On 23 January 2018, the Washington Post ran a rather silly op-ed piece by John Podesta and Timothy E. Wirth titled Women’s rights issues are climate change issues.
Just when you think that the willful insanity of “intersectionality”[1] hasn’t gone far enough, something like this comes along.
In that article, they made the following assertion —
Recent research has reinforced the understanding of the benefits of helping families plan the timing, spacing and number of their children. Brown University researchers showed that slowing population growth can enhance economic outcomes and reduce emissions simultaneously.
To summarize the article, Podesta and Wirth say that slowing population growth will stop or slown down climate change, thus leading to better lives for all, and that’s why the dams holding back the rivers of public money must be torn down.
Still, Podesta and Wirth have it backwards — as per capita wealth and standard of living improve, population growth slows down.
This has been known since the 1990s.
If he’s truly concerned about this, I’m sure they’ll be willing to lead the way on reducing the population and controlling carbon dioxide emissions.
In particular, they can volunteer to stop exhaling so much of the carbon dioxide they think of as a “poison.” Both Podesta and Wirth have already done their bit of pissing in the gene pool, so we’ll have to settle for half a loaf here.
In fact, it seems that while carbon dioxide doesn’t seem to be the planet-killing greenhouse gas that the eco-fascists claim it is, it IS responsible for increased plant growth around the world. That’s not just me spouting off the top of my head here, that’s from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)[2] — one of the “go-to” governmental agencies on the climate-change / global warming “issue,” per the eco-fascists themselves.
As for the population “issue,” I’ve already noted that Podesta and Wirth have done their “damage” (I don’t know what their kids are like, so the quotation marks might be unnecessary), but they still, rather hypocritically in my opinion, insist that OTHER PEOPLE’S lives be publicly managed.
See “The Stork, by Nina Haley (embedded below) for an example of this sort of thinking —
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-2bq0bxjMU&w=560&h=315]
Notice how after the stork-dropped bundles land on the ground, there’s an explosion, followed by babies, houses, and SUVs?
Take a closer look at the instances of when there’s multiple storks flying in formation. Don’t they look something like this?
That’s the U.S. Army Air Corps’ 384th Bomb Group en route to their target during World War II.
How about this one?
Didn’t the storks dropping baby bundles in Haley’s video clip look a bit like those B-17s dropping ordnance?
Basically, the most realistic way to describe the mindset of the population limiters and regulators is the term antihumanist[3] — “humans are basically bad, thus they need to be limited and controlled.”
In conclusion, all I need is mailing addresses for Podesta and Wirth. That way, I’ll know where to send the plastic bags, so that they can lead by example on these “issues.”
FOR FURTHER REFERENCE
- “Intersectionality” — Infogalactic page, Wikipedia page
- Reiny, Samson, “Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds.” https://nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Earth Science News Team, 26 April 2016. Web. 28 January 2018.
Hogan, James P., Kicking the Sacred Cow. New York: Baen Books [Simon & Schuster]. 2004. p.265.
- Zubrin, Robert, “The Population Control Holocaust,” https://thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-population-control-holocaust, The New Atlantis, Spring 2012. Web. 29 January 2018
See also The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (Wikipedia page)
NOTES
- H/T Sean Adl-Tabatabai via Joseph L. Roberts
Leave a Reply