LYNE LEFEBVRE_LEARNER AT RRU: POST SEVEN : Population Bomb

_______________________________________________________

POPULATION BOMB

The previous post with Marx could serve as an intro to this one, moving from Elrichs' finite world proposal, to his criticism that «Originally Marxists thought that “The productive power at mankind’s disposal is immeasurable” (Engels, 1844, cited by Elrich).

Echoes on adaptation

I remember being quite disturbed by Karen O’Brien and Gail Hochachka (O'Brien, 2009) Integral adaptation to climate change (in 504). Aware systems do not restore fully, if ever, when depleted but simply «respond to climate change» (title of paper), and agreeing with David Orr’s that thinking «we can adequately restore that which we have dismantled» (p.4) was a myth. Non-renewable energies were our most visible example. And in terms of ecosystems 85-90% of indigenous biodiversity is lost (Greenpeace) and therefore «restoration» will become –something else-. But then we also have the «Viability Approach to Global Climate Change Issues» or the whole dynamics behind sustainable solutions and proof it works, to give us hope that actions in that sense were not too late. (O'Brien & Hochachka, 2010). I still felt the authors' «only adaptation (to climate change) could occur» as the only issue or hope, was terribly discouraging (although I have since understood adaptation was not to be understood so literally).

«The far left in modern times found the advocacy of limiting population growth immoral. They saw the basic issue not as overpopulation but as maldistribution» (Elrich, 1968). Reading both Malthus (1798), and Anne & Paul Ehrlich, coming back on Paul Elrich's own book published 40 years earlier, «Population Bomb» or population growth being the major environmental catastrophy cause, or discussing Population growth on forum, I also remembered having been quite disturbed feeling that I could understand and perhaps ponder in sharing Hardin's hard position over population growth or the eventual fatality to regulate the «freedom to breed», by imposing imperative and «strict birth control» (Zane, n.d., citing Elrich).

A finite world with an increasing population. Is that the problem?
Our «finite world can support only a finite population; therefore-, population growth must eventually equal zero» (Hardin, 1243) felt it was a reality. Otherwise, would Hardin argue, population growth would «bring ruin to all» as Commoner cited him as well. I preferred thinking Hardin's comparison with birds who voluntarily stopped breeding to survive, could be an interesting non-enforcement way to succeed putting a brake to population growth, still feeling in the meantime, that incentives would be needed. The author was also referring to C.G Darwin's (the grandson) concern that human consciousness might take generations to reach such instinct (progenitive instinct) if ever, and for «homocontracipiens to become extinct and be replaced by homoprogenitivus» could be Earth's release or revenge (Hardin, 1246), a somewhat Deep ecology position I often tend sharing, unless we can reach a biocentric worldview as a species. I am glad my own frame or worldviews were shaken reading this but not left unanswered. Fearing my own thoughts on the matter could bring me to drastic thinking on population growth were brief, and I luckily, I was quickly offered more dimensions to ponder on.

Hope in multiple proposal solutions.
I felt much more hope from Zane's lecture. The 3 proposed poles of solutions to «reduce population, cut back consumption and engage in much greater resource efficiency» (Parker, 2012) felt more coherent with my own frame and worldview and much closer to reality where the ewalthy should own much more responsibility for (encouraging) inequity. The last 2 (over consumming and Non renewable) were simply evident, although the 3 needed to work hand-in-hand. The «Growth Bomb», or population growth just as the environmental changes, could only stabilize if we focus on each of these dimensions *

Risks.

Anyhow, in terms of human growth or «population control» the -mise-en-garde- (caution) of carefulness for social injustices discussed on our forum was fundamental. Coercive control examples can question either way. Possible inequity, discrimination of course and, good idea to financially help women/families have choices? I do think some church/religious doctrin and politics could start by providing safe sex education, as well as authorizing birth control, safe care for undesired pregnancy or voluntary termination of pregnancy, provide access both to education and financial help for contraceptive methods both for men and women etc.

*(Thinking of Matthew's post, I know we should worry with numbers not to be manipulated, but I still trust some numbers such as Kyoto's needed goals to be the right signals and to be incentives, should we be careful in the use of these numbers and the decisions they incite. 8 billion should be reached by 2030 according to M. Brice Lalonde, chef executor of UN's Conference on Sustainable dev. who's discourse on economy + ecology is linked to Rio+20, indeed, but what/how will we deal with it all, is key.)

_______________________________________________________

1). Commoner, Barry. (1971). Chapter 1: The environmental crisis, and Chapter 2: The ecosphere . In The Closing Circle: Nature, Man, and Technology (pp. 5-48). New York:

2). Knopf.Kuhn, T. S. (1962). Historical Structure of Scientific Discovery. Science, New Series, 136(3518), 760-764.

3). O'Brien, K. (2009). Responding to Climate Change: The Need for an Integral Approach. . Integral Institute, Resource paper, 4, 12.

4). O'Brien, K., & Hochachka, G. (2010). Integral Adaptation to Climate Change Journal of integral theory and practice, 5(1), 14.
_______________________________________________________

Women

I have shared the below animations with some team mates before, in another context, but although they are old and can be critically examined, I felt they were in the continuity of this subject and invited us to ponder, as it had in a forum discussion. Who is talking behind these? Is this what these women want and need? Did we ask for their advice? Or do we feel it is good communication and right? Is it another Kony example?
Elizabeth from KOMAZA.

______________________________________________________

The clock is ticking.