Overpopulation, Eugenics + Adjacent BS (IMPORTANT DOCS №13)

Overpopulation, Eugenics + Adjacent BS (IMPORTANT DOCS №13)

Show Video

Soylent, Green Dan. Brown's Inferno. Logan's. Run ready. Player one and. Idiocracy. Now. When I watch these films I'm. Reminded, of how it seems like there's just too many human beings on earth that's. Why I got this tiny house move, myself away from all those terrible, overcrowded. City streets living, here in the wilderness I've, reflected on population. Growth, there's. Just no. Room for these people. No. In, 1843. Charles, Dickens wrote a Christmas carol the story centers around the transformation. Of a man named Ebenezer Scrooge. At the beginning he was described, by Dickens as a squeezing, wrenching. Grasping. Scraping clutching. Covetous, old, sinner but. At the, end he was giving away turkeys, like that question mark suit guy claims. The government gives away grant, money, Scrooge. Was more or less the 1840s. Equivalent, of a payday lender inspired. By creditors, Dickens, own family, moved around constantly to avoid as he grew up when. A pair of altruist. Solicited, Scrooge to donate some money for, efforts to feed the poor he, rejected the idea outright. He said the poor should go to work houses, which at the time were, places, were people who couldn't support themselves could live in exchange for a job to do and, it sounds nice but it really, wasn't work. Houses, were intended, to maintain harsh, living conditions to, ensure that only the, supposedly, truly. Destitute. Would apply the, do-gooders, replied, with many. Cannot cava and many. Would rather die - which Evan eases crude shot back with they'd. Rather die they'd better do it and decrease the, surplus population which, you know makes sense I mean the world was overrun with people one hundred seventy-five, years ago when a Christmas carol was written and now we've got literally, 7.5. Times, that many people now I. Mean. Seriously, look how bad it has gotten George. Was an avatar, of various issues that Charles Dickens had with the harsh capitalist, transformation. Happening, around him and a Christmas. Carol is ultimately, a vehicle, for criticizing, those issues there's, a number of indictments, of capitalism. The society, it was creating, we can see in the character, of Ebenezer, Scrooge, but here, let's, focus on Scrooge's, usage of the term surplus. Population. In, using, this term it's established, this character, though meant to embody many of the issues to contact with society, explicitly. Agreed with the then popular ideas, a man, by the name of Thomas Malthus introduced. A few decades prior and, like I don't know I'm. Just, ironically, detached, enough, to want to hear in detail, about something Evan E's Scrooge a fictional person agreed, with an ironic I. Mean. It could be hilarious, it, was not hilarious. In. 1798. Malthus. And actually, real political, economist that Dickens, unfortunately. Didn't, make up published. A book entitled an essay, on the principle of, population in. It Malthus, asserted, that since food production, improved, people's well-being and, apparently. Happy, and healthy means perpetually, horny that an exponential, population growth, would, potentially, take place and would outpace growth in food production, eventually. According, to Malthus there, couldn't possibly be, enough food or resources. In population. Went unchecked increases, in a geometrical. Ratio, the subsistence increases. Only in an arithmetic oratio. A slight, acquaintance, with numbers, will shew the immensity of the first power in comparison, of the second, essentially. Overpopulation. As we talked about today, is the, idea that humans could multiply to a number that overwhelms. The planet Earth it's, rooted in the ideas of Malthus, who believed that humanity, had the potential, to double its population, every. 25, years he. Believed the amount of food produced up until this time was a natural, check which balanced, humanity's, growth other checks, included, things like disease, and famine and because, of combinations, of these and more factors, people, never previously, had the means to multiply at, the rate necessary, to overpopulate. However. Advances, in technology, in both food production, and medicine, quickly, overcame, that implying. That potential, could be reached soon, at least according to people who still believed in these things, Thomas. Malthus wasn't, the first person to raise a version of this concern, long, before Malthus, Plato, had expressed concerns about overpopulation. When, the world had only around 150. Million humans, living on it or less. Than 2%, of today's population, he, believed the world couldn't sustain more, than that and advocated. For a stationary. State an idea, that Malthus would adapt and advocate, for as well by, Malthus is time the world population, had grown to about 1 billion people well.

Beyond What Plato thought would be sustainable make. Him wrong. Still. Thomas, Malthus reintroduced. A popular, concern the idea that humankind, would outgrow available. Resources, telling, folks that a finite, amount of land would be incapable of supporting a population, with a supposedly, infinite, growth potential, also making. Him, wrong, over. The last six decades population. Has doubled Wow food production, on the other hand has. Tripled, at the same time we make so much food we could, feed. 141, percent of the people who exist right now that's. About ten point five billion people, we, could easily feed. Three, billion more, people without changing, anything, about, production, we. Just don't. Here's. Thomas Malthus his model not. Very, similar. Is it the, time for a Malthusian, catastrophe or. What, we came to call an event where food production, would no longer keep up with population growth matches. Up best with the growth of the baby boom which, took place after World War two through the 1960s. Because, food supply, supposedly. Only increases. Arithmetic, alee and this is a natural check on population. Malthus, predicted, that population, would then continue to grow exponentially. It. Didn't, though as you. Can see growth tapers, off and becomes linear after. The 60s, despite. Growth, in food production, outpacing. Human population. Growth and linear. Growth with more people means the birth rate actually went down more. People, having less, kids, we'll. Talk about that more later anyways. It's food, production, that's speeding up not, population. Technology. Is, actually what's, growing at an increasing, rate specifically. Technology. That feeds us, like. This amazing craft, beer this wasn't possible in the 1960s. Because. Food, production, was encouraging, so much population, growth to happen Malthus, thought it would be necessary to, regulate, the population. He believed there were only two ways this could happen either, the death rate rises, or the birth rate lowers when, Scrooge said to let the poor die off to decrease, the surplus population. It was a reflection, of the popular, interpretation. Of malthus's work just, as in today's capitalism. The port were generally, blamed for the conditions, they lived in and when, discussing this in relation, to overpopulation. It was said that helping the poor would worsen conditions for, everyone, in the long run from, an essay on the principle of, population, instead.

Of Recommending, cleanliness to, the poor we should encourage contrary. Habits, in our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and caught the return of the plague in. The country we should build our villages near stagnant. Pools and particularly, encourage, settlements in all marshy, and unwholesome, situations. But, above all we should reprobate, specific, remedies, for ravaging, diseases, and those, benevolent, but much mistaken men. Who thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting, schemes for the total extirpation, of particular. Disorders, if by these and similar means the annual, mortality were, increased, we, might probably every, one of us marry at the age of puberty and yet few be absolutely, starved. Allowing, the poor to live worse and, therefore, shorter, lives would, naturally, increase the death rate while quote, unquote we. Will. Live in abundance, we. Being. The obviously. Intelligent, definitely. White bourgeois, class or, you, know whatever they called it that in there as this. Bleak worldview took hold in order to preserve the workers will to work hard, it had to be tied to living better in an aspirational. Manner working. More had, to appear, to get you paid more getting. Paid more would supposedly, get you property, getting. Property, meant having appreciating. Assets, which, meant you were building wealth this, justified, the system as well as created consequences. For not being quote unquote good, enough it's. Not hard to understand, where people's perception, went with this people, thought the best among the impoverished, would rise and take a place among the obviously, intelligent, definitely. White bourgeois, class because, it happened to people like Charles Dickens as the, obviously, intelligent definitely. White bourgeois, class group, members. Would clearly have enough sense to take intentional. Measures to lower the birthrate then, the, death rate among the pores could rise because, we. Don't help those sickening, poor it feels, like the right thing to do but they overpopulate. The, world if you help them in the meantime the, obviously, intelligent definitely. White bourgeois, class could maintain and, the stupid Poor's could be left to live short sickly lives necessary, hard labor, then automation. Could come around and maybe we could just let them all die off, I ain't who knows and really, who cares. We, certainly. Don't, now. They're. Obviously, would be exceptional. People amongst, the poor like Charles, Dickens who should be raised from poverty and join the obviously. Intelligent definitely. White bourgeois, class despite, kind, of hating the obviously, intelligent definitely, by booj walk class this, system wouldn't, be fair otherwise and, this, system he's so clearly. The. Poor had to have the freedom. To become rich upward. Mobility was, there, they, just had to prove they were worthy, if. They couldn't well they, were part of the surplus population and. Looked down upon by the Scrooge's of the world as a burden, and a hindrance only. There were less of them, we, could, have a much better time here, on planet, earth if, this is starting to sound like eugenics, it's, because, it. Is, malthus's. Book was published just, at the beginning of a time when a growing consciousness, was threatening the labor situations. In the nascent Western world in, efforts to preserve the horrific institution. Of slavery as well as other forms of inexpensive. Labor both here in the US and in the UK, justifications. For hierarchy, in both class and race were sought pretty aggressively. So. Eugenics. For. Those not in the know eugenics. Is stated, to be about improving the genetic, quality of the human population or. A segment. Of it this, could and would, be practiced, in one of two ways, raising. The rates of sexual reproduction, among people with desired, traits, or reducing, the rates of sexual reproduction of people with undesired. Traits often, through marriage bans and forced sterilization the, connection, between overpopulation. Should be made obvious, in that overpopulation. Was seen as a problem of multiplying, Poor's, people, who were seen as disposable. But necessary, to perform various labor also, consider. The idea that eugenics is built on identifying. Desirable. Versus undesirable. Traits, understanding. That desire, is a subjective, human concept. And that, the prevailing, attitude at the time these ideas we're spreading was that black people were unintelligent. To the point of being subhuman. One. Can guess, who, is the most likely to be bred. Out when talking about.

Undesirable. Traits truly. A hipster, Malthus. Liked eugenics, before, it was cool by about a half century, I'll, use some of malthus's explanation. Of eugenics, before, it was called eugenics, from 1798. An essay on the principle of, population by. An attention, to breed a certain degree of improvement similar, to that among animals, might take place among, men whether. Intellect, could be communicated, may be a matter of doubt bird size strength. Beauty, complexion. And perhaps longevity. Or in a degree transmissible. As the, human race however could not be improved in this way without condemning all the bad specimens, to celibacy it is not probable that a detention to breed should ever become general. What's. Interesting here, is that he asserts the ideas, we would come to know as eugenics, probably. Wouldn't become popular, this, is a rare time I wish Malthus was right but unfortunately this one didn't affect his batting average at all he, also said that intellects, transmissibility. May. Be a matter of doubt but, it's, important, to note that he didn't rule it out and, given. He was ultimately talking, about general, concern, and public, matters, he could have easily meant, may, be hard for people to believe or perhaps swallow, let's. Also not forget Malthus. Had political opponents. Who took him to task on blaming the poor for their own exploitation. At the hands of capitalists. So it's not outlandish, to assume he may have hedged his own arguments, against charges of classism, by biological. Assertion, I look, at it this way if you've got ten people who advocate for policies, that target, the poor and marginalized hoping. To decrease, their lifespan or outright. Kill them but, one time one of them says, intelligence. May be a matter of doubt does, it really changed the overall goal, or effect of that group of ten people his. Usage, of the phrase bad, specimens. Should sound some alarms to the, ideas Malthus, espoused do necessitate. Large numbers of people to be viewed as bad, specimens. As he calls them as earlier. Stated it, is not the obviously, intelligent, definitely. White bourgeois, class that multiply. Like rabbits, it's those sad laborers, that are never gonna get anywhere so they need to fuck the pain away it's, also conveniently. For the British Empire those, quote unquote savage. People in distant, on developed, countries, that could be enslaved or live on land that is rich in resources or, perhaps provide better more convenient, trade routes we. Have to go and civilize. These people if, we're talking about the 1800s. Anyhow, nowadays. We call it spreading. Democracy, like.

Overpopulation. Eugenics, dates back to Plato apparently. No one with bad ideas actually, comes up with them on their own they just rip off the less popular, Plato deep cuts of, course Plato didn't call it eugenics, he called it something. Greek, similarly. Malthus, didn't have a word for it but he included, talk of it in his book about overpopulation, which, indicates, it's more than casually, connected, in fact I'd go further and say they're inseparable and, it, isn't hard to demonstrate their convergence, another. Field of study that emerged in the time between principle. Of population and, a Christmas carol was craniology. Craniology. Was, the brainchild of a man named Samuel, George Morton, who collected, hundreds of human skulls from the many regions, of the world after. Studying, them he claimed that he could judge the intellectual, capacity of, a race simply, by average, size of the skulls he had measured, large. Skulls, to Morton meant, a large brand, therefore. High intellectual, capacity. Also, he, believed a small skull indicated, the opposite, because bigger, is better and that's that also, also. Different. Skull shapes could dictate various. Personality. Types also also. Also this. Is all obviously wrong, both. Elephants. And whales are. Examples, of animals, with brains significantly. Larger, than ours and though, they are both smart and cool they can't really compete. Not, that it's a competition. I mean, sometimes, people say that when they feel threatened, that's, not why I said that I'm not threatened by elephants. And whales okay, I am, so much smarter than elephants. And whales, not. Threatened. Also. I probably got way bigger dick than them not. A competition though. Similarly. We have about the same brain to body mass ratio, as mice, yet, mice haven't, invented a smartphone yet that, is to say with, a small amount of critical thinking it's easy to tell that Morton's ideas, were basically, nonsense. Nevertheless. In, 1839. Morton, published crania, Americana, in which he claimed that white people had the biggest and therefore, best brains, while black, people had the smallest brands, science. He said had proven black folks are not, good brain people to use a direct quote okay, so it's not a direct quote but he, also said, the skulls were evidence that God had created all the races separately, given each specific. Irrevocable, traits and characteristics so, I don't. Need to directly quote him who. Cares, Morton. Published his work quite, a while after Malthus, his principle, of population and, though, it doesn't seem particularly, related.

When, They intersect, they, do it hard, in. 1864. Herbert, Spencer published. Principles, of biology because. It was apparently, a trend to name things principles. Of something now, Spencer, was an unapologetic, supporter. Of laissez-faire, capitalism. As he believed the struggle cause self-improvement. Which, was also something he believed to be genetically passed on Spencer's. Idea of survival. Of the fittest yes, he's the guy who came up with that his, directly, influenced, by the principle, of population Malthus. His work in fact he believed that overpopulation. Would lead specifically. To survival, of the fittest Herbert. Spencer's, writings, were known as imperative. Contributions. To scientific, racism, which, is racism. Dressed, up as science you, know like how so-called, identitarian, czar really just more branding, focused white supremacists. Except, in the 1800s, nobody was like don't claim to be racist, they, were more like find, a way to back, racism, was something that sounds like science and conjecture. Is still generally pretty accepted, so go ahead and use that like just make sure you use big words okay use, big words. Spencer. Was one of the progenitors, of social. Darwinism, what, this means is that he applied Darwin's, ideas, to the. So. Show. But. Since Darwin's theories are biological. Applying, them to the. So. Doesn't. Work. Maybe. You're not quite as dauntless, as you thought you were you're. Right. I'm. Not. I'm divergent. Also. Spencer, believed humanity, could be steered, and driven. To evolve towards, the quote, unquote ideal. Human, race because. Of course, he did the Spencerian. Take on evolution. Claims savages. Are less, evolved. And incapable. Of higher thought Spencer, also, cited crania, logical, studies of skull, size and capacity in support, of this because, again of course, he did these, ideas influenced, the eugenics, movement which was jump-started by Francis, Galton in 1869. Who, proposed the first social measures meant, to preserve or enhance biological. Characteristics. Finally, dubbing these ideas. Eugenics. He, specifically, proposed, a system of arranged marriages, between rich obviously. Intelligent definitely. White bourgeois, men and women note the binary, conceptualization. Of gender to produce the ideal. Human, race. In. 1899. Georg Fischetti Lapage published, the Aryan and his social role in which he classified, humanity, into different hierarchies. Races. Spanning. From the Aryan white race to the mediocre. And inert, Jewish. Race he. Applied eugenics, to his conceptualization. Of race as generously, as someone, who never, wants skin cancer should apply sunscreen the. Shed Dilip Uche had two ends first. The end of trade unionists, who he and his followers considered. To be quote unquote degenerate. As their, aim was to improve the conditions, of the working poor remember. According to the prevailing thought of the time the poor were genetically. Inferior and contributing. To the surplus. Population but, where have we heard the word degeneracy. Before, let's. Watch a YouTube video to find out. Let's. Watch an instructional video to learn more. The. Word degenerate, comes from the Latin prefix D which, means away from and the Latin word genus, which means race our kind so to be degenerate, is to no longer be of your race our kind and if you think this already sounds pretty flashy you. Pay attention. Second, verse shared Allah push wanted to prevent social conflict, by establishing, a fixed hierarchical. Social order with well-bred. Intelligent. Elite individuals. At the top and, a disposable, mass of people at the bottom Java. Shed Allah push became one of the leading inspirations. Of Nazi anti-semitism and. Other Nazi stalwarts. In the, hundred and one years between, an essay on the principle of, population and. The Aryan and his social, role one, big, thing worth noting happened. The, United States Civil War abolished, slavery in the country mostly. Slavery. Was a means to not just get work done for free but seen, by money as a means of controlling the populations, of supposedly, genetically, inferior races, entering, the new world considering. Labor and economics. As well as social hierarchies, it makes sense, that, these people would want reasons, to devalue, groups of human beings also fuck.

These People the, various eugenicist, c-can't, in you´d their work even, after slavery, was quote/unquote over because, even a lot of people with anti-slavery. Views, didn't, believe all humans to be created equal despite, it being the start of the second paragraph the United States Declaration of, Independence, but whatever. The. American eugenics, society, was founded in the early 20th century USU. Genesis outwardly, supported, restriction, on immigration, from nations, with, what they considered, to be inferior. Stock, and, argued. For the sterilization. Of, degenerate. And. Unfit. Individuals. For, reference this meant the mentally ill or the neurodivergent, the blind the deaf promiscuous. Women, homosexuals. And immigrants. Or racial groups between. 1907. And 1935. All but 12 states in the US had passed or were in the process of passing forced. Sterilization, laws, and just. In case you're wondering well over half had actually, already passed, them and yes. Many, progressives. Were proponents, of these laws let's. Just go ahead and say this though progressives. Were much. Bigger assholes. A century, ago because, people, in general were much bigger assholes. A century, ago I mean woman's, suffrage, had an element to white supremacy. Foreign, philanthropy, had an ulterior motive of, establishing, apparatus, of Western control and progressives. Didn't think people should be able to make their own choices about drinking, alcohol. Well progressive, attitudes, towards, government were certainly better than many not. All these. People were not removed. From their time they, were still capitalists. Who still believed in hierarchy, and all the shit the laissez-faire dopes, who popularized. These ideas, first like Spencer, and Malthus, for that matter thought, they, just also, believed, in regulation. That, alone doesn't make people good these. People are all dead, though what. Do you think people believe now hint. Most. People are different now a century, later though without, critical context, many people all over the political spectrum, unintentionally. Support the myths and assumptions we've been discussing thus far so. Early. In twentieth-century America. Over, 20,000. People were sterilized, because of their supposed genetic, inferiority, which. Included, the poor who if, they were genetically, superior could, have never been poor right, don't. You dare help them it will hurt us all move, into the wilderness away. From them do, the smart thing gears of a tailor sack they'll pay literally like eighty thousand, dollars for, it by like a hundred twenty acres of land get. The hell away from them this, world is overpopulated. And, I hate the morons who voted the way I don't like they're, both really stupid, idiots with deficient, brains, we. Have to get away from them I. Have. To get away from them now. All this, forced, sterilization, and, genetic, sorting, was in the United States before the, Third Reich happened, it should be noted that eugenics, really only became less popular because, Nazi. Germany ended, up loving that shit Adolf. Hitler had detailed, his belief and enthusiasm. For eugenics, in 1925. S mine Kampf and as, he took power he implemented, eugenic, sterilization, legislation. That had been pioneered, here in the United States much, of the master, race rhetoric, was based firmly, on ideas that had been espoused, 134. Years of in an essay, on the principle of, population by. Thomas, Malthus, overpopulation. Genius. It really seems to me that eugenics, is an unavoidable practice. If the problems, of human sustainability are. Anchored, in, overpopulation. In fact the implication, of saying, overpopulation. Is there, should be less people which brings, up a lot of questions, who, do you get rid of how, do you do it who, do you stop from having kids who do you deprive of food water resources.

And Health care to shorten lifespan do, you just kill people is, there a way to go about eugenics, that's good. Wouldn't, designer babies, be okay would it be great if we could breed out mental, illness wasn't Planned Parenthood, founded by somebody, who supported, eugenics, don't, right-wing, people try to use that to take down Planned Parenthood, well. Yeah, she. Did and they. Do but. What's weak is that instead, of saying eugenics. Isn't a good motive for Planned Parenthood's, various, services, but luckily, that's not really an acceptable, thing to believe and the Planned Parenthood of today doesn't, people, instead, defend, or even try to ignore, Margaret, Sanger trying, to act like somehow her eugenics, wasn't, the, one that had been gestating for, about a century or so before her before, we go any further it needs to be acknowledged, that this is an extremely, controversial. Topic, and that, there will be people who disagree with me here that's, fine and I don't think that you're a bad person if, you do but, I'm simply of the mind that we don't need to shine up the past, the. Past is a turd, Sanger. Had a positive, net. Effect, in several ways but I think it's worth saying that she held some really bad views, some. Have suggested that, she pretended, to have these views to popularize, contraception. Which I don't really, care to entertain, like. You, can't actually, know, a person's, motivations. Especially. When, they've, been dead for decades unless. They write them down which. She did and they. Sounded, really bad I mean, good job associating. A major moment, in body autonomy, with, the forced. Sterilization, crowd, that. Has not produced. Problem, for people advocating, for Planned Parenthood of this. I am sure, Sanger. Advocated. For negative, eugenics in, her book published, in 1920. Entitled. Woman. And the, new race which, I don't think I need to point out anything, about for. You to understand, why, it gives me the heebie jeebies negative. Eugenics and to improve human hereditary. Traits through social, intervention. By reducing, the reproduction. Of those who were considered unfit, this, was also in service, of reducing, the overall population, as here's. A surprise, Sanger. Was deeply, concerned with overpopulation. Publishing. Articles and, papers on the subject with titles like preparing. For the world crisis, in which she advocated, that no one should have babies for five years so the population, could quote unquote write itself and giving, speeches entitled. Overpopulation. And war, in. A speech she gave titled, the morality of birth control she, divided society, into three groups, educated. And informed a, designation. That regulated, the size of their families, intelligent. And responsible, who wanted to do family planning but lacked the means and knowledge and. Irresponsible. And reckless people, they, were just banging all the time with no dong bags, according. To Sanger, there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking, people that the procreation, of this group should be stopped. She also endorsed exclusionary, immigration. Policy, because I guess immigration, is bad she, also supported, compulsory, segregation. Or sterilization. For the heavy, scare quotes and, content. Warning, profoundly. Retarded, her. Words, not. Mine now, it's important, to note that she advocated, for free access to birth control methods.

And Full, family planning autonomy, and these, are good things when they're advocated, for all people, but it's also important, to note that she only advocated, this stuff for the able-minded. Which. Would not mean the heavy scare, quotes content. Warning, profoundly. Retarded keep. In mind that in a situation driven. By eugenics, neuro, divergence, is regarded, as unfit. Sanger. Saw her thoughts on eugenics as the, good kind writing. We do not believe that the community could or should send to the lethal chamber the, defective, progeny, resulting, from irresponsible in, unintelligent. Breeding thing, is even, if she didn't like the war mongering, Nazi, eugenics, which she thankfully, didn't she's, still considered neurodivergent, people, the, defective, progeny, resulting, from irresponsible and, unintelligent. Breeding, I dare. You to repeat that as your own opinion, on Twitter can, you imagine how that would go so. I mean, no there. Isn't a good version of eugenics, eugenics. Is about establishing who, is unfit. Genetic, stock and either, breeding, them out or just outright genocide. Eugenics. Is a ridiculous, motive to empower people with reproductive, rights one the right wing absolutely, does use as a line of attack it's not a very clever one though as it reveals that they would hate their own deeply, held ideology. If they weren't cultivated. In service, of it eugenics. Is hierarchy, it's survival, of the fittest and it's. Meritocracy. But poor, people are not stupid. They're, just not born into wealth they're given the same opportunities. As those who are and those, who are incentivized, to hoard the wealth instead of spread it around enforce. Those limited opportunities, poverty. Doesn't happen because the poor are lazy dumb assholes, who have a lot of sex because they don't know how to do anything else with their free time they have no free time well, Margaret Sanger's, work resulted, in more body autonomy, Sanger. Herself, held a lot of bad views, that we shouldn't be afraid to debunk shying, away from criticism, of a single individuals, Inconvenient. Worldview, seeds, ground to opponents, of women in all people's, right to reproductive, self-determination. Sagres. Motives, for promoting birth control, and birth, control itself. Are not one, in the same birth. Control, is a tool, and, nothing. More body. Autonomy, is an important, cause on its own, why, bother defending. A dead person, who at best. Complicates. The fight for reproductive, rights and at worst, functions. As an ideological foot, in the door for eugenics, and for. That matter why. Indulge over, population, if it does the same, there. Are folks who still believe that people both, racially. Speaking and individually. Speaking are genetically, predisposed.

To Exist in a hierarchy, and that the, hierarchy tells us who is worthwhile and who isn't it's, not hard to find them actually, just mentioned, Charles Murray's 1994. Book the bell curve or Jordan, Peterson's, lobster comparison, on social, media and a flurry of discussion, will suddenly accumulate. Around you some. Of these folks will. Be there recently. You may have seen some among, the youtubes left graciously, spend their time debunking, nonsense, like the great replacement with, informed, research and even-handed commentary. The great replacement, is one of a number of contemporary, fallacies. Derived, from ideas, like overpopulation. And eugenics those, ideas contextualize, historical. Realities, like a limited, supply of resources. Or, the various social orders humanity, is manifested. Through the ages creating. A perception, of necessity. For the status quo and its current socio-economic, system, of capitalism, in, fact way back when thomas malthus's, ideas, were first gaining traction Karl, Marx and Frederick Engels known, capitalism. Haters collaborated. On a series of pretty harsh reaction, videos dunking, on Malthus, uploaded. To YouTube in the mid-1800s, while. Kind of Marx, and Engels thoughts on population, can be found in 1845. The condition, of the working class in England 1867. S capital and 1861. 263, 's theories, of surplus-value but, these are obviously, not YouTube, videos though, when. Marx and Engels addressed, Malthus, they were quite, harsh and probably the closest equivalent to, a measured, response style, dunking, that we have from that time period the subsistence increases. Only in an arithmetic or ratio. Look. Peter just put one of the music here, you, want yourself I'm. Going through some stuff right now. Marx. And engels saw, malthus's, principle, of population, as framework, for bourgeois economists, to claim the way society, has historically, played out isn't the result of structures, that can be criticized, or even changed, but rather the, result of supposedly, unquestionable. Natural, laws in fact, there's a good chance that this is a substantial. Part of why people think, capitalism. Works because, human, nature you, know people. Who say stuff like of the two worldviews there, is only one, that allows and acknowledges, human nature claiming. The natural. Order of the world is that superior. Humans. Will naturally rise, to the top and the inferior, ones will sink to the bottom, explain, the inequalities. Inherent, in capitalism, and previous, socio-economic. Systems therefore it's, not hard to understand, how in a capitalist, world the people at the top you know those who benefit, from how things currently are those, who pollute and consume the most might, look at the issues of sustainability.

And Longevity of, the human species and see population itself. As the, problem, rather, than, flying a private jet everywhere, or demanding. Bluefin, tuna decorated, in edible gold garnished, in caviar or. Craft beer. Why. Face the idea it might be inefficient modes of production and distribution ones. That might waste and pollute more but our cheaper, and yield higher margins, when you benefit, more from just, not. Facing. It it's, easier, for someone like that to say there's just too many people there. A member of a class that wouldn't, be considered, the surplus, population in. Such a model, they are supposedly, genetically. Superior according. To the theories that led to the social and economic order, we have today which were socialized, to accept whether or not we believe in, the specific, theories they, are supposedly, more, vital, people leading, us towards a better future with, their capital, which they will invest in technologies, of tomorrow, they aren't disposable. They won't be the ones who starve, if there's too many people for the capitalist, mode of production and, distribution to, sustain, keeping. In mind that perspective. It's very easy to see why socio-economic. Systems rooted in these I would be kept in place it's, privileged, and insurance, all at once its comfort its power there's, no incentive to end these systems, and these viewpoints will likely never truly die under, them they're the supposedly, logical. Answer, to questions, of humanity's, essence, if a competitive, mode of existence is accepted, as human. Nature the. People saying it don't actually, make an argument for it they just say it and move on as if it's true why. Do we accept that a. Popular. Defensive malthus's, ideas, are that he never actually said overpopulation. Was inevitable, but he did say that when left unchecked, population. Doubles every 25, years and that food production, doesn't what, conclusion, should we make besides that a slight acquaintance, with numbers, will shew the immensity of the first power in comparison, of the second, and the, solutions, or checks, that he proposed, in his book instead, of recommending cleanliness, to, the poor we, should encourage contrary. Habits, in our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd, more people into the houses and caught the return of the blade were, discussed, and developed for a century by others and then eventually, inspired Adolf Hitler to do you.

Know His. Stuff but. Again the, predictions, Malthus, made didn't, come true human. Growth only became, exponential. Due to medical advances, as well as food production advances. These, things all happen just before the 1960s, and briefly. The Malthusian human, population, factor looked real there, was a, baby. Boom something. Else that happened around then was while, feminism. And equal rights see. The interesting thing about Margaret, Sanger's, outlook, was that she believed educated, informed intelligent. And responsible people planned, families, and had less kids, this meant affluent. People with money if you ask any Malthusian, which isn't, wrong, but it makes some wrong assumptions, about why, the, thing is it's less about money and it's way, less about intelligence. What, it's about is. Agency. Agency, means, the capacity, condition. Or state, of exerting, power and in this context, we're, talking about the ability for a person to act for themselves as more. People gained, more agency, over their bodies, the, baby boom oddly, enough quickly. Relegated, itself to linear growth the, struggles, of feminism, and equal rights advanced, the interest of agency, over one's body though, it should be argued, no one has full agency, in a system that extracts, from in value, alienating. Us from labor product, to other people, in the true essence of ourselves still. There. Has been less gender, and race oriented restriction. On people's careers more. Encouragement, to pursue passions but. Overpopulation. When. A young woman person, of color trans, person, neurodivergent. Person, or anyone who may have been called a degenerate, 100, years ago are given, the choice as well as the means birth, rate goes down there's. Genuinely. No, reason to care about wild. Population. Growth if you, care about sustainably. Improving, people's quality of life on an equal basis, right, now quality, of life improves, as a consequence, of the goal of profit, but profit motive also does a lot of things that aren't great from, intentionally, creating new problems to solve to more importantly, the lack of incentive, towards sustainability, or to, put it in terms that overpopulation. Warriors might be more familiar with capitalism. Grows infinitely. Exponentially. Overtaking. Everyone, and everything, it's. By design - back. To the charts. Your. Data I only like my. Data my, data is just way more chill. You. Know when I claim the world is headed for calamity, you left us just have to come back and make problems, claiming. The system depends on a lot of these ridiculous, beliefs to exist this, country, is already, divided, enough. Remember. When I said our food production growth, is outpacing our, population. Growth now, our, distribution. Methods definitely, aren't we, waste half the food we produce for various reasons, that can be summed up by saying it's, cheaper, to waste it rather than give it away remember. It still costs, money to distribute, free food similarly. It's the mode we operate, on at a planetary, level which causes, the massive, carbon emissions not. Individuals. Normal. Folks having, jobs and trying to get by wouldn't, change much by purchasing, a Tesla, because they, are personally, contributing, much to air pollution relatively. Speaking even. With their 1987. Buick Riviera, also. The electric, grid is still mostly coal capital. Still owns the means of production of electricity and, right, now coal is still way, more profitable than, other energy, sources in, fact energy, sources like solar wind hydroelectric. And, nuclear are often, denigrated, by oil companies because again. Their motive is making more money not, providing, energy they. Provide, energy to. Make money, nuclear. A potentially. Worthwhile, source of power that doesn't, cook the atmosphere, has problems, inherent to how we do things today half, of the nuclear reactors, running right now or at least 30 years old I live. Pretty close to two nuclear, power plants, one, began operation. In 1975. And the other in, 1971. Since. Then research, on nuclear tech has expanded, the potential, significantly. Waste, from new reactors, has been significantly, reduced and the ability to recycle that waste into, more fuel further, reducing, it has been developed quickly as well recently.

Experiments. That create glass as a waste product from a nuclear reaction have shown the potential to even further reduce, the waste from any of these processes by, up to 90% with, that glass being very safe to store compared, to traditional nuclear, waste but, the incentive, to perform an expensive, replacement, or upgrade, while an old reactor is still making money is well. Let's, just say again nuclear. Isn't great in capitalism, nothing. Really is anyway. How we generate, electricity and how we distribute, food, has way more bearing, on whether the world will be uninhabitable for. The 11 or 12 billion we're eventually going to top off at a century, from now then. How many people there are by. A lot like. An immeasurably. Large amount, does. Population. Growth increase, the need for clean, air resources, and food sure. Is population. A resource burn yes, absolutely. But. Is population, the, problem. See that, one is a No the problem is not consumption. It's, not specifically, that people eat or burn stuff the problem, isn't, where, we are or who, we are in fact it's really really. Not, who, we are the. Ultimate problem is that we live in a system that, prioritizes. Profits, and metrics, over our fellow human, beings we, have popular, thought leaders claiming, they have the forbidden, knowledge that, biologically. Proves the ladies either aren't capable of complex work or that, the ones that are capable, of complex work shouldn't be doing it instead, they should be breeding stock for a class of supposedly, valuable. People its. Degeneracy. If ladies, married. To one of these unfit leeches who does all the hard work but also never. Works and, they're having unprotected sex, at home all day because. They're there all day, while also working 16-hour. Days at the mill the, mill, more. Like the couch and by the couch I mean the building equipped with machinery for grinding grain in the flour so actually. A mill that, person, is lazy, and unintelligent, probably has trouble expressing their ideas with clarity not, like me. There's. Also people who don't believe all that stuff but accept, ideas like overpopulation. Or IQ, the, blame and supremacy, creep into the worldview over time causing, them to say things like vanos, has a point, no. Thanos. Does not have a point if, we accept that we're biologically. Stuck in a hierarchy, that essentially, ranks all humans, from 1st to, 7.5.

Billion Who, decides how that supposed meritocracy. Works who, is worthy who. Is useful, whose. Worldview, is a threat, who's. Got to go this. Doesn't mean no, one is more specialized, more, educated, or even more talented, than other people it, means we don't measure a person's, worth that way, help, maybe, we, could even just not measure people's, worth at all, when. I see talk of overpopulation, the. Finger tends to point at people like you and me or more. Insidiously, at people in some far-off land, that's been devastated, for its resources, labor land. Trade people. Who buy every possible, metric, are the least responsible. For any of the negative things we associate, with overpopulation. Would, so bizarre I think is that this, just misses, the point entirely, the, higher the quality of life the, more agency, people have the. Less likely people, are to breed like filthy, disgusting animals. Or whatever it is the obviously. Intelligent definitely. White bourgeois, class thinks. Why. Because. The more people get to be themselves the. More they want to be themselves for. Some people this means having kids and spending every minute they can with them for, others it means burying, themselves in a hobby an obsession, or labor the, principal's, mouth is put forward are dismissive, and often, outright disdainful, of people who haven't proven. Themselves to, be merit. Worthy which, ultimately led. To a lot of quote unquote science. Claiming, this as a genetic, reality, but what defines merit, worthy or more. Specifically. Who. What. Is good, in capitalism. Is. Usually, defined by capitalists. What. Is genetically. Superior, is. Usually, defined by people who believe in, their. Own superiority. At. Best. Overpopulation, seems, to be used as an excuse to avoid enacting, humane measures that cost money which, could easily be in someone's, pocket, capitalizing. On the fact that it's currently considered, acceptable, that 30 million people flat, out don't have health care in the United States for instance or, that the people of Flint Michigan and countless cities in at least 34, states don't, have clean drinking water not. Fixing, that stuff help. Somebody's, bottom line at worst. Overpopulation. Is a justification, for, sterilizing. Torturing. And. Even killing people someone, thinks the world would. Be better without what. I think people have failed to point out through the years is how adjacent. To genocide, this makes capitalism either. Let. Him die. Or. Kill him it's. Not hard to get some stock footage of an overcrowded. City pair, it with some footage of a shanty town in the so-called world and say, there. Are too many of us it's. Popular, to do two because. It seems plausible but. When you start asking questions like, maybe, this, one place is overcrowded for, sure but, is the world population growth, actually exponential. You start finding that most, of this rhetoric is based in pseudoscience, that leads to unsavory, situations. But, if you solve more material, problems, like the production, and distribution of, food the rights of all sentient life and, human, driven climate, change, population. Isn't really, a problem. It's. Simply a number. Everything. Tends to work out better as people's. Quality of life goes, up. So. Why isn't that the priority. Darry, spirit. Will. He live I. See. A vacant place at this table I, see. A crutch without an owner carefully. Preserved. If. These, shadows. Remain, unaltered. By. The future the child will, die. No. Sale despair. If these, shadows remain unaltered, by. The future none other of my species will find him here, but. If, he is to die then, let him die and. Decrease. The surplus population. You. Use my own words against, me. So. Perhaps in the future you will hold your tongue until you have discovered, what the surplus population. Is. And, where. It. Is, it. May well be that, in the sight of heaven you are more, worthless and less, fit to live than, millions. Like. This poor, master. Yeah.

2018-07-13 01:01

Show Video

Comments:

Thank you for this video. As a person who got a degree in conservation and sustainability, I can fully tell you that the human race has little to nothing to worry about in regards to their own food supply or personal space. The issues are that we're removing resources for OTHER species. Oh, and that capitalism is ruining everything for everyone across the board, it's just that the bougies can avoid consequences by throwing money at the problem (eg: relocation from flood as well as mining and fracking operations, NIMBY movements etc) whereas poor folks can't. It's frustrating. A lot of the classes I took (at one of the highest rated environmental science and geology programs in the country, so you THINK maybe they could get with the fucking times) actually still preach the overpopulation myth as well, but I think they're doing the really gross, really prevalent in academia method of "if you turn this into an issue about humans, then you can scare people into doing what you want." The argument was never "poor people should stop breeding" but the whole thing smacked of "it's our duty to make sure the human population stays in check, and that may be through preaching reduced family sizes, etc" which still would likely mean that the higher ups would only punch down. College is such a fucking mixed bag of dollar store candy and razor blades. It's superficially pretty okay when it's okay, but you're still going to have to wade through way too much bullshit to get anything out of it. I've done a lot of work locally and regionally with some professors to raise awareness about how capitalism and growth-obsessed industrial production does far more damage than any amount of the general population could. I live in the rust belt in a city fraught with abandoned paper mills, coke plants, and mechanical factories. The neighborhoods around these are absolutely terrible throughout much of the city (though, I do live in a tiny loft apartment in a former factory building, but out of a city of a dozen or more abandoned factories, this is the only one that was ever repurposed.) The homes were never maintained and are in a state of obvious distress, they often situated dangerously close to where the houses would have been showered in industrial pollutants for 24 hours a day, the soils feature high concentrations of lead and mercury, the houses themselves feature lead paint. These houses, obviously, are still being rented and/or purchased, primarily by the city's black and immigrant population. Much like there is a lot of evidence to show that the general population isn't dooming the human race to famine and plagues, there's a lot of evidence to show that large corporations ARE dooming the entire planet to a future of disease, coastal and inland flooding, and general shittiness, due to climate change. At any rate, again, thank you for making something that exposes bougie bullshit again.

Gonzo the great so, basically, because the quality of life for individuals improved at all levels so dramatically due to scientific advancement, the number of people dying off decreased. This lead to a massive increase in population, even though birth rates, on average, severely declined.

Gonzo the great Growth is what is added to the population. What is added each year to the population has fallen from the post war (1950's, 1960's) levels and is currently leveling out. This means what is added each year becomes less. Increased live expectancy and a population boom after the war, however is something we still live with. These people don't die off once the population growth reduces and levels, thus the overall population will continue to grow until a large part of the baby boomer generation has passed away.

When you add the same amount of people every year that's linear growth. When every year, you have more people, but the amount of new people doesn't go up, that's declining growth. It's not the population ~shrinking~, but I never made any claims of that. I claimed the rate of growth has gone down, and that we add roughly the same number of people yearly. Eventually, there is a ceiling for number of people unless the growth *rate* goes up. Which it is not; it is going down.

Gonzo the great no, Our World in Data shows that the world population is still growing, the annual rate went down.

+Astro Illogica Explain how it can be linear? From 1960 to 1999 world population went from 3 billion people to 6 billion people. It happened in 39 years. Growth rate dropped from 2.1 to 1.3. Yet, the doubling occurred in 39 years which is equivalent to exponential growth at a growth rate of approx. 1.8. Whether the growth rate is varying or not, it still is exponential growth. (cfr variable rate compound interest) Btw, it could not be exponential decay, because the growth rate is positive.

i did International development, and they taught us how malthus was overall wrong . The baseline we began from was increasing standard of living through health and education decreased mortality and birth rates, and using only economic growth as a measure of equality isnt accurate. Thats how alot of UN work is done now, quality of life +economics

He said 'lands at a new plateau'. If he believes that this means population stops to grow, then he is wrong. It still is exponential growth. Even with a varrying growth rate.

No, it isn't, and he didn't make any claim about zero population growth, either.

That's not what is happening. It is not linear growth. It is exponential growth with a declining variable growth rate. ZPG is a myth.

So you are making a mistake on what linear growth means in this context. Linear growth means that there is the same number of people being born constantly, which in the short term means population goes up until you have the same number of people at every age group. If you look at the blue line from the thing that you linked you'll notice that the curve before 1960 curls up, then becomes straight/linear, and even seems to have curled down a bit. This trend will continue and the curve will end up making a large S-like shape as population lands at a new plateau.

6:40 He says population growth becomes linear after the sixties? This is wrong. He doesn't know what he is talking about. There are numerous errors in this little video. What do you care if it is nicely done. It is utter fiction. No grasp of reality at all.

I haven't watched the video yet (I know, I know), and I will, but I can guess where this is going. Yeahhh, overthrowing capitalism, efficiently and justly distributing resources would magically make those resources NOT finite and dwindling, miraculously solve the issue of oil dependancy, simultaneously halting already irreversible catastrophic climate change and the resulting mass extinction (including that of humans). Yeah, let's modernize and industrialize those poor developing countries with their booming populations so they can feed themselves, that definitely won't fuck us up. The planet can definitely withstand an industrial civilization with 10+ fucking billion mouths to feed, I just need to justifying killing poor people :/

I always forget that these videos only have tens of thousands of view when the production value is better than people with millions of views.

Great video. I wished you touched on how animal consumption diminishes the amount of people we can sustain globally, but you covered so much that it's ok.

Sonic 2 analysis when?

Just recieved a notification for a now-missing video entitled "test". That was a funny face on the thumbnail!

This is really good. Nice work!

I won't lie, lil me grew up thinking about overpopulation after being taught about it in public school. If I could go back in time I''d make lil me sit down and watch this video.

Neoliberal capitalist ideology doesn't have any answer to over-consumption or waste. It doesn't really even have a framework to even understand or acknowledge that it can exist. If there is too much consumption of a thing, then there will be less of it and the price will go up, making consumption go down and if there is any waste that could be used to help people, then it would be profitable to use that waste and therefore someone would be doing it. If you believe that, then there can't be any such thing as over-consumption or waste. That means any question of over-consumption or waste has to be reframed as a question of overpopulation.

Really good video but I think my favourite part is the "he didn't call it eugenics, he called it... something greek" joke, it caught me off guard

You just blew my mind, mah dude.

Ive been on the communist left for many a decade, and this is the best Ive ever seen these points communicated. Great job!

excellent choice of hitler footage.

Fuck nicer automata. Good video

A&W is the craftiest of beers.

noice

this video is long lol

i dont understand how, but the quality of your videos keep increasing in every way. keep up the amazing work!!

Thank you!

Thing about exponential population growth is it's an effective strategy. For rodents. Which we aren't. For humans, making a baby into a breeding-age adult takes 2 decades of intensive, collaborative work and enormous sums of money. People who are somehow able to have numerous children, while competently providing for and teaching them, deserve to. Making people is socially important work and someone has to do it.

Seeing other YouTube folks working with you again warms me old bitter heart. That one of them was HBomb with a typical dedication to having All the Appropriate Props makes it even better.

The contrapoints part made me giggle. Great video, you've got a new subscriber!

I like how Thought Slime got a little bit of a nod here in your video (@ 35:10). He's one of my favorite new YouTubers!

Is the only safe course of action when watching an Indiana Jone double-bill, to watch Indy fighting Nazis in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" followed by Indy fighting inequality in "The Temple of Doom" - otherwise you either go leftist tankie or risk getting sucked into Peterson's rhetoric and become a "national socialist" in your dreams? Or does "anything goes" (including aliens and crystal skulls)?

Amazing video. Thank you.

Great Video

Great video

Youtuber pops up in my feed I've not seen before, and it's sourced? That's an easy subscribe.

It's "funny" how most modern people would agree the 19th century poor weren't really to blame(but the people then didn't think so) and yet today we see the same arguments. I often think about how disgusted future humans will find us early 21st century humans.

Peter coffin has the best hat hair

I came very close to physically snarling when you said "Idiocracy"

TheCommunistGamer That's because you are a rabid animal! Your brain is trying to get you to finally accept that fact.

25:06 are you in Finland?

This is extremely well done! Editing, scripting, sound, sets, etc possibly your best video so far

I literally just went to a party at the question mark man's house OMG

I actually really like Lesko!

Hi quality stuff keep it up!

Actually, people in better living conditions have always had fewer children, modern contraceptive methods have only increased that trend, not caused it. There is a very simple biological explanation to this: There are two different basic taktics among sexually reproducing species, some have as much offspring as possible and take little to no care of it, and some have very little offspring and take much care of the individual. We are the species that has taken the latter to the extreme, no other species invests more in its young (elephants and blue whales maybe excluded). This is probably one of the causes for homosexuality, as well as the reason why every human society has members who voluntarily forego procreation and are rewarded with high social standing. Yet, it seems that in life-threatening situations an emergency program kicks in and humans start to procreate intensively, in hopes that kids some survive. Which seems to prove that poverty causes population growth.

Limey Lassen: You are right, the word "cause" is misunderstandable. I was referring to the evolutionary causes, why it is of advantage for many species to have a certain percentage of homosexual members.

Limey Lassen Maybe, it is just another version of the grandmother hypothesis

I'm not saying it's false, the explanation just leaves something to be desired.

Limey Lassen same sex younger siblings are often gay, it depends on environment in the womb. A lot of domesticated animals have an 8% chance of being gay, like us humans.

"This is probably one of the causes for homosexuality" easy on the conjecture there mate

The funny thing about craniology is that West Africans have in average larger skulls than white people. After Morton's first examinations showed that, he had to quickly invent a whole host of "skull shapes", "measuring angles" and other new factors to explain that away.

This is your best yet! This + the episode of Vegan Vanguard that Mexie and Marine did on overpopulation really helped me - as a lay person - understand the problems with overpoplation rhetoric.

This is Peter's best work so far. It exposes the underbelly of the overpopulation argument, in addition to showing how Capitalism demands human suffering. I'm thankful that Leftist YouTube has put in the work to explain this stuff thoroughly and entertainingly. I'd probably be towing the line of Capitalism if not for the work of Peter and people like them.

Excellently put

This was really amazing! Well researched and presented. Thanks for the advocation for nuclear power as well. Environmentalists tend to have totally irrational fears about it thanks to famous disasters, private sector propaganda and the pseudo-religious environmentalist obsession with the cleanliness of Mother Nature stained by the mere idea of radioactive waste. Technological development has made it much more clean and safe (as modern reactors have passive safety mechanisms that make meltdowns and such physically impossible). Moreover, it has the lowest overall death toll per units of energy produced than any other energy source. Plus, it's cheap energy long term, although the starting costs are quite big - practically necessitating state intervention, which is why many capitalists hate nuclear power so much.

This is incredible!!!

Ahh Crap! My opinion just changed.

Best one so far

Who is wigged creature labeled "Gournay" you parody with crawling text whilst narrating about Herbert Spencer (around 17:53)? When I looked up the name, I got a Marie de Gournay, who looks to be a proto-feminist advocating for equal education in the late 16th and early 17th century, but I somehow doubt that's who this is referring two since the rest of the "quotes" come from fairly shitty authors. Any clarification anyone can offer?

Much obliged for the awfully quick response. And since I neglected to say so earlier, great video, good sir. I've been known to toss about the "there's too many damn people" joke when in traffic or some other trifling circumstance (a Bill Burr classic), and it's strange how even things meant in jest seem certifiable when assessing ones own actual political positions without any terra firma basis. Needless to say, I think I'll at least attempt to be a mite less cynical while en route for ice cream henceforth.

Vincent de Gournay, 18th century French economist credited with coining the term "laissez faire." Not one that comes up in conversation a lot, though.

Man I'm not watching all that shit. U sure it couldn't be shorter and still have the same information value?

I take it back, watched the whole thing

This is your best video yet. Or, it's my personal favorite, at the very least.

Christmas Carol is as anti-capitalist as the NSDAP

I've had to watch this three times to process it all. It has left me with an overwhelming sense that _human nature is cooperative,_ not competitive. Competition only exists to profit a few. I'm going to do everything I can to tell people this from now on. Bravo, Peter.

49:48 ghost of Christmas present BTFOs Scrooge

this is amazing

Masterfully done. Those 50 minutes flew by!

Everyone in the world today would fit into the state of Florida

Anyone who quotes goddess Contra is a good person in my book. You've got a new subscriber.

Despite everything, i like the song at the end

Damn, you do a really good job!

What's the name of the classic movie you've gotten the scene from the end of the video? Really curious about it

Damn Peter.. you humble me. Is this the stuff that goes through your head when you're in the shower?

That expensivest show on vice is one of the worst concepts for a tv show ever.

Well spoken, I will admit I have caught myself using Malthusian language before, much to my great shame, but it is something I am working on. This Very Important Documentary is definitely one that more people should see, if only so we can become aware of how internalized Malthus' ideas are in our society.

I like these better than the adversaries series.

Up till about a year ago I would have said that truly revolutionary thought didn't exist. This isn't the first video to make me change my mind, but it may be the best. Definitely more revolutionary than anything the so called dark web has to say.

this is easily your very best work in this series of documentaries yet. the amount of research and preparation that went into this must have been enormous. this should also help in convincing people that without capitalism, we could already be living in a post-scarcity society. also, very nice use of cameos of/nods to other leftist youtube contributors. always nice to see the community interact in this manner.

https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth/up-next Turns out, the only ones multiplying exponentially are the folks that Capitalism has left behind. That "bottom billion" mentioned in another ted talk is who keeps multiplying - the folks without reliable food, healthcare, shelter, clothing... Everyone else averages out to procreate enough just to replace their own population. Im a little annoyed you didnt mention this - but I can understand as it fell off of youtube. The people left behind by Capitalism are the ones who will overcrowd us. Capitalism isnt just disrespectful - it is the real problem that makes overpopulation a threat.

I've used Rosling's info and a bit of his rhetoric, but I kind of thought if I did more explanation it almost would sound like I'm doing too much. I do like his explanation and I've shared it before.

I think there's a sense in which the overpopulation argument resists refutation because it FEELS true, irrespective of actual analysis. Dense crowds without a shared purpose are psychologically exhausting, and tend to generate that feeling of just needing to be alone. All the rationalisations laid above it are just ways to explain that feeling, layered with various forms of prejudice like the worst sandwich.

I'm loving the crossovers of all my favorite Youtubers. It's just nice and I like it.

also i swear to god my mind auto-completed Peter at 43:56 as saying "We Live In A Society" and then the video would've just ended after that

Extremely well-done video, a lot of info for my digestion. Thank you

You put the sources on the description....you are a Heroe only for that(i kinda hate when they put it only in th video...is makes track the info more harder). PD: Hello from Argentina, a place with MANY problems

Anybody else get a CRTV ad before this video starring Gavin McGinnis, mark Levin and some chick from fox? Also some rip off PragerU ad starring doctor "I used to be an atheist guy". Is it all the ads on YouTube, or just the ones for me?

Was that exurb1a?????

This is easily the best doc ever man. It's awesome to see a lefty pushing the pros in Nuclear power. I've seen too many leftys actully push fossil fuel companies talking points. And I'm gonna make sure to push this video on my FB page. Sure some of my friends will say "why you posting this Connie crap" but fuckem.

This is so fucking good man. I've watched it like 6 times so far.

Killing the rich would solve the problem, tho

Please someone gif capture the [bourgeois Intensifies] scene and send it my way. I need it for reasons.

I doubt Plato called eugenics, Μαλακίες. But it was funny, μαλάκα!

Hey, can you release a playlist of the music acompanying these videos

Goodness, this one was a fucking masterpiece, and also helped me with the essay I had to write today, so thanks Peter!

Overpopulation is one of the most OBVIOUS covers for racism I've ever seen. I mean, the whole theory of capitalism relies on infinite growth and an infinite ability for capitalists to solve society's problems. So why wouldn't there also be a " peaceful market solution" to increasing populations? A capitalist shouldn't see a need for the government to limit population growth, as the market should be able to take care of population if it's a problem.

Damn man, that was beautiful. You've thoroughly convinced me of my folly and I will promptly change my opinions. Thanks for saving me!

I Swear I'm Not a Troll How is it racism... YOU CLOWN??!! ...When only whites and Europeans have been told that overpopulation is a problem, and were the only ones expected and coerced into not having children...So that the worse parts of the world could flood in, leech off of us, and easily outnumber us??? Just look at the birthrates. And remember who is paying the bill, for all the socialism that people praise so ignorantly! Without those paying the bills, all the handouts that fund the constant breeding of others...VANISHES INTO NOTHING!!! You people are delusional, because you've never had to live truly difficult lives or work or fight for what you have. It was all just given to you, and you have too much time & luxury on your hands, to appreciate it! You think because it's easy for you, now, that it must've always been this easy and so therefore was easy to come by or build in the 1st place. The world was brutal, FOR EVERYONE, in the past! And now we demonize a select few, who are easy to pick on, because it's the norm. You just keep picking on the same groups, over & over, no matter who does something wrong on the day-2-day, right?! Because you know they will take it. It's cheap, and easy. It's weak. And it's lazy... And listening to people, like this idiot that made this video, is only going to reinforce the stereotypes & the delusions you've been indoctrinated into, by other idiots just like him. Why don't you get out of your safe little bubbles, and go experience the difficult reality and choices that need to be made, in the world...Instead of just sitting back, judging, from inside the luxury! Maybe we could try being grateful to the people that gave us everything you enjoy and rely on, daily??? Huh? No, that won't work, will it. 'Cause then what happens to all the trendy, ridiculous outrage, that everyone revolves their worldview around?! Lol. Our ancestors were heroes, and were ACTUALLY brave, and ACTUALLY inspiring, and collectively built an amazing society...The same one that our worthless, whiny generations are systematically destroying, because we have no foundation, and no moral-base, and also because its trendy to do so. So I don't care if we could technically handle 50 billion people on the planet. Because alot of the ones we have now, aren't worth much, and would be doing a great service if they just ceased to be. Just because people "can" exist, doesn't mean they should. Unless there is, suddenly, a strong movement for people to become helpful and useful and productive, than it is just furthering the wasting of space & oxygen & resources. And, btw, the only people that rail against Jordan Peterson are those that are small, and are intimidated by someone who is intelligent and speaks sense and logic. And we all know, that goes against the narrative of the day. So they bash him, to protect their fragile little egos! That's all. Because you can't refute his logic...So you come up with one label after another. And they don't stick, so you have to keep creating just as fast as they fall apart. God forbid admitting ignorance, and admitting that they don't know. Because then you'd have to open yourselves up and learn. And the world might actual become a better place. And really, who wants that, right?! Just keep fighting against logic and against solutions, without offering anything but regurgitated hate & rhetoric in it's place. BRILLIANT! That's all. It's weakness personified! And to pretend it's anything more, is just lying to yourself & others. Please get a clue....And realize. Go against the flow of insanity that has somehow become "right" and "normal". Because it's not going anywhere actually good!

18:00 Thank you, Mr. Spencer, for getting Darwin's theory of evolution so wrong people screw it up to this day. -Dude from the early 21st century

Every time I mention that lobster thing on social media no one knows what I am talking about. :(

jeremy miller the 20/80 thing?

Definitely a good thing!

Maybe that could be considered a good thing.

This is probably one of the most accessible debunkings(assuming you added subtitles xD idk) with the least impenetrable leftist jargon. Awesome.

I definitely need to show this to some people I know who are concerned about overpopulation without, I think, really realizing the implications of what they're saying. Because even if you frame it in more universal terms, as they do (everyone should have to have fewer kids), it's still missing the point, as you so eloquently explain. (Nitpicky, off-topic side-note though: why do Americans think the "r" is bourgeois is silent or that "laissez" is pronounced "lahz-ay"? I mean, I get that French pronunciation isn't intuitive to non-French speakers, but sometimes things (like "bour" and "laiss") are pronounced exactly as phonetics would make you think.)

Love the ff7 reference!

Very well done! Thanks for the great content!

America has been built up as the ultimate Malthusian-based country. When you really question people why they dislike socialism, they will always walk the border of Malthusianism . Whether it be wood, food, oil, money , people in this system naturally assume a constant scarcity . This is then reinforced by the monopolies created during slavery times. Malthusian tragedies could be avoided with leftism, something Malthus and his followers never allow into their thinking. I would say Malthus was correct, but in that they perfectly describe the utopian mindset and the common sense that exists in bourgeoise culture.

I believed in overpopulation, but just thought the fix was to expand humanity to the stars and colonise other planets... please don't take that way from me.

Does this count as a Christmas movie?

Amazing work! I love your VIDs so much, man!

It is worth noting that subsequent editions of malthus's essay were slightly less horrible on the solutions. Solutions like voluntary abstinence, It's not great but it's a slight difference. Also is there that much difference between Spencers views and Darwins? I know Darwin said some pretty reprehensible things about the "lower races".

Some of your best work, thanks man.

Nice Moviebob impression at 25:10

Solid video comrade! Pssst, the bourgeoisie ain't gonna give it up without struggle. Get in the vanguard already.

I think you missed an opportunity to come down on liberals that often perpetuate the overpopulation tropes. Especially people that have studied or work in the ecology fields.

I want them to change their minds rather than think of me as an enemy.

Contra ❤️❤️❤️

This was an awesome video, some of your best work. Please keep it up!!

Why are most of the commercials right wing propagana?

so I guess you would disagree with Iceland breeding out Down Syndrome

whomever is doing the voice for Malthus is doing a very good impression of comedic actor Richard Murdoch

Contra-cameo!

absolutely masterful

This is a great video and it is much needed, hardly anyone is questioning the concept. I read the script before and I thought it seemed wordy and technical. However seeing the result edited together, it works well.

Absolutely brilliant. Probably the best one so far

Is society discouraging incest eugenics? Don't we frown on brother/sister marriage mostly because the offspring would likely be genetically harmed?

Love your work

Great vid

I feel personally attacked by the mention of craft beer. Not really, though. But maybe if all beer was craft beer, shops and breweries wouldn't be pouring them out in the thousands upon expiration, because we wouldn't be brewing more than we "need." The only real overpopulation is the amount of things we don't need, sitting on shelves waiting to be bought until they're deemed unsellable, and wasted.

So Malthus was awful and racist and wrong about exponential population growth and technological progress. Sure. But I'm still afraid we're going to starve because of our current unsustainable farming practices. Current food production methods could feed the world, but for how long? How long before the soil loses its nutrition? We don't have infinite oil, we don't have infinite phosphor. To be clear, I get that capitalism would have driven humanity into these farming practices even without a huge world-population, but I'm not convinced we could have a huge (say 11 billion) population without relying on farming practices that are effective in the short term but unsustainable in the long term.

“the rights of all sentient life” does this mean you’re vegan?!

It means if I were a better person I'd be vegan lol

nice nier automata plug

Watched the whole thing twice because I need to think about this more.

Thank you so much for this. We as a species need equality, not only between us but across species. We need to care more for nature and do more to make our own lives sustainable. The rich must stop hoarding their wealth.

That's very kind. Thank you ♥️

Friend Bun at 11billion all in this b******* f****** Rat Race to live like one percenters that that's not possible judging by rap videos and fashion culture we aren't going to get people to take vows of religion and poverty

Astro Illogica you expect me to take you serious and you said the word bougie??? Please sight something the only other person i heard argue that is hans rolling spelled the last name wrong public heath expert an he said we could level out at 11billion with a B eating a western diet thats already caused a greatedt hits of catastrophe like factory farming There is a common thread it takes water to move energy and energy to move water Other than nuclear a highly divisive topic the only other means we have to do this is carbob emissions. Photosynthesis stops at 104°f correct there is already 2° of warming back3d into the equations. While argee the 1% need to be taken to task more than you know. The private lending landholding class an there corporate machinery finalization must be taken to task. Calling overpopulation a boogeyman is disingenuous to put it mildly. Maybe the problem is the majority only has an attention span long enough to formulate Thoughts with words like bougie oooooo salted. The person who populated nonsence like that needs to be euthanized with the IQ fearmongers an the 1%ers

Thank you for this video, it spreads light on a topic many of us would benefit from understanding a little better, however, there was no mention of water scarcity and little development into the problem of allocating the resources we do have. Malthus may have been wrong in regard to food supply, but it is water that the world is desperately running out of; National Geographic states that: "by 2025, an estimated 1.8 billion people will live in areas plagued by water scarcity", this is the primary concern to many in the Third World before food. But beyond the problem of distribution, even if there is enough food for the current world population and more: is the uninhabited land suitable for a larger population? Does the geography/ecological life allow for enough houses and roads to be built? And perhaps more pertinently, is there enough work to sustain an economy in these uninhabited areas? There are many issues which the world faces that cannot be solved through advances to one's quality of life. There are still questions as how to effectively improve one's quality of life without creating more of a burden on the rest of population, even more when pondering how in which to govern it. In this light, the concept of a smaller population seems desirable, and the implementation of some forms of positive eugenics (like those established in China) is not necessarily a bad idea. But again, I greatly appreciate that this video was uploaded, thank you.

*We need to fight to keep our current rights but should also fight to extend that franchise to others. Family planning is fundamental to both individual empowerment and national development and yet is somehow regularly overlooked by bureaucracies or targeted for elimination by conservative forces. There are 214 million women in the developing world who don’t want to have a child right now but don’t have access to family planning. As a result they are less able to control their futures. Their health, education, employment prospects and very standing in society will all be impacted by something Australians so often take for granted – the ability to choose.* *When a woman can control when she has children, she can control her future – complete her education, pursue a career, run her own business or spend time with the children she already has.* https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/25/when-a-woman-can-control-when-she-has-children-she-can-control-her-future https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcS9DdyRm8M&feature=youtu.be

49:03 Wow, I've never seen the Ghost of Christmas Present be that straight up gangsta before. Which version of A Christmas Story is this?

Falcon.....psssst...... is that you?

I think your coverage of the issue is excellent and despite being a capitalist I would be far more comfortable with many of Marx's ideas than those of Malthus. However, the idea that excessive competition in general is the issue is a problem. Economically, command economies such as the USSR saw much slower diffusion of technological advancements as the individual factory managers would rather keep things the way they are, the far easier and less conflict-prone path, rather than changing production methods to accomodate new advancements. If workers were to vote on the issue they would face similar incentives. Instead competition between firms results in more innovation, more prpductive effiicency, less profit accrued to the capitalist class, and less power in the hands of any individual producer. Individuals could be provided a stipend for a decent standard of living and such a system could still persist, as people would still appreciate the extra income, and such a stipend would serve to increase the worker's bargaining power. Furthermore the ideas of degrowth are themselves severely flawed. It is absurd to claim that all increases in GDP must stop to prevent resource exhaustion. Carbon emissions per dollar of gdp are falling globally, and thus it is possible to have growth and falling carbon emissions. And so long as the efficiency of resource utilization and recycling increase, growth is sustainable at a fixed level of resource extraction. That is before getting into the possibility oi f replacing resource intensive products and services with more sustainable ones while increasing production of those alternatives. Furthermore, the fact that money exists or the use of price has nothing to do with not using more expensive methods. Using examples of systems where such do not exist, the Soviet Union had massive industrial pollution because it took fewer resources in the immediate term. That is why certain methods are cheaper or more expensive. Some take more resources. However industrial pollution and carbon pollution are negative externalities. They result in costs not borne directly by the parties of the transaction, or by decisionmakers in planning. In a market a carbon tax would solve this. Tax carbon emissions, then reducing emissions is more profitable, if you tax it at a sufficiently high rate, which we should. The proceeds would then go to constructing flood walls and adapting to climate change as well as funding new renewable research, as research in general is a positive externality.

Anyone else really wanna see Karl Marx's YouTube channel in some alternate universe where YouTube existed 150 years ago?

What should we do? Im legitimately asking. I am catholic and god gave us the works of mercy. So i want to help people and capitalism subjugates i have a duty to help. I want to get rid of it and replace it with something better. I thought i can become wealthy by working hard and then help the needy by helping creat something new but there are people dying today from things we can easily prevent like hunger and water born illness. If you have anywhere i can look or any ideas please let me know.

Also THANK YOU for the section on nuclear energy! People pillory nuclear energy unfairly because of groups like Greenpeace regurgitating coal/natgas lobbyist propaganda about it.

It annoys me that I have to watch shitty US comic book movie spin offs just to get your cultural references...

Well done.

A drunken rant. How pefect.

Defending capitalist greed with arguments for population control makes anti-communist efforts in the early 20th century so much more slimy.

This is really good and something I have been looking forward to after your comments on overpopulation, nuclear energy etc. during streams. Only thing I might nitpick about is your description of Dickens. He certainly is a good contrast to Malthus, but he had a somewhat paternalistic, characteristically Victorian idea about Great Men helping poor people through charity (the opposite of what Malthus is going on about in that one sociopathic excerpt about deliberately not curing disease etc). Not quite what you don't overtly state, but imply, which is that Dickensian morals are socialist in nature. George Orwell's essay on Dickens is a really good essay on him from a socialist perspective.

humans die machines rise

Stop badmouthing Malthus. Yes, he was wrong. We know that now. But his conclusions were perfectly reasonable based upon the information available to him, and his concerns justified. He simply did not anticipate certain advances.

This is one of your best ones (if not the best) yet. Funny, informative, provocative and easy to follow despite its length!

Malthusians: Please depopulate yourselves.

It's unfortunate how much Malthusian ideas are relevant on both sides of the political aisle. The number of times I've seen pro choice and environmentalist arguments bleed into Malthusian elitism is unreal. When I was a conservative, I believed Malthus was primarily a fixture of the Left, not the Right. This was because I didn't know my history, but I think that actually goes to show how twisted the presentation of Malthus typically is in our education system by both left and right-leaning educators. In both K-12 and college, the wildly discredited phrenology was readily associated with racism but Malthus was simply described as coldly rational. His motivated reasoning was only hinted at, not laid bare for all to see like phrenologists'. You don't even need to resort to historical context - his quotes are damning enough - so why the hesitation to call a duck a duck?

Peter Coffin Just do it! It’s been nearly six years for me and I have zero regrets. Literally every day I feel glad to have changed. Most people already believe in the vegan ethic that animals are individuals and not objects to be used. Aligning actions to that belief is surprisingly gratifying. Love your work!

I had always interpreted overpopulation to be the problem of generating the resources required being too damaging to the environment, and thus eventually the population. I had never took it as literally packed streets and human personal space being at risk. However, I seem to be learning more and more about the possibility of having the same output with much less harm to the environment, seems I have to look into this a lot more but I've definitely started questioning the validity of what I once did believe could be a problem in a the new future... Thanks for detailed response, and the video of course!

I never thought I'd find out who Falcon was.

Thanks for saying "the rights of all sentient life" instead of just "the rights of all people".  I think I understand and agree with all of your points.  So, overpopulation doesn't matter because suffering and environmental destruction is being expanded many times faster by the people who are already here being ridiculous.  I don't know if that's easier for us to change than our birth rates are though.

If it is a problem why do they flood those who breed to fast into places that breed just right? Is that not counterproductive? Asinine even!

I appreciate the use of clips from Idiocracy. I finally watched that movie a few years ago after years of having it recommended to me, and I found it...disturbing. And by that, I mean I found the movie's classist and eugenicist politics disturbing.

"Irresponsible and unintelligent breeding" still bad. We let 10,000 people, and that's the low estimate, starve to death every fucking day. We're not going to be overpopulated; we are overpopulated by 10,000 people every day. Why would we ever advocate for a world where everyone isn't well fed and educated? Fewer people, more resources. It's just inarguable. We should be handing out mint-flavored day after pills like they're fucking tic tacs. No one should have accidental children. And the best way to improve humanity, which I guess would be eugenics, is to give everyone good prenatal care, feed them, and give them an education. We could do that a whole lot easier in a world with 3 billion people than with 17 billion. Hans Rosling has pushed this idea that population isn't a problem, but Rosling bases his ideas on the developing world becoming developed and birth rates naturally decreasing. The glaring issue with this is that while yes, birth rates will decrease as women are given opportunities to participate beyond motherhood in developing societies, they will also increase resource usage. Americans use like 40 times more resources that the average person in India uses. So the average woman in India may have fewer children, those children in the hypothetical developed society Rosling proposes will more than make up for the decrease by using more resources. Corporate agriculture, pollution, climate change, virtually every problem facing the modern world has a single magic bullet solution, or at least mitigate it, and that magic bullet is made out latex rubber. Easy equation, less people = greater quality of life for the people who exist.

This is really great, i believe your counter to the Malthus argument was more in depth argued by Boserup if you're interested. Also a great perspective on something i hadn't given too much thought to.

The reason I mentioned the USSR is not for the purpose of invoking the red scare. There is simply an abundance of data on them over a long period, which is why I was able to find sources such as nintil's post with respect to productivity growth in the USSR (a lost I would advise you look up). With respect to price my point is that prices reflect resource scarcity because nonmarket systems have shown a similar propensity for environmental pollution and fossil fuels. Thus it is not the existence of money as a medium of exchange which causes pollution. And a carbon tax is an example of how pollution can be mitigated using markets instead of in spite of them. Thus, it is clear that markets are not the primary cause of pollution, as nonmarket systems have had the same issue, and it is not impossible to reduce pollutiin via market mechanisms, as demonstrated via a carbon tax. The government can shape what is and is not profitable via taxes and subsidies, while competition between firms results in innovative adaptations to the new business environment.

Yeah, but a nation of 1 billion can beat the shit out of a nation of 100,000, especially if most of the 100,000 are older than fighting-age.

He was nice, we took shots together. Wore his question mark suit the whole night! :P

Just to be clear, your not totally against the idea of people deciding on their child's genetics are you? There is allot of bad genetic heritage in my family with depression, anxiety and various psychical ailments and I would love to spare any child of mine from having to deal with such things.

A few points. Malthus was obviously the product of his time and held some truely repugnant ideas, that said; It is important to understand Malthusian theory was based on the historical rates of growth in agricultural production vs. the population growth rate. Now obviously his prediction was way off. This was because he couldn't or didn't consider technical break throughs. The first major one was the discovery of a way to industrialize a method of mass producing fertilizer in the 1930. However even by the 60's people were again concerned with producing more food. Luckily Norman Borlaug created the green revolution and that truly altered everything. Now of course with the discovery of PCR and other molecular methods of genetic modification we have again been able to improve agriculture but not nearly as much as was accomplished with the green revolution. We have also seen decreases in agricultural production do directly to climate change. It also takes 34 bushels of corn to produce 1lb of beef greatly reducing the amout of available grain. Also a substantial amount of corn that is produced now is directly used for ethanol production. Both of these issues are impact the overall amount of available food. Also with the loss of biodiversity we will see further decreases in overall food production, especially the vast number of crops dependent on pollinators, the most important being the honey bee which has been devastated by colony collapse disease with rates is America reaching rates of close to 50%. So yes for now if we actually used a system more efficient then the current one we could feed everyone. But there are extremely important red flags on the horizon that question are ability to continue increasing production. Also if the dust bowl returned to the midwest due to prolonged drought we would see a serious drop in food production.

Great!

Silver lining; Galton believed in “taking the roulette out of reproduction”, and the eugenics movement is responsible for some of the life saving, health improving practices that are used today in modern medicine such as; prenatal screening, and prenatal vitamins and dietary/lifestyle changes in preparation for child rearing. This is not to defend the eugenics movement, but just to not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Even a broken clock tells the right time twice a day and people at least had the understanding to say “hey, if you want your children to be healthier, perhaps you shouldn’t drink and smoke for the nine months of your pregnancy…, or increase your nutritional intake with these vitamins and go see a doctor to make sure that the child you are going to give birth to is doing OK while it’s developing, and if it isn’t, we might be able to catch it in time before, SURPRISE!” But this in no way means that eugenics was a good idea or movement, but rather that the pursuit of improving the human condition is one that is taken up by every generation and is not without cause, though it is colored through the biases and prejudices of the people of the time. A lot of basic scientific ideas that had some credibility got thrown into the waste bin of history because of the eugenicists racist/classist overtones. This is what happens when you allow social prejudices to tarnish science; even a century later you are not allowed to discuss basic provable concepts because you left a bad taste in people‘s mouths with your racist/classist propaganda. I.E. what happens to a population where natural selection no longer applies? I’ll pretend that I don’t know because it’s politically incorrect (not meant in the last bastion of aggrieved white people way*) to state the obvious fact that if you no longer have predators that pic off the slow, the weak, or the diseased that those traits will just go back into the population and further spread and effect new generations. I’ll pretend that I don’t know that because it’s impolite to say those things out loud even though it can be proven in a laboratory. Thank you eugenicists for making basic scientific truths unpalatable to reasonable people. * because I’m black, and it’s even harder as a black person to be like “hey, not everything these racist/classist people said was completely incorrect, though their intentions behind saying them were incorrect.” While they certainly would’ve been no friends of mine, I am capable of separating the wheat from the chaff and not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. And remember, the hallmark of intelligence is holding two conflicting ideas in your head at the same time, and as you can see I’m a fan of the clichés. Good Video.

Overall I liked your vid. It tied in so much together & it leads me to take people complaining about Eugenics more seriously. However: What is the best long term solution for Cystic Fibrosis? Does it confer any benefit to the individual or society? My first encounter with CF was the mother of a child that died in her arms at 6 years old. The mother had Bi Polar and was raising her other 3 children on her own. She developed PTSD from the experience of raising that child and there was lasting mental health impacts on the son which has been a contributing factor to his drug abuse. I understand that CF is basically treatable & on average extends the *expected* lifespan to 37 years. It may well be that the mother I knew lacked the capacity to access health services adequately due to poor mental health and being a sole parent, and thus her daughter's early death may be the result. This experience and my own experience with negative heritable traits in my family has pushed me to not wanting to reproduce. I would rather not have my experienced minimized by an "ally" so I won't go into detail. I'm open to the concept of forced sterilisation for heritable diseases which cause extreme suffering to the individual AND for which there is inadequate treatment available. On the availability of treatment, it is irresponsible to insist on "support" instead of cure when support cannot be compelled. A treatment may be technologicaly available, however in the context of a NeoLiberal government, more funding for support X means less funding for somewhere else. Whilst I know of 2 Disability Rights Activists that are Anti-choice, "Pro-Life", that are opposed to NeoLiberalism & active in the Labor Movement, most Disability Rights Activists seem to think we live in a Keynsian Economic Environment. They think if they just agitate well enough, funding will appear without consequences. They don't even think to make links with the unions covering the workforce related to what would constitute "support". Yeah I hate fucking Nazis. I also hate "Disability Rights Activists" that accuse me of Eugenics when I say I want a damn cure.

Does anyone know the name of the song at 12:00? I hear it on the Zero Books podcast all the time and I've never been able to find it.

Falcon the Hero? Is that you?

Barely more than 16 thousand views after 1 week? One would expect this to have 160 thousand, and it deserves 1,600 thousand!

Uhhhhh Hegel is a known race science guy

Upon further reflection, I think "survival of the fittest" is a circular statement. Fitness is often defined or reduced to meaning "ability to survive". "Survival of the most able to survive" is just stating something without any basis. In any case, natural selection supports many places for many niches and when looked at fully can not be read in a way that supports any kind of superiority, simply the need to survive by any means necessary.

So what you're saying is we need to collect the infinity stones and kill half of everyone?

This episode has certainly shown me a different side to the argument and I certainly knew nothing of the eugenics side of the story which I really commend you on the insights. I just wanted to know what your opinion is on people like David Attenborough's views on population and the demands on resources. Now I can appreciate the argument that resource management and waste can alleviate greatly the problems of shortages but since they are inextricably linked to capitalist processes and effects. My worry is that since capitalism (with its waste and inequalities) does seem like being replaced with something better any time soon; does that imply that in the short term we ought to really be concerned with rising numbers (9-10 billion by 2050) and how many will be displaced / effected in those areas that are worse off in how resources are distributed?

This was excellent. Peter, well done! "Some of you poor folk can join us if you have the traits we like to pretend we value, but really, we don't value them that much since we never hold that shit against our own" - the "meritocracy" excuse always infuriates me when I hear it from libs. What it really does is ensure that there will always be a handful of poor people that manage to rise to the bourgeoisie, while the overwhelming majority can't and never will, but so long as they believe it's possible, they will not rebel against this system. However, this system is designed to only work if most poor people never manage to escape their poverty. Also the "american dream" is a version of this and a glaring example of how insidious this shit is.

this is down right amazing

Good shit comrade

We need socialism now, we need communism when machines take over the means of production.

Finally a left wing video that's in depth, convincing and not cringey. It's also very well made and uses real data, I'd love to see any somewhat popular youtuber on the right try to debunk this video.

It most certainly does! I'll have to take a look at it this winter... oh, and of course subscribe to you, as well. ^_^

As far as the dialogue, it's in every version of the book. But it's the production with George C. Scott as Scrooge. TBH that execution of that line just brings the whole production up several notches.

I do, for sure.

Doesn't it?

I wasn't badmouthing Malthus for being wrong. I was bad mouthing him for advising the world to do things like "court the return of the plague" to kill poor people.

Exactly.

In better words: this is the reason why homosexuality doesn't negatively affect the "fitness" of a human population.

The rise of the temperature of the globe is 1c since 2000 , the rate of increase is exponential, food supplies wont last.

Astro Illogica. _"I can fully tell you that the human race has little to nothing to worry about in regards to their own food supply or personal space."_ ROTFLMAO !!! I almost peed my pants. Thanks for the laugh.

I’m mostly worried about the animals...if we move where they live, where will they go?

Maybe stealing ideas from someone who looks like Grand Moff Tarkin isn't the best idea.

AAA work here. This is TV quality, it should be on tv; but more to it; this is tv. imagine this and other youtubers being put up on netflix. Of course, its already accessible here; it just needs that bump from us.

"Foreign philanthropy had an ulterior motive of establishing Western control" USAID begins to sweat and stare off to the side.

I mean, humanity, like any animal, could be bred toward whatever characteristics we want, but I don't think we want to live in a world where we breed people into some idealized Ubermensch of thousands of years.

Why do we assume that, for example, the Orca is not of comparable intelligence to us? What would they do differently, either as a group or pod or tribe or as individuals, if they were equally intelligent to humanity? It would seem to me as though analysis of their brains indicate Orcas have incredibly advanced signal processing abilities that frankly put humans to shame. The reason whales can be intelligent without founding civilization is basically that they don't have hands, live an an environment poorly suited to fire, and are pretty good predators without technology. Additionally, they DO reach population levels that are at carrying capacity.

While I agree with most of the points on over population, I find the opinions on "capitalism" to be strawmen. Capitalism isn't an ideology, it can't be described monolithically and opposed to socialism (which is an ideology/set of ideologies). Capitalism is at it's root the right to private ownership, nothing more. Yes what is done in some capitalistic society is ridiculous and horrible, but greed and willingness to cause human misery does not automatically disappear in socialist society (as proven multiple times throughout history). Pretending everything done in every capitalistic country is bad is complete BS, some countries including the US have worked on scientific projects to improve the entire human race's lives. You don't have to be a socialist to understand that you should not be a retarded consumerist, and both are not synonymous.

I'm sorry, I'd love your video to be true, but I've watched the first 20 minutes so far and I can't agree with the way you put forward your arguments. For example, arguing against the hypothesis of population reaching the unsustainable levels from the fact that this idea is being favoured by racist is sophistry. The hypothesis is true or false to the reality regardles of who likes it. The ideas of eugenics (especially as a solution of the overpopulation problem) might be wrong but the problem might be real. Second, it doesn't matter whether the body-brain ratio of mice is similar to humans. It matters that within the realm human diversity it slightly (but negligibly TBH) correlates with IQ, as studies show. We shouldn't pay much atention to it, becuase the differences are so small, but your argument is wrong.

Holy shit, were you in finland? Also that is definitely not craft beer, it's almost the worst of the worst

Peter Coffin I certainly don’t disagree with you there, depending on how it’s implemented it could start a new golden age for all mankind or create even further division and hierarchy. Certainly I think people who want to make difference get on this now and start planning how we are going to distribute it fairly and what limitations should be placed upon it before it catches them off guard.

I'm worried about genetic modification in a system that incentivizes things from a colonial, white, cis, male perspective. That's not exactly the same, IMO. TBH if all of it was free and competent it's different than if one person can pay to not have inherited depression and another can't.

I'd actually really enjoy seeing what methods they use to try to debunk it.

except that all he says on capitalism is just a bunch of strawmen... Capitalism is the right to private ownership, nothing else. You dont need to eliminate private ownership if you educate people to not be retarded greedy consumerists. And all socialist attempts in history have proven that socialism doesnt solve the problem of greed...

Very fine video. It is important to debunk the eugenic bullshit as long as their myth are repeated, even by leftists. Eugenics is unscientific und biologistic and has no place in a modern, enlightend society.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand subed.

This is the best video that Shane Smith never made.

Malthus was kinda right for the first serious 100 years of capitalism, up until the 1910s. Economic production explosions didnt translate to better per capita living conditions because people were having more children then they could support on their wage. China's com party didn't try to decrease population for no reason. They wanted to accelerate the process fast. Look its complicated OK.

"Take a look at the world. If densely populated Japan and Western Europe were poor, and thinly populated Congo and Brazil were prosperous, a nice case might be made that people reinforce their poverty by their own numbers. But this is not so." - Jane Jacobs

what i believe is that we need to confiscate all the wealth of the capitalist and given it to the poor with this you would have no overpopulation.

peter coffin is falcon.

I just discover you, but you are an amazing anti-capitalist channel

Living in Seattle and Portland for most of my 50 years, I've seen the quality of life decrease as the population of these cities rise. I assume that if the world population increases at the projected rate, this will eventually be true everywhere.

Peter, Human choice, in and of itself, creates a sort of hierarchy, where popular/desired choices are rated higher than less popular ones. This creates a societal pressure further reinforcing the supremacy of previously popular choices. Furthermore, unless humans have stop evolving ( i.e. DNA transcription is error-less, and all genomes identical) more desired traits will be favored over less desired traits, though mate selection. As such evolution is an implementation of Eugenics along a specific hierarchy. For example about 10% or autistic adults are married vs 27% for millennial from which we would expect most of these to be selected due to more prevalent diagnosis in recent years. Similar examples exist for other traits/disorders/illnesses. As such asserting that human choice is desirable requires that autistic people should marry less. As such, the specter of Eugenic does not just go away because you empower humans to make choices. Any framework where humans govern themselves necessarily creates a hierarchy, and someone who gets screwed over. Thus a hierarchy is inevitable, someone will be worse off as a result of any change in policy not constructed as to effectively do the same thing. Thus any argument for how society ought to run, must answer who it screws over, and how badly. This includes the degree to which humans should have autonomy, everything effectively reduces to how many human lives does it cost.

Listened to this all the way through and whilst you have some points (yes our system is very flawed and yes the answer is to free, educate and give agency to all the women on the planet) the overall feel of the vid was ridiculous. Firstly population growth is to the benefit of capitalism and largely driven by it (bigger markets and cheaper labour), secondly standards of living to improve is the goal and that can only happen when the economic and environmental costs of globalisation are properly accounted for and when population gets under control. Finally though the vid is not even close to right when discussing the impact on biodiversity, sustainable carrying capacity, long term impacts on other species and more. There is not a single issue on the planet today that can not be attributed to excessive population or which is not excaserbated by it.

This is beautiful

Yeah I mean the world is so (((overpopulated))) I mean Japan has too many people on their island nation. Don't listen to the right wing lies that they're suffering from a low birth rate, even the Japanese is right wing.

Without a doubt, human population is the root of it all and is what drives more of what you lament or take pleasure in and about the present times. However, without being part of the pleasantries of a 12, 13,14 billion population, my guess would be that any leveling off of human population should be from shortages in what a human needs to live a quality life.

Ok this was interesting

If overpopulation is a notion you wanted to disabuse people of, but also a notion you knew was commonly held, why would you open with such a vehement criticism of the people who proposed those ideas? It turns people off. Also why would you show such a beautiful wide open area in order to demonstrate that there's plenty of land left for people to live in or farm? Isn't there a contradiction in that you're saying "We can destroy this splendour and make way for more humans" I appreciate that that might be the utilitarian way of thinking, but I don't think these choices serve your argument on an emotional level. Finally I feel you buried the lead for too long a time. Personally I would've preferred a more succinct abstract. Eight minutes in and you're still talking about the ideas of long dead men, including the ancient Greeks, and I see that as a sign of disingenuousness towards the opposing viewpoints - the long dead do not possess today's facts and will not be modern representations of the argument about overpopulation.

basically peterson. GOTIM

Didn't agree with this video, capitalism still best system we've got. But this was informative and interesting.

Wow. That was an excellent video. Probably the best thing I have ever seen on YouTube.

YOU GOT HBOMB LMFAO

Thank you so much for debunking Malthus and the Malthusian argument. A sensible take on nuclear power was also much appreciated. China has 10,000 scientists working on nuclear. They are also turning desert into forests. Imagine if the US invested in something other than spying and war. On 19 July 2018; 20,000 Views 2,100 Likes Amazing ratio. Why is this not viral?

I hear so many people say they won't have kids because overpopulation will inevitably leave them in a world without enough resources to go around (I used to say it pretty often myself). People just need to realize that while this is a rational fear, it's not one common only to the most intelligent and highly informed. The fear of being unable to provide for your children is the main reason people choose not to have them. The general population is a little more aware of their problems than self-claimed intellectuals will give them credit for. Of course, I'm sure we've all heard at least one "super smart guy" explain why the general population is just to dumb to think for themselves and that's why stuff like eugenics and population control has to be used on them.

One of the things I learned from Charles Dickens is the concept of telescopic philanthropy from his work Bleak House. It is the idea that charity should begin in one’s community rather then in remote locations. I am not saying that people shouldn't give money to charities elsewhere or fight against global problems, but rather to be mindful of those around us and to be understanding and empathetic to our neighbours.

Holy shit. How have I not found you before. This is a remarkable video.

I've just been going along with the idea that the world was overpopulated without giving it critical thought, or realizing the connection to eugenics. One of your best documentaries ever. Thank you so much.

The binary conception of gender is how you reproduce. I see nothing wrong with at least that.

+Celina k I wouldn't be surprised if fascists in 20 years time start declaring cyborgs as degenerate. I'm just waiting for that day.

Xados - cyborgs and hybrid clones is probably going to be a thing in some capacity.

Bad Company Gaming Notice the word “world” using a small portion of the world doesn’t actually elaborate on whether or not overpopulation is a major concern. (Nor is it proof of overpopulation being an non-existent problem)

darknight910 +

Elizabeth Schafer +

Dalym +

A few questions. 1) do you think the earth has an infinite carrying capacity? 2) do you think the slowing of the population growth rate will last forever? 3) do you think the rich should pay for ever more poor to live in relative squalor, if indeed automation further enfranchises the wealthy while it makes humans unemployable? 4) should that state of affairs continue until the earth is stripped of all resources? all while quality of life inevitable decreases. 5) do you think capitalism will be replaced on a grand scale? 6) is it acceptable for the population to increase indefinitely, or is there a limit at which human activity is sustainable and quality of life is good? 7) why even bring up Morton's skulls to debunk it when we now know for certain the IQ differences between races? Are elephants and whales relevant when analyzing data taken from humans? From wikipedia, "A large number of studies have been conducted with uniformly positive correlations, leading to the generally safe conclusion that larger brains predict greater intelligence." 8) you say eugenics relies on one's subjective appraisal of what is good. is there no trait which is certainly desirable in humans? Is a low IQ ever more desirable than high? Is obese better than lean? Weak better than strong? (I'm not arguing for race-based eugenics, so don't read that into those questions) 9) are humans still subject to natual selection? if not, is it wrong for humanity to take responsibility for her future in the form of our genes

Funny, informative, ...outraging that this ghost of an ideology just wont go away. I'll have to check out some of your other vids.

Why do you have so many subs but so few views? Excellent content anyway

elon musk is good in capitalism

Just a little nitpicking but food production is also very inefficient.for example cows which we keep locked up in cages are horribly inefficient because they require far more calories than they produce.Because of the rise in demand for dead animal flesh we are destroying the Amazon and draining aquifers to water crops for livestock and livestock themselves.the reason we make so much food is that western lust for dead animal flesh requires large amounts of land and resources to be wasted in an immoral system of exploitation and murder merely for a little pleasure requires it.

I agree, and it really necessitates huge change, but that's not so much specifically a population problem. Again, it's totally systemic.

Pretty good stuff. I just want to say that (in case people got the wrong idea) global food production and distribution is actually an issue in regards to the predicted growth of global population, but like you say, the solutions are practical ones that will require companies and governments working in the best interest of the whole world and are not going to be solved by something as awful as eugenics.

Wait, wasn’t On the Origin of Species published in 1859? Did Darwin not use the phrase “survival of the fittest” at all? I have to admit I only skimmed the book. Whenever I try to read it thoroughly, and I’ve tried a few times, it’s a gods damned snooze fest.

Peter Coffin, oh. Thanks for taking the time to clear that up for me.

The phrase is not a Darwin original; he introduced the phrase in the fifth edition, which was published in 1869.

Bad Company Gaming It always fills me with warm fuzzy feelings to see the use of the (((Jewish conspiracy))) triple brackets /s. Seriously, try not to blame the world's problems on an entire race/religion/vague group of people. It really helps no one.

Great use of the Contrapoints video to explain "degeneracy", the Hbomb bit got a pretty big gut laugh from me too! Your editing is always on point and your scripting makes everything clear and concise! Keep up the great work Peter!

first, I don't remember saying that "it's all the Jewish people's fault", neither did I say that Japan is somehow at fault for the *overpopulation*. You just committed the strawman fallacy. My point was that, if the world was so "overpopulated", then why are there underpopulated countries, like Japan, and why do people who believe in overpopulation deny that fact and the other fact that a handful of countries have a big issue with low birth rates.

Overpopulation and the scarcity it can bring is inherently necessary for technological and scientific development. Were it not for overpopulation we wouldn't have the advanced agricultural methods that sustain a world of almost eightbillion mouths. Without the desperation of increasingly scarcer resources there is no incentive and demand to innovate. Humans take the path of least resistance, we're lazy slobs, "If it ain't broken..."

The excerpt from _A_ _Christmas_ _Carol_ at the end punctuated the video perfectly. Bravo!

If you have a pizza, the more people there are, the less slices you get.

Box Top Well... iq. I'm not even big on iq, just devil's advocate

Benjamin Hill They will be domesticated or die. Worse case scenario is Venezuela where they ran out of food and ate the dogs, cats, pigeons, rats and zoo animals :(

Benjamin Hill + We tend to move to cities, maybe Bucky fuller style

Phart Me neither, so let's invite them to make one

Maarten van Rossem Lezingen - Can you reference a single right wing video that's in depth, convincing and not cringey? I mean this seriously - not trolling. I've just never seen one.

Bad Company Gaming You used the triple brackets dude, you know what you meant by using them. Also you were the one who brought up Japan, I didn't say anything about it. The "overpopulation" problem is less about there not being enough physical space and more about the improvement of food production and distribution to meet tomorrow's (likely) larger global population.

Maarten van Rossem Lezingen y'all tryna say contra is cringy

Peter Coffin lives in a cuck shed

If the West was really concerned about overpopulation, they would just offer to pay people in the developing world monthly reparations in exchange for them not having a bunch of kids. Also, give them healthcare so that more of the kids they do have survive. After all, the reason they have all those kids is because many of them don’t make it, and because they need offspring to give them financial support once they are too old to work. But with western welfare, everybody wins. But oh, wait, that would require us whities to make as many sacrifices as the filthy, dirty, inferior overpopulaters (whom we exploit), so of course, that can’t be the answer.

Dude you sound like jeff holiday

Best documentary , Very interesting and told by good story teller !

Wait a second, Thanos didn't judge by any of those points, ranking people in one way or another? He eliminated at random.

It's the draconian aliens working through the elite blood lines, keeping everyone else subverted, like free range live stock.

FALCON IS A FILTHY LEFTIST!?!? Why did no one tell me that before!?!? THIS IS GREAT!!!

This video is cool and all, but where is the footage of Hitler shooting someone from?

Thanos dislikes this

Huh, in my politics unit, I suggested increasing the economic heights (and thus hopefully agency) of "third world" countries to decrease population growth and thus (generationally and multiplicatively) reduce their impact on the environment. It was a weird argument for undergrad, but it got a pretty high mark. I do do Computer Science though, so am traditionally bad at humanities.

You know that not every ruling class was white right?

So self actualization and full agency sound great how exactly do you achieve that in a realistic centrally planned a society

Olvi mainittu, torilla tavataan.

Love the information although obviously you are pandering to a different demographic from me and are viewing this through rose tinted glasses. The constant jabs, mischaracterisation (not intentional) and categorisation & buzzwords was a struggle for non-lefty viewers. You really need to look at IQ and how that shapes countries and people's lives rather than thinking that all humans are equal and that the poor "are just not born into wealth or given the same opportunities". I feel that you have a cartoonish representation of people from the right when you equate them to people from the past who have written fraudulent science articles. Nitpicking: Global warming is largely following a trend that is natural although there is some human aspect to it (blaming the top percentage of people for global warming is dishonest as they also are the ones who contribute the most to society economically through businesses and other things that inevitably pollute). Pollution is also not nearly the biggest issue of overpopulation. Whites are from the bourgeois class but they were also every other class in the UK as well because nations were homogenous. Good, bad, racism, superiority and inferiority are all perspectives that change from person to person, why do you pay attention to them?. Also no one in their right mind these days thinks one group of people is "superior" to another, sure there are some characteristics in one group of people that are better than another but other peoples can also be better at different things.

44:57 And dropped. There's decades of scientific research demonstrating the predictive validity of IQ. The idea that IQ isn't real or that it isn't one of the most powerful predictors of academic achievement and job performance is on the absolute scientific fringes.

I think that the majority of people believe that if you have a debilitating deformity that can’t be cured, you probably shouldn’t risk passing it on to your kids. You don’t want your kid to be born with one leg or missing part of their face. It’s common sense; it’s the reason why we don’t do incest. But that has nothing to do with eugenics in practice; eugenics in practice is „I have more money than you, die“ or „I’m a different race than you, die“.

Unfortunately a lot of that food production is carried out through the modern holocaust that is factory farming (which apparently isn't a social justice issue 'cause basically no one talks about it).

im paused at 36:40 and thinking over this section. It's got me thinking about leaders like Tariq Nasheed. Their view on improving the situation, as I understand it, is that theres nothing you can do to change the patriarchal / capitalist / etc systems as they are - imagined as a table with seats only for "the genetically capable" an "fittest who survive" - and through hard work and cut throat tribalism ("community support") black Americans can find a seat at that table. I wonder if he ever considers it a defeat stance, accepting the machine and wanting to be a shinier cog than most cogs. You know? Anyways back to watching

"he's a racist moron so i dont need to directly quote him." oh man, just beautiful. i want to kiss your brain you wonderful content creating bastard.

lol The comedic interlude at 16:30 is perfection. Also I'm not saying this cuz I feel threatened by Peters.

macintosh plus

Fantastic..I’ve been thinking a lot about this topic for the past few days now..

Elliot Wagstaff Why would that surprise me?

Maarten van Rossem Lezingen The Academic Agent for one. This may surprise you, but there are some really smart people who don't all agree about everything.

A lot of... video game B-role.

If we have space for 3 billion more, then we have already passed the halfway point. And the growth *is* an exponential curve. But we are hitting another limit, climate change is giving us a hint that we should not aim to hit near capacity before we think about these things. Our growth is kinda cancer-y. We have to grow up and accept this and stop seeing ourselves as more important than nature, but a part of it.

Plato was basing his hypothesis on the available resources of his time. The ability to grow food in abundance and get it to hungry mouths before it spoiled. What made him "wrong" is that he could not have foreseen the evolution in technology. The ability to grow more and more food on what would have been considered barren lands. But even with today's technology. We depend more and more on the use of energy, man made chemicals and so on. People constantly complain that we are destroying the planet and need to live more simply. The truth is that the world's population is already too large. Even if it stabilized at current levels. It would still mean more pollution, more plastics and chemicals in the environment and on and on. The population was able to grow so large, so fast, because of technology. But it is those very same technological advancements that will bring mankind back down to size. The next few centuries or less, will be the pinnacle of human population. The things we make, use to grow more food, build our cities and homes with, will eventually slow us down. We will poison the earth and ourselves long before we run out of fossil fuels. All in the name of sustaining an ever growing population. In the end it isn't so much about what humans do that will doom us. But how many there are doing it.

Thanks for the video! I was recently told that being gay was a natural human defense against overpopulation, I didn't agree for some reason (uninformed as I am) But this video gave me some context to the thought process this person.

Why I hate people who say Thanos was right

Fantastic video. The mention of the N-Gage made me smile. Hmu if you wanna get smoked in tony hawk pro skater on that motherfucker.

"Also I probably got a way bigger dick than them. Not a competition tho."

Scientific American says it is not so easy: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/human-overpopulation-still-an-issue-of-concern/

It comes down to priorities. Is taking good care of the population a top priority?

Cook and Palisades? Kzoo or GR?

Good work, I really enjoyed it, you are my kind of people. I'm eying that Jordon P one next. I have a feeling we might be simpatico with that as well. Keep doing really important things. At the end of the ________________ everything seems more important.

This is slick propaganda up there with Vox. I especially liked all parts where you mischaracterized everything Murray and Peterson say to make them sound sexist and racist. Good job.

"profoundly retarded" is not an "ablest slur". It's a simple descriptor that was invented by the medical community ffs.

Falcon?

"Hell maybe we could not measure peoples worth at all."

Overpopulation is very real. So are climate change and environmental destruction. They're the main causes of the global refugee crisis that's going on. You don't personally feel the effects of overpopulation because you live in the USA, which is still relatively sparse and prosperous. Overpopulation is not happening everywhere at the same rate. It should make sense to you that the earlier-settled parts of the world are overpopulating sooner than the later-settled parts like America. Be assured that in the rest of the world, wilderness areas like the one your cabin is nestled in are fast becoming a memory, especially if they have any useful resources or food-growing value. Enjoy your wide open spaces while they last.

Dont upvote, answer!

2:53 Is that a shot at people named "Thomas" or just Malthus in general? _No Thomas, we will not call you Robert, for Thomas is a more befitting name, for such a bellend as grand as you._ Great video, regardless.

funny stuff.....

Overpopulation bothers me not just because of the history behind it, as you have now informed me, but because it continually assumes that scarcity is true. I however like to actually look at the fucking world. Every time things get worse we try and fix it usually bringing more in. First off we have more then enough already as you demonstrated. Secondly if we ran out of enough stuff the more stuff could be created. Third and finally, people already die from poverty and most people don't REALLY care so why does a little more matter to them (even if it is completely avoidable)?

Youtube is overpopulated with bs.

8:41 "we" (((we)))*

I just binge watched all of your very important documentaries. Thank you. They're great. But now I feel really depressed. And I'm not even American. I want to call my representatives here and get them to fix everything here but I don't even know where to start. This world is such a mess. But it's also beautiful and wonderful. My head is spinning now..

It depends on what you fear. If you fear running out of food then that's been debunked. But if you fear the extinction of many species, and the mass destruction of the environment then overpopulation is at least a concern. Overpopulation is somewhat subjective in that respect. If you define overpopulation as so many people that the oceans are depleting in fish abnormally then by definition overpopulation is not a myth. It's dependent on what you care about. Also associating a concept with something bad (example eugenics) doesn't make that former concept false. It just means that that a bad concept like eugenics is false, and this other thing that's not eugenics may, or may not be false.

Socialism is evil. Shame on you.

Shack man is my dad holy shit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zatoGqc46fQ

That's cool and all, but I didn't hear a word about why racism is bad. You just assume it's bad, and you form your arguments against eugenics around that statement. It's racist, and so what?

Wait is that Falcon in the beginning?

MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR in late June 2018. The journals revealed the cause of death of the expedition members. Apparently Franklin had discovered documents that had been buried near the Arctic circle. They were about to sail back to England to reveal the contents of these documents to the world when they all mysteriously died under suspicious circumstances. It is now been revealed by the Russian government that the documents Franklin found provided incontrovertible proof that Jews did 9/11.MYSTERY SOLVED! I don't think this has been picked up by the English language news services. On August 15, 2018 I read a Russian language news item that Russian naval vessels discovered the preserved journals of the HMS TERROR i

I trust TYT over the Ruben Report

Wham City collective!

5:50 food production & population graph.. check the graph for 1800 - now and you'll have a very very different curve. in fact it's completely exponential. we're not just dealing with the developed world here, but also the world that is still underdeveloped or developing. while your take on food technology is definitely correct, we haven't talked about pollution or global warming..

41:41 In the US, this is no longer true. Coal contributes a third of America's electrical output. Coal is slowly being replaced by natural gas and now, the two are at a crossroads. In a decade or so, natural gas will outpace coal. In fact, almost every year after 2007, coal consumption in the US has gone down. Wind and solar are also on the rise. In 2000, wind provided just 0.15% of America's electrical output while solar contributed a measly 0.013%. In 2017, wind did 6.33% while solar did 1.32%; this is remarkable growth over just 17 years. Granted, these two energies have a long ways to go but it's proof that the free market doesn't just automatically favor coal.

It's strange that you approach this topic from the "racist capitalist eugenicist" angle because the only people who regularly talk about overpopulation are left-wing environmentalists (contemporarily).

Show this to Thanos

How many billions of humans do you think that the Earth can support then?

If you don't think Eugenics doesn't get into everything forget all the 'chosen people' in religion.

All noms.

Of course Thomas Malthus, in his infinite wisdom, didn't think inciting a new plague would effect non-poor people.

I was made aware of you through David Pakman’s debate with you! (not that it was a shitty, typical “debate” more of a convo, which I found refreshing) This video earned you a sub! Excellent work here, I thoroughly enjoyed the care and dedication in the set up and delivery throughout the video. Easy to follow. An hour well-spent watching! Keep making good content, no matter how long it ends up being! Take care Edit: spelling

Thank you! Very kind of you. ♥️

It wasn’t that Plato was wrong, he understood that the earth could not Sustain human life with a population more than what he estimated. The population group has that, but ecosystems have died, and are still dying today. Most likely due to overpopulation of the earth. Which at the time of overpopulation was still sustainable for the moment.

You: "Why do we accept that?" Ad: "You need to improve your business!" Me: FML!

1984!! Also Utopia!! Also, what if Bill Burr is my favourite comedian? :O

my headcanon is thanos just kills all the transphobes and other fascists

never mind lmao

except i guess genocide, whether targeted or not is inherently fascist so he'd have to kill himself too

Marx supported forced Labor, he was still a Capitalist in my view.

you think i cant tell you are a drug user? with your fat face and alergic sphincter (lips). the thing is with overpopulation, is we don't seem to be able to even talk about it on any mass level, other than a few youtube viewers that care. the top beings in any organism like it how it is, they like the chaos and shear abundance of lovers to choose from, the successful people with money enjoy the status quo, thats why things dont change.

Peter’s got a bigger dick than an elephant or a whale?

Other news