Written by Don Feder
And lo, the cry went up from the mainstream media: When, O when, will the Copenhagen climate summit, which concluded on Friday, discuss the real solution to global warming - fewer people? When will Jesse Jackson get around to talking about race?
Writing in The National Post (Canada's largest newspaper) on December 8, columnist Diane Francis waxed apocalyptic, "The 'inconvenient truth' overhanging the UN's Copenhagen conference is not that the climate is warming or cooling, but that humans are overpopulating the world."
Francis insisted, "The world's other species, vegetation, resources, oceans, arable land, water supplies and atmosphere are being destroyed and pushed out of existence (global-warming cultists are big on over-kill) as a result of humanity's soaring population rate."
The Washington Examiner described a training film shown at the conference (the world as seen by Al Gore and a paranoid polar bear on an ice floe), "The planet will be ravaged and millions of people will die horrifying deaths as increasing temperatures in the Earth's atmosphere result in a monumentally devastating deluge of man-made floods, droughts, storms and rising seas."
Seven years of darkness, seas boiling over, dogs and cats living together! Who ya gonna call? Red China!
Francis knows where salvation lies, "A planetary law, such as China's one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days." Is it not a wondrous thing that the most bloody, totalitarian regime on the planet - one that tortures and murders members of a harmless meditation cult - is proffered as the only hope for humanity's future?
The Chi-coms were the superstars of Globo-Warm 2009.
"China has had the most successful family planning policy in the history of mankind," said Sven Burmester, the UN Population Fund's representative at the conference. Calling forced abortions "family planning" is like calling the Tiananmen Square massacre community relations.
Zhao Baige, Meyer Lansky of China's family planning commission, agreed with Burmester's assessment. Zhao informed delegates that the Middle Kingdom's contribution here is - well - downright historic. Since the nation's compulsory one-child-per-family policy was instituted, Beijing has prevented an estimated 400 million births, which, Zhao continued, has meant 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions released into the atmosphere every year.
The global-warming cadre even have a formula - each child whose birth is prevented, by whatever means, means so many fewer tons of greenhouse gases released each year. It's ironic that those who claim the mantle of "humanist" have come to view people as a pollutant.
But all is not joy unbounded in the People's Barbed Wire Enclosure. Beijing is steering the country toward a demographic train wreck. The commissars have indeed managed to reduce the nation's birth rate from 5.8 per woman, at the outset of its one-child program, to 1.8 today. In the process, it's created an ominous imbalance of young men to young women.
All over the world, the ratio of girls to boys is roughly 103-107 males for every 100 females. Due to the cultural preference for male heirs and the prevalence of sex-selection abortion and female infanticide, in China the ratio is 124 to 100.
In China today, 25 million young men will never find wives. Any sociologist worth his salt will tell you that unattached males (especially in their twenties) are one of the most lethal forces in society. They drive the nation's crime rate, which in turns drives the state to find an outlet for their aggressive tendencies, which means a larger army and, for a totalitarian state, military adventurism.
By 2050, China will have one of the oldest populations in the world - 31% of its people will be over 60. The nation will confront severe labor shortages as well as the 4-2-1 dilemma - the impossibility of one child caring for two parents and four grandparents.
Still, the eco-fascists are convinced that coercive population control is the answer to man-made global warming - in reality, an answer to a non-existent problem.
In the vanguard of the green-machine's anti-procreation blitzkrieg is an obscure but influential British outfit called the Optimum Population Trust. (Frank Furedi, a professor of sociology at the University of Kent, calls OPT "a zombie-like Malthusian organization devoted to the cause of human depletion.") A report issued by the group in August was titled: "Fewer Emitters, Lower Emissions, Less Coats: Reducing Future Carbon Emissions by Investing in Family Planning (i.e., contraception and abortion)." You see, a child is no longer a gift to be cherished, but an "emitter" - a little smokestack belching CO2 into the atmosphere - a clear and present danger to a fragile eco-system.
An editorial in the Lancet, the prestigious British medical journal, claims that every dollar "invested" (via taxation) in family planning is five times more effective than a dollar spent on so-called green technologies - alternative energy and other folderol. Also, $7 spent on people-prevention cuts global CO2 emissions by a ton. And every dollar spent on closing a school of journalism eliminates x tons of hot air released into the atmosphere.
Global warming cultists and their allies are increasingly convinced that nothing else they do - including destroying the U.S. economy - will matter, as long as women keep popping out kids, especially in the Third World. This despite the 50% worldwide decline in birth rates since 1979.
John Porritt, chief environmental advisor to the British Prime Minister, flatly states that families which have more than two children are "irresponsible." In February, Porritt told The London Times: "I am unapologetic about asking people to connect their own responsibility for the total environmental footprint and how they decide to procreate and how many children they think are appropriate."
Toward that end (the end of the British race?), Porritt urges aggressive spending on abortion, contraception and anti-procreation indoctrination. "I think we will work towards a position that says having more than two children (per family) is irresponsible." Thanks to such thinking, sometime in this century, British Muslims - who don't use contraception or have abortions, and for whom large families are the norm - will constitute a majority of the island's population. Britannia will be ruled by the Mosque.
During a visit to India in July, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took part in a roundtable discussion of environmental issues. When one of the other participants observed that we can't hope to stop climate change without population control, Hillary gleefully replied: "That was an incredibly important point. And yet we talk about these things in very separate and unconnected ways."
The global-warming juggernaut won't stop at showering condoms on developing countries. In the end, utopians always resort to the mailed fist of the state. Hitler and Stalin both had successful population-control programs.
Barry Walters, a professor of obstetric medicine at the University of Western Australia (who calls condoms "greenhouse friendly" and recommends carbon credits for sterilizations) wants Canberra to charge a one-time "baby levy" of $5,000, plus an annual $800 "carbon tax," on families engaged in human pollution - having more than two children.
When John Holdren was up for confirmation as Obama's science czar in September, Republicans remarked on a college textbook the ideologue co-authored with Paul and Anne Ehrlich (the original population hysterics) in 1977.
In "Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment," Holdern and the Ehrlichs decided that "under the United States Constitution, effective population-control programs, even laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis becomes sufficiently severe to endanger society."
At his hearing, Holdren's office reassured Senators that, of course the czar-nominee didn't believe in compulsory population control. But it took Holdren 30 years to retract his advocacy of mandated abortion, and then not until he was up for the chief science post in Obama's administration.
Other than the right to life itself, is there a more fundamental right than that of families to have children?
Yet, this is the very right the left attacks in the name of combating a non-existent threat. If global warming is so incontrovertible and palpably true, then why did hacked e-mails from the staff at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (the Vatican of Global Warming) disclose that they were desperate to deep-six studies that challenge their dogma? Phil Jones, director of CRU, asked colleagues to "hide' evidence of the recent decline in global temperatures.
In the 17th century, there were the humanists, who said man was the measure of all things. In the 19th century came the liberals, who said their great goal was the liberation of mankind, and that conscience could not be coerced.
Today, the left sees humanity as a blight on an otherwise pristine natural world. It measures the value of individuals solely in terms of CO2 emissions and carbon footprints. Instead of turning human beings into energy, a la "The Matrix," it celebrates non-existence as a way to reduce energy dependent on burning fossil fuels.
This is the dead end of modern liberalism. Leftists started by hating their class, moved on to hating their nation and their race. And now, they have quite logically arrived at the point of hating their own species. The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement is most honest and consistent cohort of this misanthropic mob.
At least in the West, the left has been at war with human fertility since the early 20th century. At various times, this assault advanced under the banner of human improvement (weeding out undesirables), fighting poverty or promoting women's rights. Prior to global warming, the goal was to prevent worldwide starvation. Global warming is merely the latest convenient excuse. If it didn't exist (in their minds) they would have to invent it.
While the establishment is obsessively focused on over-population, supposedly leading to environmental catastrophe, birth rates are declining precipitously. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world's population, that have below-replacement fertility. (Russia is losing three-quarters of a million people a year.)
The UNFPA estimates that by 2050, there will be 248 million fewer children under 5 in the world than there are today. Long before then, population growth will end and decline will begin. The demographic crisis of the 21st century won't be too many people but too few.
At the end of the Copenhagen summit, President Obama (who knows as much about science as he does about economics) grandiosely proclaimed that "the time for talk is over." Increasingly, when the left can't prove its case, it resorts to its favorite formula: the debate is closed.
In that deafening silence, you won't even be able to hear humanity's death gasp.