Sunday, November 22, 2009

Save The Starving Children

Save The Starving Children

Yeah, I know -- almost everyone, from left-wing humanists to right-wing Christians, are united in their opinion that feeding the starving children is a vital cause to support. How can anyone be against saving the children? It is a self-evident "good" thing to do, they feel. "Oh, the children (sob, sniffle)." Only "bad" people question it. Well, count me as one of the "bad" people.

What is the effect of saving the starving children? Feeding starving children allows them to grow up and breed even more starving children. People in favor of that -- most people -- are incredibly stupid and shortsighted. They are just perpetuating misery from generation to generation.

Maybe it would be OK to feed the starving children, as long as they were spayed and neutered so that they could not pass along their failed religious and cultural ideologies that led to their starvation to a new generation of starving children. But both the left-wing humanists and right-wing Christians are not about to even suggest that solution, much less insist upon it. The pussy liberal lefties are against it because of being labeled racist and/or genocidal. The a-hole Christian right-wingers are against it because of their stupid (unworkable in real life), anti-life sexual and reproduction religious beliefs.

Why are there starving children? There are several causes, but the unquestioned major cause is overpopulation, which leads to per capital resource problems. In case you didn't know, growing food requires fertile soil. It requires clean, plentiful water. It requires a certain amount of those per person. And, a little extra is needed because of potential weather or problems that might perhaps affect crop yields. You have heard droughts, perhaps? Untimely excess rain? Floods...?

The only solution to "hunger" and other resource problems is population reduction, but most people, including religious and political leaders are not even interested in population stabilization.

Oh, you might say, what about bettering crop yields? You don't like "factory farms" and "chemical pollution", but what are the alternatives? Sorry to break the news, but there isn't enough good land and water to grow organic alfalfa sprouts and free-range chickens for everyone -- at affordable prices. But price, you might say, price is no object if we are to feed everyone. That just shows your total economic ignorance.

Billions of people have been added to the world's population in the twentieth century. In the last couple of decades, or less, the world population has increased from 6 billion to 6.5 billion. Do you know what 6 billion is? Probably not, so here it is: 6,000,000,000. Do you know what the difference between 6 billion and 6.5 billion is? Probably not, as you likely flunked basic arithmetic in your socialized (public) school system. So, here it is: the difference is 500,000,000. How big is that? The United States population is around 300,000,000 (maybe more if all the illegal aliens could be counted). Anyway, that means in the last twenty years or less, more people than in all the U.S. have been added to the world population.

And you want to feed the starving children? Are you fricking idiots?

“Whatever your cause, it is a lost cause without population control.”

5 comments:

  1. "Maybe it would be OK to feed the starving children, as long as they were spayed and neutered so that they could not pass along their failed religious and cultural ideologies that led to their starvation to a new generation of starving children" .....

    One of the main reasons that "Third World Countries" are in the position they are today is because of Imperialism. Africa for example was divided up, with no regard to residing ethnicities, had its resources and people exploited, and then abondoned to its own devices. It is our own economic imperialism that has put these countries where they are today, by making them providers of cheap food and raw materials for developed countries. In addition, these countries are so poorly off is because there burdened and trapped with ridiculous amount of debt by the World Bank. If anything its our own failed "cultural ideology" that led to their starvation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The imperialism rationale is the latest excuse for third world poverty that the trendy left has latched upon.

    The root reason for third world poverty is their failed religious and cultural institutions. Over thousands of years. Period.

    You say that they had/have a lot of resources that "we" exploited them for. So why did not THEY develop them, themselves?

    If they did not have failed institutions including massive incompetence, pandemic corruption, and crazy "leaders" that the local wogs supported, they would not have fallen into the World Bank debt trap.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree whole heartedly. I have been scouring the internet for people who share these views of yours and am glad that I am not alone.
    It is retarded to encourage more humans on our already packed world, I say let them die off to a sustainable amount, fucking reapers of the earth.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, there are a few of us. Unfortunately, we have been tremendously outbred by those with an insatiable "need to breed".

    ReplyDelete