Announcing the launch of CELDF's Community Resistance and Resilience Program, dedicated to supporting, networking, and facilitating the success of grassroots initiatives, actions, and campaigns
The environmental movement is failing in large part because we refuse to talk about or actually thinkseriously about human overpopulation. All these wonderful efforts of the serious activists cannot succeed when the population of tomorrow is twice that in today's environment.
I agree, at least in part, Lynn. The book "Countdown" by Alan Weisman was, I think, a good and nuanced exploration of this topic. If you haven't read that, I recommend it. I've been taking notes for a piece on this topic for a while. It's coming, at some point in the future.
Here's an excerpt from Weisman's book that stuck with me:
“The week before Rio+20—the June 2012 UN conference held twenty years after the original Earth Summit—the world’s 105 science academies, led by the Royal Society of Britain, warned that failure to act on population growth and overconsumption would have 'catastrophic implications for human wellbeing.; It was no shock to Paul Ehrlich that Rio+20, billed as the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, ignored the question of population, for much the same reasons that the Earth Summit did. As in 1992, the Vatican courted support from human rights and feminist groups, contending that population programs unfairly blame poor women for the world’s environmental ills. But as he drives his pickup back into Palo Alto, down six-lane El Camino Real, which formerly passed through orchards, not miles of commerce, Paul Ehrlich has no doubt that the most overpopulated country on Earth is his own.
'There is no condom for consumption,' he says, sorrowing at the unabashed displays of Silicon Valley purchasing power. How to curb human acquisitiveness is more vexing a mystery than finding a unified theory of physics. In the last fifty years, world population more than doubled, but world economic growth increased sevenfold. With luck and contraception, world population might stabilize, but consumption grows on, almost exponentially, as the more people have, the more they want.
'Yet to separate consumption from population,' says Ehrlich, 'is like saying the length of a rectangle contributes more to its area than its width.' The United States is the world’s highest per-capita consumer, and its 315 million people are headed to an estimated 439 million or more by 2050. And a new factor has intensified the Impact in the I=PAT formula that he and John Holdren wrote in the 1970s: Population, Affluence, and Technology are further exacerbated by Time.
'The next 2 billion people we add will do a lot more damage than the last 2 billion,' says Ehrlich. Those of us already alive have already plucked the lowest-hanging resources. Like wringing oil from rocks, from now on acquiring things we use will be much harder, involving much more energy and leaving much bigger messes in our wake.”
Thanks for this. I’ve been taking a break from my writing, wondering if it’s doing any good, feeling useless. This inspires me to get back at it—and to keep watching for other opportunities to plant seeds of change. 💚
Thanks, Max, for your passionate defense of Our Dear Mother Earth and ALL of Her lifeforms, great and small. However, I see that you did not like Lynn's focus on our massive human overpopulation/overconsumption. We are 3,000 times more populous than were our ancestors who lived in small mobile Hunter-Gatherer clans/bands and in an ecologically balanced self-sustaining manner. 168,000 new humans are born daily to struggle for survival amongst the 8.2 billion of the rest of us. We are an insane species, having lost touch with the reality of the natural order. Memorial Day should be repurposed to a day of mourning for the nature we have thoughtlessly destroyed, and which the Madman Anti-Christ in the Oval office seems intent on further destroying, so that the whole planet looks like one of his carefully manicured golf courses or high-rise urban apartment buildings. Saving what's left of Mother Nature is as much, if not MORE, of a responsibility of us as INDIVIDUALS. Stay home on a staycation this Memorial Day and make a difference that only we as individuals can. Don't drive, fly, or cruise, burning the 100 million barrels of oil a day (13.3 million in the US alone) that we will otherwise contribute to. Have a blessed day! Gregg
Hey Greeley, I'm just getting to the comments now. You're right, population is a major issue. It wasn't the focus of this piece, but it is really important to talk about, with nuance. Justin addressed that in a good way in his recent piece here: https://collapsecurriculum.substack.com/p/from-resistance-to-ruin-vietnam-and
Thank you, Max, for writing and sharing this. I have to admit, I thought some of the laws passed in the 70s— the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)— made a big difference in our environment. With today’s gutting of many of those, though, it’s clear how thin the veneer was. Good luck with your good work!
Thanks Melanie! I agree. Those laws did make a big difference. But, at the same time, they mainly mitigated some of the worst and surface-level harms of industrialism, while leaving the deeper structure intact (and in some ways, contributed - quite unintentionally - to the offshoring of the dirtiest industries). But you’re right. The gloves are off at the moment, and it’s full speed ahead for techno-feudal-capitalism, and screw the consequences. All the more reason for serious and effective resistance.
The environmental movement is failing in large part because we refuse to talk about or actually thinkseriously about human overpopulation. All these wonderful efforts of the serious activists cannot succeed when the population of tomorrow is twice that in today's environment.
I agree, at least in part, Lynn. The book "Countdown" by Alan Weisman was, I think, a good and nuanced exploration of this topic. If you haven't read that, I recommend it. I've been taking notes for a piece on this topic for a while. It's coming, at some point in the future.
Here's an excerpt from Weisman's book that stuck with me:
“The week before Rio+20—the June 2012 UN conference held twenty years after the original Earth Summit—the world’s 105 science academies, led by the Royal Society of Britain, warned that failure to act on population growth and overconsumption would have 'catastrophic implications for human wellbeing.; It was no shock to Paul Ehrlich that Rio+20, billed as the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, ignored the question of population, for much the same reasons that the Earth Summit did. As in 1992, the Vatican courted support from human rights and feminist groups, contending that population programs unfairly blame poor women for the world’s environmental ills. But as he drives his pickup back into Palo Alto, down six-lane El Camino Real, which formerly passed through orchards, not miles of commerce, Paul Ehrlich has no doubt that the most overpopulated country on Earth is his own.
'There is no condom for consumption,' he says, sorrowing at the unabashed displays of Silicon Valley purchasing power. How to curb human acquisitiveness is more vexing a mystery than finding a unified theory of physics. In the last fifty years, world population more than doubled, but world economic growth increased sevenfold. With luck and contraception, world population might stabilize, but consumption grows on, almost exponentially, as the more people have, the more they want.
'Yet to separate consumption from population,' says Ehrlich, 'is like saying the length of a rectangle contributes more to its area than its width.' The United States is the world’s highest per-capita consumer, and its 315 million people are headed to an estimated 439 million or more by 2050. And a new factor has intensified the Impact in the I=PAT formula that he and John Holdren wrote in the 1970s: Population, Affluence, and Technology are further exacerbated by Time.
'The next 2 billion people we add will do a lot more damage than the last 2 billion,' says Ehrlich. Those of us already alive have already plucked the lowest-hanging resources. Like wringing oil from rocks, from now on acquiring things we use will be much harder, involving much more energy and leaving much bigger messes in our wake.”
Thanks for this. I’ve been taking a break from my writing, wondering if it’s doing any good, feeling useless. This inspires me to get back at it—and to keep watching for other opportunities to plant seeds of change. 💚
Glad to hear Superball. We need to write, speak, and act. It's essential.
Thanks, Max, for your passionate defense of Our Dear Mother Earth and ALL of Her lifeforms, great and small. However, I see that you did not like Lynn's focus on our massive human overpopulation/overconsumption. We are 3,000 times more populous than were our ancestors who lived in small mobile Hunter-Gatherer clans/bands and in an ecologically balanced self-sustaining manner. 168,000 new humans are born daily to struggle for survival amongst the 8.2 billion of the rest of us. We are an insane species, having lost touch with the reality of the natural order. Memorial Day should be repurposed to a day of mourning for the nature we have thoughtlessly destroyed, and which the Madman Anti-Christ in the Oval office seems intent on further destroying, so that the whole planet looks like one of his carefully manicured golf courses or high-rise urban apartment buildings. Saving what's left of Mother Nature is as much, if not MORE, of a responsibility of us as INDIVIDUALS. Stay home on a staycation this Memorial Day and make a difference that only we as individuals can. Don't drive, fly, or cruise, burning the 100 million barrels of oil a day (13.3 million in the US alone) that we will otherwise contribute to. Have a blessed day! Gregg
Hey Greeley, I'm just getting to the comments now. You're right, population is a major issue. It wasn't the focus of this piece, but it is really important to talk about, with nuance. Justin addressed that in a good way in his recent piece here: https://collapsecurriculum.substack.com/p/from-resistance-to-ruin-vietnam-and
As always your ideas make total sense. Thanks for doing this.
Thanks Kathy!
Thank you, Max, for writing and sharing this. I have to admit, I thought some of the laws passed in the 70s— the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)— made a big difference in our environment. With today’s gutting of many of those, though, it’s clear how thin the veneer was. Good luck with your good work!
Thanks Melanie! I agree. Those laws did make a big difference. But, at the same time, they mainly mitigated some of the worst and surface-level harms of industrialism, while leaving the deeper structure intact (and in some ways, contributed - quite unintentionally - to the offshoring of the dirtiest industries). But you’re right. The gloves are off at the moment, and it’s full speed ahead for techno-feudal-capitalism, and screw the consequences. All the more reason for serious and effective resistance.