Refuting the 'Overpopulation Crisis'

It's an oft repeated lie that is never examined

Malthusian globalists will often repeat the lie that the earth is ‘overpopulated’ and the growth rate is ‘unsustainable’, with many orbiting followers in tow parroting the line, as if they’re somehow ‘helping’, all without examining the claim, and without examining what happens when birth rates decline in countries.

There are currently 7.5 billion people. When Thomas Robert Malthus coined Malthusianism in 1798, barely 2 years later in the 1800s would the population register as being a mere 1 billion. Meaning Malthus was wrong.

That’s 200 years of constant population growth in a situation Malthusians claim is “unsustainable”. If it was so unsustainable, why did nothing happen as it grew for 200 years? If anything it shows population growth is very sustainable.

But What About [Insert Doomsday Scenario]

Malthusians will try to backpedal, inventing future imaginary unevidenced doomsday scenarios befitting the kind of non-existent scaremongering climate changists use: We were supposed to see our major cities flooded and underwater decades ago, according to their projections. That hasn’t happened either.

A future possible imaginary outcome is not a good enough justification to murder billions of souls. By this imaginary murder logic, one could justify murdering the Malthusians for imagining that they would go through this catastrophic mass-murder campaign.

And indeed, they never seem inclined to lead by example. Harry berated the public for having kids, then granted himself the exception to have two; two won’t reduce the population Harry, it’ll sustain it at the current rates the lying Malthusians claim is unsustainable. So either you just created yourself a magical exception - eugenics - or you just admitted by your actions it is a load of crock.

Eugenics By The Backdoor

The other evil situation Malthusians won’t acknowledge, is what they propose is eugenics by the backdoor. They’re trying to propose some sort of ‘magical’, undefined murder selection method by which to determine who lives and who dies.

Naturally Malthusians except themselves. Their giant egos and constant parroting of poorly researched lies is a requirement for the future of humanity, apparently. They’ll flail about. Some will propose murdering the elderly and the ill (‘euthanasia’), some will propose murdering children (‘abortion’), some nations will impose penalties upon the poor, like China’s one child policy. A policy that ended in failure.

Globalists Aren’t The Useful Ones

Malthusian globalists make the errant assumption they’re what keep the planet running. But the truth is the polar opposite. The hardworking poor, who represent the majority of the labour pool, are the useful ones. The globalists are the ones the planet can do without.

This was made painfully evident to even the repressive Chinese, when the one child policy resulted in a labour shortage, leading to both a social care crisis for the elderly, a collapse of worker numbers for food production and healthcare, and a generational drop in the workforce.

It turns out other people were dependant on that generation workforce in order to survive. Who would of thought it? Not the Malthusian globalists, that’s for sure.

Immigration Is Not A Sustainable Solution

Malthusian globalists in some countries try to ‘solve’ the issue of the labour shortfall created by their insane policies, by importing immigrants from overseas to plug the falling birth rates and thus labour shortage in their country. This isn’t sustainable long-term.

Ignoring the fact that overseas immigration tends to be unskilled labourers (for there are many skilled poor workers in the labour workforce), as skilled labourers are often able to find employment in their home countries, it isn’t sustainable, because either:

A) Those countries birthrates will also be falling, meaning no additional labour to export, or;

B) The countries rightly don’t follow the Malthusian globalists’ insane policy and end up becoming the dominant population by default (meaning said policies also win; see eugenics by the backdoor).

Malthusian Globalists Double-Down

Rather than admitting their policies are completely unhinged, unworkable in reality, with massive red flags of failure thrown up everywhere, and denying all evidence, Malthusian globalists double-down, insisting that robots will somehow magically solve the labour force shortfall.

Not only is this a prime example of Malthusian globalists’ magical thinking, deluding themselves that there will be robots with human level adaptability and capabilities, they worsen the situation for one of the arguments they claim is their justification for massacring billions of innocent people; the environment.

Robots are not zero-cost. They require rare earth materials. Ignoring the hugely ironic fact (for the Malthusian globalists) that the rare earth cobalt used in electronics comes from child labour, the mining practices are hugely destructive.

Although robots might be cheap to run compared to minimum wage, they are not environmentally cheap, requiring coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power to run. We’re not talking the cheap, tiny robot toys you get as a present. We’re talking the 600 volt+ giant robot arms that fill an entire warehouse that spans several football pitches.

That requires a lot of power. Thankfully, there’s a better option. Humans are quite literally solar powered. Yes, you read that right. We eat plants - grown by the sun - and things that eat plants. We are, by our very nature, already in symbosis with our planet. It is polluting Malthusian globalist tech that takes us further away.

Humanity Naturally Wants To Live In Harmony; Globalists Are The Problem

Early tribes invented wind power for boats, around for many centuries. Impatient Malthusian globalists invented diesel powered engines because they weren’t fast enough.

Early tribes rode horses who ate crops grown by the sun. Malthusian globalists invented diesel engines for cars because they weren’t fast enough.

Early tribes engaged in manual labourous work to produce goods that they and the community needed. Malthusian globalists industrialised the s**t out of their countries using coal fired plants and industrial waste polluting factories because they wanted more profit.

Early tribes had enough family members as required to meet the labour needs of their family, such as on a sustainable farm. Malthusian globalists invented robots because the people weren’t cheap enough.

Early Egyptians brought more plant life to the desert via irrigation of the desert using the Nile. Malthusian globalists got rid of plant life in the Amazon so they could grow crops to burn as fuel.

Notice a reoccurring theme? Humanity was already in symbosis with the planet until giant, abberant, poorly applied technological “leaps” by the Malthusian globalists claiming to ‘save the day’ started destroying the planet.

Supply Chains Are The Problem

The fact there’s even 7.5 billion people still alive after Thomas Malthus coined his thesis actually proves this. If 1 billion was unsustainable, we would have collapsed in the 200+ years since, experiencing some sort of mass famine.

Instead, most people often point to Africa as ‘evidence’ there are insufficient resources, but the biggest concentrations of population are actually in China and India (1.4 billion each at time of writing), neither of which are suffering famines currently.

Africa’s issues stem from government mismanagement and corruption. It is no secret that civil wars and racist persecutions of E.G. White South African farmers, where warlords seize part of the food aid to raise funds to further fuel their warmongering disrupt the food supply chains and economic stability.

Even the comedy channel on YouTube, Dorkly, knows of the flaws of Malthusian globalism, where their assistant Kevin puts a verbal beatdown on Thanos for killing off half the life on the planet and making the entire food supply situation infinitely worse. It is a good, entertaining rebuttal.

Resources Are Actually Abundant

Even if, for a moment, you incorrectly presumed there were insufficient resources, early Egyptians could turn parts of the desolate, unused desert into food producing areas using irrigation techniques with the river Nile, which is the death blow to the Malthusian globalists’ lies.

The Sahara (for the name ‘Sahara’ is Arabic for ‘desert’) is the biggest, unoccupied landspace on earth. It is a wide area ripe for development and the expansion of plant life on earth via irrigation.

Getting water from the sea into the desert requires a lot of energy. However, the Sahara is abundant in that too - solar energy, with hot sun day in and day out. It boggles the mind why Malthusian globalists are destroying the rainforest in the Amazon to produce food crops to burn rather than irrigating the absolute s**t out of the devoid Sahara where no plant life exists.

If there was a food shortage problem, however…

Malthusian Globalists Themselves Are Making It Worse

Globalism as a concept itself implies global trade. This means stupid s**t like outsourcing jobs to other countries only to ship goods back over 3000 miles burning fuel every step of the way. Cargo ships produce a lot of pollution. You know, the ones without wind sails that the globalists themselves invented.

Globalists are anti-“protectionist”, a term they use to try to slander domestic, localised production. You know, fuel efficient, local, ‘just down the road’ type production. In their worldview, shipping goods 3000 miles+ across the globe is the economy running at the most efficient. Yeah, you read that right.

By ‘efficiently’, they really mean ‘the most profitably’ (for them). Exporting to the Chinese child slave labour, which is cheaper than American adult labour (which they’re also trying to replace with robots because they are cheapskates) gives them wide profit margins. Aiding the planet? Not so much.

Plus, the globalists’ tendency to use private jets that cause more pollution than most citizens would create in a year contradicts their lies that they want to reduce the population for the good of the planet. It is painfully evident they’re only doing it for the good of themselves. See ‘eugenics by the backdoor argument’, again.

They’re okay with exploiting large quantities of human labour whenever it suits their profiteering. How many of Bill Gates’ devices got built in underpaid, slave labour using China? How much of Harry’s money came from the taxpayer? Hillary Clinton’s?

If we are to save the planet, we must get rid of the insanity that is Malthusianism. And maybe, to save the planet, the Malthusians should lead by example and do it themselves.

If you like my work, be sure to support it by sharing the article link with other people, subscribing or even becoming a supporter. Thank you!