Over Population

Ok, so now is the time for me to introduce some controversial subject material into my blog. Apparently over population is a taboo subject and environmentalists keep avoiding it for fear of upsetting people. So David Attenborough and co have decided to actively campaign about it. I was on the BBC website reading about this, and it led me to several links to other articles about over population.

What do I find? Well, at first the writers of these articles appear to be making interesting, and potentially valid points. If disagreeable the arguments raised are certainly worth thinking about. However, does one single person (writer or commentator) give one humane solution to the problem? With all their self-righteous whining what is their suggestion? Well many state that they won't have any children. Fine. Some say they will adopt. I am much more for this idea. Others are totalitarian, suggesting governmental control of the number of children people have, deciding who should be allowed to have children, or indeed some have even suggested mass culling. Hmmm... This is all because of the massive "carbon footprints" each individual allegedly generates. I wonder how many of the anti-population individuals take steps to reduce their "carbon footprint"? How many of them are using more than their fair share of resources? And at the same time how many large families (perceived in these articles to be families of five and upwards) have actually contributed to saving the planet? Well, I don't know the answer, but I can say with certainty that there are some individuals who use too much, and some families that don't. Likewise, I don't deny that can work the other way round, but my point is, who is really the judge of who, individually, is contributing worst to pollution and climate change? Well, I think that none of us are in a position to say who has more of a right to be on this planet than anyone else. And also, it is worth pointing out, that in Africa, where there are often large families, the overall "carbon footprints" are so much less than those of the UK and USA that it is frankly quite sickening. That is my first point of contention with such articles and their ensuing comments.

My second problem is this: I am one of three children myself. That makes my parents selfish apparently. I completely disagree! My brothers are two of my best friends. We grew up wearing hand-me-down clothes, often sharing toys (not all made of plastic either), supporting each other through thick and thin, and learning life lessons of friendship, caring and sharing. So, what does that lead to? More giving back to society. And yes, that includes helping the environment. Both my youngest brother and I have campaigned, volunteered, and at present I work for a charity that covers the issue of carbon emissions as a significant part of its workload. Some people may shrug and say, well that's just one family that turned out to be vaguely beneficial to state and planet. To an extent they may be right, I wouldn't like to say, but I happen to know other families of our size and bigger that are made up of some of the most wonderful people I know. Call it sentimentality if you will, but there it is, and my experience of this heavily influences my opinions on the matter. I'm not having a go at smaller families, I know just as wonderful people from those too, but merely defending those of us who come from the larger kind :)

My third problem is: there is something wrong with blindly accepting statistics of alleged future figures based on current population growth when external factors have not been taken into consideration. The statistics indicate how population is likely to increase, if it continues at the same trend, regardless of illness (especially those resulting in fatality), natural disaster, wars, personal choice to not have children etc. When these things are factored in then the outcome is somewhat different. Some of the comments I read say that we must act now to stem population growth before Mother Nature finds her own ways...erm...what? Hang on a sec... Isn't Mother Nature acting all the time anyway? Are there not a number of other terrifying natural occurrences (yes, some worsened or doubling in number by the humanly sped up climate change)? Add to this the nature of disease bacterium and viruses to multiply and change and consequently infect thousands... All this stuff is going on now! And it always has been! We are not waiting for more...we know that there will be more, and there has been much in the past! What do the anti-poulationists say to that? That we don't respond and let people die? It makes me think of the way Ebenezer Scrooge talks to the charity collectors in 'A Christmas Carol when they mention the plight of the poor. "If they are going to die then they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population!" To be fair to those anti-populationists, none of them have declared anything against humanitarian aid - but essentially, as humans, we do work to preserve our lives and the lives of others. If we can be strict on childbirth, then who's to say we won't become the same about who deserves to be helped to stay alive? Under their argument could they not say, "Well, we will save two of the children, but let the other four die, because they shouldn't have had that many in the first place!" The concept is disgusting isn't it? But, to me, it has the potential to be the result of these crazy suggestions about population control. Mind you, I have a tendency to get over-excited and melodramatic about all things of an Orwellian nature...but that's only because I fear there is some truth in the matter...

Placing restrictions on child numbers is not the answer to the problems of this world. It seems logical that a reduction in number of people would help the situation the world finds itself in, yet there is no way to go about this without damaging the human race completely. Penalising families who have more than two children could lead to forced abortions, isolation of those born who would be considered a "spare part" to the family and a burden on society, not to mention all manner of other social ills.

If you don't want children then don't have any. But don't stand there and judge all others as stupid or selfish just because they do.

The focus needs to be shifted and centred on the real solutions to the environmental problems in this world. Remember your three Rs firstly - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. The main focus being on Reduce. Reduction of our use of resources is key, and we, in the UK, can all be held accountable for this. What characteristic helps with reduction of resources? The ability to share. How did I learn to share? I have two brothers.