By Moristotle
The comments following the publication yesterday of motomynd Paul Clark’s “viral poem” were almost as interesting as the poem itself –maybe even more interesting, actually, however brilliant the poem was (to quote one commenter). So...
I’ve selected and assembled some of the comments here. Let this be a lesson to those of you who generally read only our email notifications of blog postings: maybe you should change your ways and start visiting the blog itself...and reading comments....
Have you ever tried to post a reply,
but gave up with a sigh,
because you were laughing so hard,
at the idea any of us might actually be a bard?
Okay, enough of that. I am thrilled that my initial effort – which I slaved over for at least 20 minutes – provoked such spirited and clever responses. I realized too late (as in, after I clicked SEND) that my “poem” had spun out of playing word games with my son...my six-year-old son...who is forever asking me to create rhymes using names of his favorite cars. Out of the mindset that created “He said he would drive his old Volvo 245, so we seriously doubted he would ever arrive” came “99.915.”
While I did not mean to make light of something as serious as Covid-19, the math in my “poem” is basically correct: here in America we (so far) have way less than a 1 in 1,000 chance of dying from it. For a guy who remembers a very fast first car that did not even have seat belts, and who has ridden a motorcycle upwards of 160 mph (on a race track, not a public road), sometimes I have to step back from the corona mania and wonder...
Is this maybe a bit too much ado,
over something far less than the 1918 flu?
If our leaders didn’t lie and told us why
instead of worrying about keeping the rich so rich,
we would not have to worry, hoard, panic and cry,
watching the innocent drop away because of their glitch.
Wouldn’t it be nice if they told the truth and let us know
the economy was more important than the people?
But, no, apologize? – they dropped the ball so –
now they tell us what to do, too late, full of lethal fecal.
There once was an I-don’t-know named Trump
who led his nation into a dump.
He put money before people,
ignored a disease that was lethal,
and now we are stuck on our rump.
But if the laws of Nature don’t belie,
there is a truth on which we can rely,
no matter that our fearful hope deny
100 chance we die
In the end, you see, wherever we jive,
however slow and careful we drive,however hard we try to stay alive
0 chance we survive
| Copyright © 2020 by Moristotle |
It looks like the Population Control advocates are getting their wish
ReplyDelete"At present the population of the world is increasing... War so far has had no great effect on this increase... I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. There are others... If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full... the state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of it? Really high-minded people are indifferent to suffering, especially that of others."
Bertrand Russell - In The Impact of Science on Society
Michael, I think Mr. Russell was being ironic. Or are you being ironic too?
DeleteNo, these people are serious. I wrote a piece back in 2004 on Eugenics. I plan on publishing it soon. These Globalist Elitists are deadly serious. This is an excerpt.
ReplyDelete-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To give an idea of how some of the people who advocate population control in the name of the environment feel here are a few quotes from prominent proponents.
("Human happiness and certainly human fecundity are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but it isn't true... We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth... Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along." David Graber - a research biologist with the National Park Service quoted in the Los Angeles Times Book Review Section, October 22, 1989
"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself." In The First Global Revolution, published by the Council of The Club of Rome (an elitist think tank)
"The total world population should be no more than 2 billion rather than the current 5.6 billion." Cornell University Professor David Pimentel as quoted by the Los Angeles Times on April 5, 1994
"The damage people cause to the planet is a function of demographics-it is equal to the degree of development. One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladeshis... This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it." Jacques Cousteau (the UNESCO Courier of November 1991)
"At present the population of the world is increasing... War so far has had no great effect on this increase... I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. There are others... If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full... the state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of it? Really high-minded people are indifferent to suffering, especially that of others." Bertrand Russell - In The Impact of Science on Society
"We believe that our goal for the United States should be no more than 150 million; our size in 1950. For the world, we believe our goal should be a population of not more, than two billion, its size shortly after the turn of the century." Negative Population Growth Inc. (part of Negative Population Growth) - in a letter stating their long-range goal
Speaking at Gorbachev's State of the World Forum in San Francisco in 1996, New Age writer and philosopher Dr. Sam Keen stated that there was strong agreement that religious institutions have to take a primary responsibility for the population explosion. He went on to say that, "We must speak far more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control the population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren't enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage." Dr. Keen's remarks were met with applause from the assembled audience of New Age adherents, Socialists, Internationalists and occultists.)
Not sure what Goines was referring to, and I myself didn’t realize that you were thinking of eugenics. [“Eugenics” is defined by Merriam-Webster as “the practice or advocacy of controlled selective breeding of human populations (as by sterilization) to improve the population's genetic composition.”] Do you consider any measures to try to limit the growth of the human population to be a form of eugenics?
DeleteThere is positive eugenics and negative eugenics. One encourages “the fittest” so procreate, and one proposes the elimination of those who are deemed “Unfit”.
ReplyDeleteThis is from Wikapedia-
“Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek εὐ- "good" and γενής "come into being, growing")[2][3] is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population,[4][5] typically by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior, and promoting those judged to be superior.[6]
The concept predates the term; Plato suggested applying the principles of selective breeding to humans around 400 BC. Early advocates of eugenics in the 19th century regarded it as a way of improving groups of people. In contemporary usage, the term eugenics is closely associated with scientific racism and white supremacism.[3] Modern bioethicists who advocate new eugenics characterize it as a way of enhancing individual traits, regardless of group membership.”
I believe in people being free to procreate. No programs to tell us who is fit or unfit. People are not animals to be bred like cattle to get the best “breed”. I found out about Eugenics when I came across an article showing the Planned Parenthood – Nazi connection. It’s worth looking into.
Are you telling me that you think Planned Parenthood is motivated toward eugenic ends (either positive or negative)?
DeleteBut that may be getting off the main point. Your opening statement in all of these comments was, “It looks like the Population Control advocates are getting their wish,” and then you immediately segued into eugenics – as though anyone who advocated population control was a eugenicist. But from our quotations from Merriam-Webster Dictionary and Wikipedia, population control needs to be selective or targeted in order to qualify as “eugenic.” Just urging people to limit the size of their families, as a matter of free choice, wouldn’t seem to qualify. I myself was a “zero population growth” advocate as far back as about 1968, when the trend toward a vastly over-human-populated planet was fairly obvious. And I haven’t had a single moment of exultation over the coronavirus. Anyway, I suspect that the effects of the coronavirus on population reduction are infinitesimal compared to the coming effects of climate change....
This has been interesting, Michael. I saw your reference to Margaret Sanger in your book The Time of the Canton, and I look forward to reading your forthcoming 2004 piece on eugenics, to learn more of your thinking on this subject, which I had thought was now only a “historical curiosity.” Where will it be published?
These are excerpts from the paper. I hope to publish it on Amazon. It will take a while to edit.
ReplyDelete“Planned Parenthood is founded on eugenics, racism, anti-Semitism, and elitism, with the aim of breeding people like one would breed animals and the elimination of those deemed unfit to live. Although Planned Parenthood claims in their "Fact Sheet" on Margaret Sanger that she was not a eugenicist her name appears on the list of members of the American Eugenics Society, (which changed it's name in 1972 to The Society for the Study of Social Biology), as well as the list of members of the British Eugenics Society. Her book "Women and the New Race" was published by Eugenics Publishing Co. 1920, 1923. They claim she was not a racist, but how could anyone accept this considering her words on race and her involvement in the "Negro Project" as well as her addressing a Ku Klux Klan rally? This is small wonder given the host of lies that Planned Parenthood operates under. Although they admit she held ideas that are outmoded for our times they have never disassociated themselves from her and consider her a heroic champion of women's rights.”
“The myth of world overpopulation has been accepted as truth in most quarters. The real truth is that the world is NOT overpopulated and was not about to be before the population control eugenicists took over with their lies and half-truths. This article by Sheldon Richman *(article had web connection)* shows how people are the world's greatest asset and gives a different perspective of the overpopulation myth. The truth of the matter is that the entire population of the world could live in the state of Texas! The entire population of the world could stand within the city limits of Juneau Alaska! The entire population of the world if stacked like cordwood could fit into Loc Ness! This means that everyone in the world could literally go for a swim in Lake Superior which has 49,300 square miles of surface area.”