn’t China’s overall experience at least serve as a proof of concept for the general idea that if you reduce population growth while simultaneously growing the economy, the general standard of living will rise? Of course, most sub-Saharan African countries are effectively much more ethnically diverse than China, so many people might view family planning as a sort of zero-sum game: If they don’t have those children, somebody else will, thereby increasing a rival clan/tribe/religious group’s relative strength in national or regional politics.

    Providing better access to birth control and accurate health knowledge goes without saying. But what about trying to influence social attitudes? As more people in Africa get access to TV and movies, what sort of social norms are coming out of Nollywood? And what about some basic form of general social insurance? High fertility is not always about unplanned pregnancies. Traditionally, “Plan B” was to have lots of of children as a sort of insurance policy against sickness and old age. There need to be more credible alternatives, especially now that so many Africans live in megacities.

    Regardless of what happens with emigration, it’s the Africans who are stuck in Africa who have the most to lose from runaway population growth in their own countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nico

    [D]oesn’t China’s overall experience at least serve as a proof of concept for the general idea that if you reduce population growth while simultaneously growing the economy, the general standard of living will rise?
     
    Possibly, although I think we've yet to see the full distance of the negative social fallout you refer to as "side effects" from the One-Child Policy. Mind you, as an ethnically-minded nationalistic Westerner I am tempted to say that I don't particularly care about the health of the Chinese social tissue and that in the event of a zero-sum game I'd mourn rather little if an eventual Sinic/Oriental retreat meant a resurgence for my own kind, and probably not mourn much more if said social rot led to the depopulation and emasculation of subsaharan Africa. Nevertheless I am also interested in the truth, even uncomfortable ones which may provide useful information at some later date.

    Regardless, the more pertinent question is this: what in high heaven would make someone think ANYTHING that works for Chinese society could be applied to like effect in subsaharan Africa?

    What have you been smoking, and where can I get some?

    Providing better access to birth control and accurate health knowledge goes without saying... And what about some basic form of general social insurance?
     
    1. Who's going to pay for the contraceptives, education and social insurance for a billion subsaharan Africans?
    2. When family planning and social insurance have proven difficult and costly to administer in black enclaves within Westerm countries where the white majority can still foot the tab, what makes you think they will be even remotely possible to realize for a billion blacks in Africa?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. What good does it to do tell black women anything, when their husbands may be making all the decisions? They beat them if they won’t have sex, they beat them if they don’t get pregnant, and they beat them if they give birth only to daughters.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. @Anonymous
    We are on the cusp of a game changing technological revolution regarding 'energy' which has the potential of the 'micro-chip' revolution of the 1970s.
    Likely, next generation batteries will surpass the performance of IC engines, in the next decade or two, and thusly electric cars - which beat hollow conventional vehicles in terms of simplicity, maintenance, acceleration characteristics etc, not to mention emissions, will effectively 'sell themselves' and wipeout conventional cars the same way digital cameras did film cameras.

    Already solar cells have collapsed in price, and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy. Add in wind turbines to the mix.

    Possibly we are looking a largely 'renewable' powered-world, something I would have dismissed as pie in the sky merely a few years back.
    New, safer, more efficient designs of nuclear reactor are also to be considered.

    The potential geo-political implications are enormous.


    The main point is that technological innovation, and certainly not uncontrolled mass immigration, is the *only* driver of economic growth.

    These are some rather impressive assertions to make sans a single link.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @TomSchmidt
    "Especially the US, which can now easily produce all the petroleum it needs."

    Why do we produce only half our needs, then?

    Cause I’m talking about oil and gas and natural gas liquids, not just barrels of oil.

    We have excess natural gas. We are starting to export it — through liquification and pipelines to Mexicoo.

    US refineries get a processing gain of about 6% from refining imported heavy crude.

    We produce over 4 million barrels a day of liquids.

    On a net basis, we could be at zero. And we are even closer to the lower hurdle of North American independence (including Canada and Mexico).

    If it were important, we could run cars on natural gas or propane and balance our usage and production more closely, but it is inconvenient and there is a glut of oil.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    Yeah, one forgets about NatGas, all of which, basically, we consume here. Right before fracking, we planned to build gas import terminals off Boston and New Orleans to make up for the inevitable decline. Switching to run cars on NatGas would make a lot of sense. But that's fossil fuels not crude oil.

    EIA says we import only a quarter of our petrol (including liquids that are not crude) total, and that 45% of imports are from Canada and Mexico. So it is conceivable for North America to import nothing from the rest of the world.

    At present, we are 5MMbd short.

    I'd welcome being no barrels short, so we can essentially not worry about the ME at all. Come to think of it, this change probably inflected our ME policy, and will do so more.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Anonymous
    Actually, elitist thinking on this matter, (The Economist magazine is always your bellwether trusty guide), is that Africa's population growth is the 'best thing ever' for boosting global GDP.
    The theory is that *once* the Africans (*all* 4 billion of them) are transported to the magic dirt of Europe and north America, 'economic growth' will magically follow, greatly increasing the world's economic output.

    No. I'm not making this up. It is *THE* current economic orthodoxy amongst the political class, the foolish slaves of The Economist that they are.

    Yes I think that’s where they’re getting estimates of $78 trillion in additional wealth with mass african outmigration. http://worldif.economist.com/article/13532/78-trillion-free-lunch

    How could ANYONE not want to partake in that future? What’s unmentioned of course is the $78 trillion from resource extraction flows to multi-nationals and govt/banking elites. And if we’re supremely dishonest (and the Economist is), we’ll consider unproductive immigrants to be a good thing — we’re wasting money on welfare, housing, education, and prisons, which increases annual GDP! Bravo.

    It’s like another Economist shibboleth, the “End of Poverty!”, which entails that subsistence farmers and hunter-gatherers on their ancestral lands will be removed, sheltered in make-shift shantytowns. But they’ll be earning more than $1/day! How could anyone be against that humanitarian gesture, which happens to repeat the colonial land grabs on steroids? The left is so busy looking in the rearview mirror they overlook the present-day wealth extraction. In fact they side with the very multi-national interests forcing Africans off their lands.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. The iSteve Commentariat again pontificates about how if only we reasoned harder with people who think albino body parts will give then magic powers, we can fix the Africa problem.

    The way you fix the problem of a billion plus feral retards is going to be more palatable than infanticide, but not much else. The upside is that if humanity can muster that kind of triumph of will the sacrifices involved in space colonization are going to seem like small potatoes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. First paragraph at link:

    PRINCETON – At a press conference during last month’s G20 summit in Hamburg, a journalist from the Ivory Coast asked French President Emmanuel Macron why the world’s rich countries have not developed a plan to assist Africa in overcoming its problems, as the United States’ Marshall Plan had aided Europe after World War II.

    This question is really stupid.

    Africa is in perpetual need of help. The Marshall Plan was a one time thing.

    It seems that Ivory Coast reporter is an idiot.

    Hasn’t he noticed how quickly the population is growing?

    We notice how quickly our population is growing–all of it due to immigration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  54. @Open-hearted liberal
    As a truly open hearted liberal I do sympathise with feminists and I certainly see the utility of feminism. I am actually a very strong feminist in many situations. Perhaps in Africa.

    Indeed when I hear about feminism I think of the Israel Palestine conflict. Anyway, at root, the conflict is so hard to solve because many Israelis want the Palestinians to disappear and many Palestinians want the Israelis to disappear. There isn't a lot of common ground.

    Now Israel has essentially won militarily and with technology but they cannot actually close the deal. You see the problem is that there were about 1 million Palestinian Arabs in 1948, the year of Israeli independence, while now there are in total over 12 million. They had a lot of kids.

    This means that Israel cannot accept living in the same state with all of them. It would mean their end. 12 million Palestinians would outvote 6 million Israelis and Israel would disappear.

    So I can't help with hindsight thinking, and I'll get to the point, that if the Israelis had been very smart then in 1948 they would have secretly pushed and funded Palestinian feminism. 'Gender equality' 'rape culture' 'equal pay' 'intersectionality' 'trans stuff' - the whole shebang. That would have been really great and I'd be a total feminist for that. It would have been genious.

    As that would mean they the Israelis would probably have fewer than 1 million Palestinians not 12 million to deal with by now and there'd be no issue. The 1948 1 million would have barely had any kids. Look at what is happening and has happened to all countries that have adopted feminism as a reigning plank of elite ideology over the last 50 years. Their people are disappearing and being replaced.

    Israel could then have simply sent in some of their 6 million people as migrants into the West Bank and eventually voted the Palestinian land for themselves while waiting for Palestinians to (not) breed themselves out of existence. Easy.

    So don't dismiss feminism. It is pretty amazing.

    Yasser Arafat wasn’t stupid. He deliberately encouraged big families, saying they would win demographically.

    However, after a while, Palestinian women (and men) stopped listening.

    Others worried about falling birth rates in their countries include Erdogan (Turkey) and the Iranian leaders.

    Erdogan is particularly concerned that the Kurdish birth rate is higher than the Turks. He hates Kurds. But last I read, the birth rate of Turks hasn’t increased.

    The Iranians also have large numbers of non-Persians living in Iran.

    But they are also now facing environmental problems, like running out of water in places.

    There’s a lake between Iran and Azerbaijan that’s drying up, like the Aral Sea. They’ve dammed every river in the area.

    And large parts of rest of Iran are deserts. I’m not sure if the birth rate has increased or not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Ace
    The Sahara and the Congo have enormous potential. I say go for it. Show us how it's done. You'll need white capital and expertise I'm sure but I'm sure something can be worked out.

    Thanks, Mate, the negativity on here can get tiring. You’ll, of course, have to restrain you do-gooders, who to be frank ruin a ton.

    As for “white capital”, you mean like the sort the US got? Besides, you’ll get your returns on investment, so I fail to see the point…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @3g4me
    @29 Nigerian Nationalist: You have to go back. Go home, Nigerian, and preach to your own people.

    But I am home, and increasingly successful. Unlike a certain people who have been…failing at convincing their people to care about them.

    How sad is it that your own people care more about strangers than they do you?

    I weep my man, truly, I weep for you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. anon says: • Disclaimer

    I looked at the original on Singer’s blog.

    No one seemed at all enraged about the race aspect.

    Singer framed it as a question of sustainability. Although there was some energy around the ecological aspects of an unsustainable population.

    In South Sudan, there is literally competition between tribes. That’s a major incentive to increase population. The theory was that Africa would urbanize and the economics of children would shift and with ‘women’s health’ provided, they would respond like the rest of the world.

    Africa bursting at the seems is bad all around. It’s unsustainable. It contributes to climate change. Even if it has the unintended (and some leftists may think beneficial) consequence of race replacement — all that carbon isn’t worth it.

    I suppose it doesn’t matter what the alt right thinks. But academia has a sustainability fetish and if visions of a few more billions of carbon footprints are the nightmare, all the better. And all those landfills. And they struggle to figure out how to build toilets — much less recycling. Its for the good of the planet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. Pat says:
    @J1234

    Singer is also in favor of infanticide, so I am not looking to him for moral guidance on anything.
     
    Very true. Singer said, "killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living."

    Not exactly the sort of person you want on y0ur side of the population control argument. He certainly must know that someone with pro-infanticide views could only hurt the case for population control. Couldn't he? The stupidity of leftist academics never ceases to amaze me.

    (Stupidity...or deviousness.)

    The Singer quote is not evidence of support for infanticide. Singer was critical of the decision to deny treatment of British child Charlie Gard’s condition.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J1234

    "Infants are sentient beings who are neither rational nor self- conscious. So if we turn to consider the infants in themselves, independently of the attitudes of their parents, since their species is not relevant to their moral status, the principles that govern the wrongness of killing non-human animals who are sentient but not rational or self-conscious must apply here too. As we saw, the most plausible arguments for attributing a right to life to a being apply only if there is some awareness of oneself as a being existing over time, or as a continuing mental self. Nor can respect for autonomy apply where there is no capacity for autonomy. The remaining principles identified in Chapter 4 are utilitarian. Hence the quality of life that the infant can be expected to have is important.

    One relatively common birth disability is a faulty development of the spine known as spina bifida. Its prevalence, varies in different countries, but it can affect as many as one in five hundred live births. In the more severe cases, the child will be permanently paralysed from the waistdown and lack control of bowels or bladder. Often excess fluid accumulates in the brain, a condition known as hydrocephalus, which can result in intellectual disabilities. Though some forms of treatment exist, if the child is badly affected at birth, the paralysis, incontinence, and intellectual disability cannot be overcome.

    Some doctors closely connected with children suffering from severe spina bifida believe that the lives of the worst affected children are so miserable that it is wrong to resort to surgery to keep them alive. Published descriptions of the lives of these children support the judgment that these worst affected children will have lives filled with pain and discomfort. They need repeated major surgery to prevent curvature of the spine, due to the paralysis, and to correct other abnormalities. Some children with spina bifida have had forty major operations before they reach their teenage years.

    When the life of an infant will be so miserable as not to be worth living, from the internal perspective of the being who will lead that life, both the 'prior existence' and the 'total' version of utilitarianism entail that, if there are no 'extrinsic' reasons for keeping the infant alive - like the feelings of the parents - it is better that the child should be helped to die without further suffering.

    ...When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him."

    quote from Peter Singer
     

    That ought to be enough evidence. BTW, my sister has sever spina bifida that's left her paralyzed from birth. The doctors told my mom that my sister wouldn't live past the age of 12, but she's now 57 and in good health. Has a college degree and a job.

    https://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1993----.htm

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Eagle Eye says:
    @Jim Don Bob

    ...and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy ...
     
    Just where is this true?

    …and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy …

    Just where is this true?

    ON SUNNY DAYS: At the top of Mt. Everest, on a satellite circling the earth, on a sailboat in the middle of the ocean, and in similar remote and sunny locations with no PU-241, diesel or gas-powered electricity supply.

    ON OVERCAST DAYS: Only in extreme locations where residual electricity amounts are still useful, e.g. for emergency functions.

    AT NIGHT: Nowhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Correction - should be PU-238.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Eagle Eye says:
    @Eagle Eye


    …and in certain locales solar energy is cheaper than conventionally generated energy …

     

    Just where is this true?
     
    ON SUNNY DAYS: At the top of Mt. Everest, on a satellite circling the earth, on a sailboat in the middle of the ocean, and in similar remote and sunny locations with no PU-241, diesel or gas-powered electricity supply.

    ON OVERCAST DAYS: Only in extreme locations where residual electricity amounts are still useful, e.g. for emergency functions.

    AT NIGHT: Nowhere.

    Correction – should be PU-238.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. TG says:

    Indeed. But it’s not just Africa!

    Since around 1970 the rich have used their power and influence to overturn any reference to the effects of demographics.

    For example, the Sierra Club leadership was bribed about 100 million dollars to change its views on the effects of population growth on the environment (search for “Sierrans for Sustainable Population” for details). This was not about white people telling blacks how many babies they can have – this was primarily about deflecting opposition to cheap-labor immigration policies in the the United States. But of course, once you prevent talking seriously about demographics in the United States, you prevent talking about it seriously everywhere else…

    And there remains a total news blackout on the effects of the Syrian government’s pro-natalist policy, which included making the sale and possession of contraceptives a crime! But we absolutely cannot talk about this.

    http://globuspallidusxi.blogspot.fr/2015/04/the-real-story-on-syria-forced.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  62. Without a doubt most foreign aid goes into the pockets of corrupt officials and politicians, so we would be better off just openly bribing them to keep their people contained. All foreign aid should be 100% controlled and distributed by the countries that give it.

    Looking at the elections in Kenya and the rapes and violence carried out by both sides including the police, I don’t hold out much hope of Africans ever being able to manage their own affairs. Could say the same about South-America. With the best will in the world and accepting that all men are created equal, there are some differences that it is wise to be aware of. Judge people by the way that they behave and compare Zimbabwe to Japan, where would you feel most safe?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. anarchyst says:

    This is the same Peter Singer that advocates “post-birth abortion” up to three years of age. Sick..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. J1234 says:
    @Pat
    The Singer quote is not evidence of support for infanticide. Singer was critical of the decision to deny treatment of British child Charlie Gard's condition.

    “Infants are sentient beings who are neither rational nor self- conscious. So if we turn to consider the infants in themselves, independently of the attitudes of their parents, since their species is not relevant to their moral status, the principles that govern the wrongness of killing non-human animals who are sentient but not rational or self-conscious must apply here too. As we saw, the most plausible arguments for attributing a right to life to a being apply only if there is some awareness of oneself as a being existing over time, or as a continuing mental self. Nor can respect for autonomy apply where there is no capacity for autonomy. The remaining principles identified in Chapter 4 are utilitarian. Hence the quality of life that the infant can be expected to have is important.

    One relatively common birth disability is a faulty development of the spine known as spina bifida. Its prevalence, varies in different countries, but it can affect as many as one in five hundred live births. In the more severe cases, the child will be permanently paralysed from the waistdown and lack control of bowels or bladder. Often excess fluid accumulates in the brain, a condition known as hydrocephalus, which can result in intellectual disabilities. Though some forms of treatment exist, if the child is badly affected at birth, the paralysis, incontinence, and intellectual disability cannot be overcome.

    Some doctors closely connected with children suffering from severe spina bifida believe that the lives of the worst affected children are so miserable that it is wrong to resort to surgery to keep them alive. Published descriptions of the lives of these children support the judgment that these worst affected children will have lives filled with pain and discomfort. They need repeated major surgery to prevent curvature of the spine, due to the paralysis, and to correct other abnormalities. Some children with spina bifida have had forty major operations before they reach their teenage years.

    When the life of an infant will be so miserable as not to be worth living, from the internal perspective of the being who will lead that life, both the ‘prior existence’ and the ‘total’ version of utilitarianism entail that, if there are no ‘extrinsic’ reasons for keeping the infant alive – like the feelings of the parents – it is better that the child should be helped to die without further suffering.

    …When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him.”

    quote from Peter Singer

    That ought to be enough evidence. BTW, my sister has sever spina bifida that’s left her paralyzed from birth. The doctors told my mom that my sister wouldn’t live past the age of 12, but she’s now 57 and in good health. Has a college degree and a job.

    https://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1993—-.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @anon
    Cause I'm talking about oil and gas and natural gas liquids, not just barrels of oil.

    We have excess natural gas. We are starting to export it -- through liquification and pipelines to Mexicoo.

    US refineries get a processing gain of about 6% from refining imported heavy crude.

    We produce over 4 million barrels a day of liquids.

    On a net basis, we could be at zero. And we are even closer to the lower hurdle of North American independence (including Canada and Mexico).

    If it were important, we could run cars on natural gas or propane and balance our usage and production more closely, but it is inconvenient and there is a glut of oil.

    Yeah, one forgets about NatGas, all of which, basically, we consume here. Right before fracking, we planned to build gas import terminals off Boston and New Orleans to make up for the inevitable decline. Switching to run cars on NatGas would make a lot of sense. But that’s fossil fuels not crude oil.

    EIA says we import only a quarter of our petrol (including liquids that are not crude) total, and that 45% of imports are from Canada and Mexico. So it is conceivable for North America to import nothing from the rest of the world.

    At present, we are 5MMbd short.

    I’d welcome being no barrels short, so we can essentially not worry about the ME at all. Come to think of it, this change probably inflected our ME policy, and will do so more.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    In my opinion, we are close enough that it isn't a significant strategic issue. $4-$5 gasoline would close most of it pretty quickly. The collapse in oil prices in 2014-2016 prevented unconventional oil and gas from growing for a couple of years. We are close enough that it is silly to fight for something that could simply be purchased. And there are a lot of ways that fairly modest shortfalls could be finessed without any material disruption to the economy.

    However, I don't think this has made a dent in our NeoCon based geo/political defense doctrine. It was never 'just' oil. But oil is associated with the general thinking and doctrine.

    Without it, the US is fully diversified and really doesn't need any trade, except to the extent that it helps our economy. Which then means that it doesn't have to do all the expensive stuff it does. And it is too much to hope for -- no more lost wars. We haven't won one since WW 2 and it is getting tiresome.

    It isn't imaginable that anyone would talk about strategic coal or think of fighting a war over it. But we ended up with Puerto Rico as a coaling station for ships. And the very first cooperative economic venture after WW 2 was the European Coal and Steel Community.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Nico says:
    @IBC

    White men should not be telling black women not to have babies.
     
    Is Xi Jinping considered white when he attends these conferences? We know that China's family planning efforts have had some negative and perhaps preventable side effects, but doesn't China's overall experience at least serve as a proof of concept for the general idea that if you reduce population growth while simultaneously growing the economy, the general standard of living will rise? Of course, most sub-Saharan African countries are effectively much more ethnically diverse than China, so many people might view family planning as a sort of zero-sum game: If they don't have those children, somebody else will, thereby increasing a rival clan/tribe/religious group's relative strength in national or regional politics.

    Providing better access to birth control and accurate health knowledge goes without saying. But what about trying to influence social attitudes? As more people in Africa get access to TV and movies, what sort of social norms are coming out of Nollywood? And what about some basic form of general social insurance? High fertility is not always about unplanned pregnancies. Traditionally, "Plan B" was to have lots of of children as a sort of insurance policy against sickness and old age. There need to be more credible alternatives, especially now that so many Africans live in megacities.

    Regardless of what happens with emigration, it's the Africans who are stuck in Africa who have the most to lose from runaway population growth in their own countries.

    [D]oesn’t China’s overall experience at least serve as a proof of concept for the general idea that if you reduce population growth while simultaneously growing the economy, the general standard of living will rise?

    Possibly, although I think we’ve yet to see the full distance of the negative social fallout you refer to as “side effects” from the One-Child Policy. Mind you, as an ethnically-minded nationalistic Westerner I am tempted to say that I don’t particularly care about the health of the Chinese social tissue and that in the event of a zero-sum game I’d mourn rather little if an eventual Sinic/Oriental retreat meant a resurgence for my own kind, and probably not mourn much more if said social rot led to the depopulation and emasculation of subsaharan Africa. Nevertheless I am also interested in the truth, even uncomfortable ones which may provide useful information at some later date.

    Regardless, the more pertinent question is this: what in high heaven would make someone think ANYTHING that works for Chinese society could be applied to like effect in subsaharan Africa?

    What have you been smoking, and where can I get some?

    Providing better access to birth control and accurate health knowledge goes without saying… And what about some basic form of general social insurance?

    1. Who’s going to pay for the contraceptives, education and social insurance for a billion subsaharan Africans?
    2. When family planning and social insurance have proven difficult and costly to administer in black enclaves within Westerm countries where the white majority can still foot the tab, what makes you think they will be even remotely possible to realize for a billion blacks in Africa?

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC
    Haiti's TFR is now only 2.79 and Jamaica's is actually below replacement at 1.99. South Africa has a TFR of 2.5 and Botswana's is 2.8; so it's definitely possible for black-majority countries to rein-in population growth if they want to or if economic conditions incentivize it.

    As for insurance, I was thinking that it would be like a small-scale version of social security except the payments would be voluntary and made through something like M-Pesa in Kenya. It would have to be something compatible with the informal economy. And remember that while most people in sub-Saharan Africa don't earn a lot, the cost of living there is potentially way less than in developed countries or virtually anywhere with a cold climate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @TomSchmidt
    Yeah, one forgets about NatGas, all of which, basically, we consume here. Right before fracking, we planned to build gas import terminals off Boston and New Orleans to make up for the inevitable decline. Switching to run cars on NatGas would make a lot of sense. But that's fossil fuels not crude oil.

    EIA says we import only a quarter of our petrol (including liquids that are not crude) total, and that 45% of imports are from Canada and Mexico. So it is conceivable for North America to import nothing from the rest of the world.

    At present, we are 5MMbd short.

    I'd welcome being no barrels short, so we can essentially not worry about the ME at all. Come to think of it, this change probably inflected our ME policy, and will do so more.

    In my opinion, we are close enough that it isn’t a significant strategic issue. $4-$5 gasoline would close most of it pretty quickly. The collapse in oil prices in 2014-2016 prevented unconventional oil and gas from growing for a couple of years. We are close enough that it is silly to fight for something that could simply be purchased. And there are a lot of ways that fairly modest shortfalls could be finessed without any material disruption to the economy.

    However, I don’t think this has made a dent in our NeoCon based geo/political defense doctrine. It was never ‘just’ oil. But oil is associated with the general thinking and doctrine.

    Without it, the US is fully diversified and really doesn’t need any trade, except to the extent that it helps our economy. Which then means that it doesn’t have to do all the expensive stuff it does. And it is too much to hope for — no more lost wars. We haven’t won one since WW 2 and it is getting tiresome.

    It isn’t imaginable that anyone would talk about strategic coal or think of fighting a war over it. But we ended up with Puerto Rico as a coaling station for ships. And the very first cooperative economic venture after WW 2 was the European Coal and Steel Community.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. IBC says:
    @Nico

    [D]oesn’t China’s overall experience at least serve as a proof of concept for the general idea that if you reduce population growth while simultaneously growing the economy, the general standard of living will rise?
     
    Possibly, although I think we've yet to see the full distance of the negative social fallout you refer to as "side effects" from the One-Child Policy. Mind you, as an ethnically-minded nationalistic Westerner I am tempted to say that I don't particularly care about the health of the Chinese social tissue and that in the event of a zero-sum game I'd mourn rather little if an eventual Sinic/Oriental retreat meant a resurgence for my own kind, and probably not mourn much more if said social rot led to the depopulation and emasculation of subsaharan Africa. Nevertheless I am also interested in the truth, even uncomfortable ones which may provide useful information at some later date.

    Regardless, the more pertinent question is this: what in high heaven would make someone think ANYTHING that works for Chinese society could be applied to like effect in subsaharan Africa?

    What have you been smoking, and where can I get some?

    Providing better access to birth control and accurate health knowledge goes without saying... And what about some basic form of general social insurance?
     
    1. Who's going to pay for the contraceptives, education and social insurance for a billion subsaharan Africans?
    2. When family planning and social insurance have proven difficult and costly to administer in black enclaves within Westerm countries where the white majority can still foot the tab, what makes you think they will be even remotely possible to realize for a billion blacks in Africa?

    Haiti’s TFR is now only 2.79 and Jamaica’s is actually below replacement at 1.99. South Africa has a TFR of 2.5 and Botswana’s is 2.8; so it’s definitely possible for black-majority countries to rein-in population growth if they want to or if economic conditions incentivize it.

    As for insurance, I was thinking that it would be like a small-scale version of social security except the payments would be voluntary and made through something like M-Pesa in Kenya. It would have to be something compatible with the informal economy. And remember that while most people in sub-Saharan Africa don’t earn a lot, the cost of living there is potentially way less than in developed countries or virtually anywhere with a cold climate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Senator Brundlefly
    The stuff I've read by Singer reminds me of Ayn Rand. Not because they are ideologically similar (they aren't at all) but because they seem like they espouse opinions generated by a computer. There's an inherent "pure" logic to their thoughts leading them to make interesting observations and arguments (like Singer in this case) but their disregard for human norms leads them astray to really weird places (look at Singer's views on bestiality or infanticide or the way Ayn Rand began her relationship with Nathaniel Bradford to get what I mean).

    the way Ayn Rand began her relationship with Nathaniel Bradford

    Branden! Branden!

    It anagrams most appropriately to “ben Rand”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation