Sep 232015
 September 23, 2015  Posted by at 2:24 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

Dorothea Lange Depression refugee family from Tulsa, Oklahoma 1936

At the moment I start writing this, leaders of European nations are in a meeting in which they talk about refugees that, though it was announced over a week ago, was nevertheless labeled an ’emergency’ meeting. The only thing that truly tells you is that Europe still refuses to see the refugee situation as an emergency. And that’s not just semantics.

Of course there’ll be all sorts of bickering about the difference between migrants and refugees, and tons of words about how “we” should separate the two, and send people back, and strengthen European borders, and fight the human smugglers. None of which addresses reality, or at least at best a tiny sliver of it.

“Smugglers” are not the problem, it’s the people they “smuggle” that are. Or perhaps we should turn that around and admit that in fact it’s the European leaders who are the problem. It’s they who lack any courage or vision, or even a basic understanding of what is going on.

Angela Merkel has gotten a lot of accolades when she opened Germany’s borders to Syrians, even though that only lasted a few days. But people seem to forget that she is Europe’s most powerful politician, and that makes her responsible for a lot of the drowned children who lose their lives on a daily basis in a small stretch of the Mediterranean between Turkey and Greece.

Merkel should have acted much faster. She’s just as culpable as all the other jokers in Brussels and various EU capitals. They all were, and still are, hoping this issue would go away by itself. Instead, the issue has only just started, and the whole continent is woefully unprepared to this day.

German paper Die Welt ran a story this weekend (in German) that detailed how Merkel and her government were warned in Q1 by the German federal police (Bundespolizei) that a million refugees would be coming to Germany in 2015. And did nothing. The paper didn’t provide a precise date, but Q1 ended close to 6 months ago, so we know Merkel et al could have acted on this information -and prepared- at least half a year ago.

Have they? Given the chaos that developed within a few days of allowing refugees to enter the country, our money’s on a resounding NO. So those portraits we’ve seen with Angela dressed up as Mother Teresa can now be filed away as ludicrous.

The outcome of today’s meeting is very easy to predict. There will be promises of millions of dollars, and of saddling Greece and Italy with huge camps to house refugees in, far away from whoever is either too comfortable or too right-wing to deal with Europe’s new reality.

There will be nothing in writing that comes even close to what is needed, neither financially nor in practical terms. All politicians will feel free to pander to, and hide behind, their bigoted populations.

These talks should have taken place at least half a year ago. That might have saved children’s – and adults’- lives both in the meantime and in the future. That nothing of true value happened between the moment Merkel got her warning and last week’s announcement of this week’s “emergency” meeting not only tells you all you need to know about Merkel and her peers, it also is certain to both have made matters worse and to continue doing so going forward.

There is precious little to be expected from Europe’s leadership, because there is so little of it. They all like the power but skirt the responsibility. The EU apparently seeks to charge 14 nations with 19 cases of violating EU asylum treaties, but countries like Croatia and Hungary were so unprepared for what happened to them, this could only have led to panic and fences and police dogs. It’s a miracle nobody shot a whole bunch of refugees. Yet.

It could all have been prevented if Merkel had decided not to shelve that warning from her federal police force, and instead had called a high level summit then and there. But she was too busy whipping Greece into submission, and hoping, as all other did, that one morning it would all prove to have been a bad dream.

One would suspect that French secret services also had information on what was to come, but François Hollande is a dunce who spends his time counting votes and reading polls. David Cameron would probably prefer to drown and/or shoot that ‘swarm’, and the other heads of state either don’t count for much in terms of population numbers or elect to keep their mouths shut lest they risk the next election.

If Europe’s leaders don’t tackle the issue now, and in an effective way, we risk, with a likelihood bordering on certainty, much worse than we have seen so far. The refugees will not stop coming to Europe. But with autumn now on the doorstep, their journeys will become much more perilous, and deadly.

Europe is set to change, and in very sweeping ways. That cannot be altered. What can be done is to treat refugees like they are human beings, whose lives matter the way German and French lives matter.

Moreover, if Merkel had called that EU meeting in early spring, she would rapidly have concluded that it was not enough. That this is not a European problem. Very few of the refugees, after all, are European. It is, therefore, a global problem. And there is a political body to deal with those, the UN. Merkel would have called a UN meeting long ago if only she had called that EU meeting first.

Why the UN itself hasn’t even opened its mouth, other than to chide Europe, is a mystery. It’s on a fast track to becoming redundant.

The US has announced it will accept 10,000 Syrian refugees – who may take two years to be processed. For perspective: in the space of just three hours this morning, 2,500 arrived on the island of Lesbos alone. The US cannot deny its share of the blame for causing the crisis. It can still, however, start acting in a humane fashion.

Not like Hollande and Cameron whose main target today is increased bombing of the very places the refugees are fleeing from, not providing them with asylum away from those places.

The refugee question should be the top priority in the talks Obama has with the Pope in America in the next few days. As it should be in the meeting(s) with Chinese president Xi Jinping, who’s also in the country. But it doesn’t look as if that’s going to happen. It’ll be a sidenote at best.

Merkel has a narrow window to right her wrongs, and it’s closing fast. If she doesn’t act now, we’ll see Europe’s lack of humanity and abundance of disgrace bared even more, and increasingly so.

There will be blood.

Home Forums Europe’s Refugees Are A Global Crisis

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • Author
  • #24044

    Dorothea Lange Depression refugee family from Tulsa, Oklahoma 1936 At the moment I start writing this, leaders of European nations are in a meeting in
    [See the full post at: Europe’s Refugees Are A Global Crisis]


    My guess. As to where it may eventually go.

    The UN will become the putative over-seer, and the European countries being deluged will provide the money; since it’s obviously going to cost billions anyway- to set up “intercept” territories, inside the countries of the refugees’ origins. Those without papers anywhere in the world will be shipped back to where they came from – but kept inside UN premises.

    The argument will be that they will one day be able to truly go home- so they need to wait there. It will all be horrifying; corrupt instantly- but will be sold as more humane- and cheaper than allowing the floods of people to continue. Concentration camps, in reality – but on their own soil. The “No Strangers Wanted” signs are going up rapidly, and seriously – do you see today’s humans doing anything else?


    Incidentally; one more guess. The Pope and President Xi – WILL meet; probably in the VIP lounge at the airport- with zero announcements ahead of time. Probably plenty after.

    A) why schedule so closely – if not intended?
    B) both individuals strike me as the kind to go ahead and meet- and see what happens.
    C) announcing would quintuple security problems, and make world media go seriously weird; so, no announcements.

    I betcha a dollar.


    Overpopulation and carrying capacity overshoot define the supraordinate problem space. All other problem are internally subordinate to the supraordinate problem space. Population is the single limiting and commensurable variable across all antagonistic factors facing humanity at all scales of organization. Using supply side “solutions” to an explicit demand side population long-age problem is a double think category error.

    Anyone care to refute these propositions?


    Dr. Diablo

    Need to clear up is happening here, as shown by their own actions. As you say, obviously they do not care about the refugees. If a million are killed, they could care less, and/or are actively excited about it, same as when a million Greeks, a million Ukrainians, or a million Libyans were in same trouble.

    Therefore, they do not care. Don’t then posit that they care or acted “too slow” because they don’t care. If they cared, they would have acted. They LIKE it this way, this crisis is the way they WANT it, otherwise, as you say, they would have a meeting a little before a week’s delay, like 2+ years ago.

    So you have a bunch of people who LIKE refugees, the crisis, and their deaths, and actively promote it. Why? And wait a minute: the Syrian war has been going on for 4 YEARS, so where did all these people suddenly come from? Shouldn’t we have had 1,000/mo for 4 years instead of 30,000 a month all at once now?

    Well, news has shown some of what’s going on. As the western war against Assad failed miserably, and the chemical attacks were generally proven to be ISIS (why would a state actor barrel-bomb their own people and hospitals? Aren’t hospitals valuable infrastructure? Wouldn’t they use real arms if they wanted to harm citizens? Que??) the West had to try a new and better approach. Reviving their 2011 plan, they needed to create a “Safe Zone” in Syria, a “No Fly Zone”, an area of Syria that they could claim somehow “wasn’t Syria,” or was owned by ISIS or whatever–the manufactured premise isn’t important so long as the public would swallow it. Best case, the “Safe Zone” would be right on top of the Syrian pipeline routes, near Damascus, the better to finish them off later. But that failed too. Assad stayed and Russia made sure they had weapons and Intel, while even the most radical fighters came to hate, H-A-T-E Isis, hate them enough to JOIN THEIR ENEMY ASSAD, leaving ever-dwindling forces, surrounded by all sides. MSNBC “news” article this week, only 5 original “moderate” trained rebels left? Yeah, that. Even if no one could seem to locate their matching t-shirts and Toyota pickup trucks with 100 drones and 20 satellites, even if no one could seem to locate the millions in oil, pipelines, and refineries they fund themselves with, even if no one could seem to speak to Saudi to cut off their lavish funding. Even after 16,000 western air sorties, all of which somehow missed hitting a few thousand men in the open desert. Really, people?

    So, back to our refugees. How do you create a Syrian safe zone as plan B, or C, or F, G, or Z? We know Turkey has been stockpiling all the refugees since the beginning of the war, while Jordan, Saudi, and the other rich states don’t really feel like taking their brothers and no one ever gives them a hard time about it. No! That’s Europe’s job! Europe is mean, but Saudi Arabia is nice! Turkey releases the million men they had stockpiled, and right on cue, the press suddenly cares about it! A lot! So muchly! After years of watching Greeks and Ukrainians die and not caring even a little!

    Europe is swamped, everyone agrees they can’t possibly absorb 30,000 men a day into a country of 30 million. Of course! But where can they go? Well as Diablo himself said, they have perfectly good cities in Syria to go to if you’d stop bombing them. But As Cameron and Hollande said, we can’t stop bombing, the answer is more bombing! Assad, Assad! Evil, death, dogs and cats! So the only solution–which France, the U.N., and EU are coming around to now, is to set up refugee camps. Where? In Italy, Greece, sure, we’d like to control more territory there, but in Syria. In a special area controlled only by the west. A “Safe Zone,” if you will. Out of the goodness of our European hearts. That it will be a no-fly zone, on top of the pipeline, heavily armed by NATO, and 10 miles from Assad is simply a coincidence. See Serbia and that war.

    This week Russia pre-empts this yet-newly branded, “humanitarian” retooling of same, tired “no-fly-zone” plan first floated in 2011. At invitation of Syria (the only country other than Iran legally authorized to be there and not breaking international law with war crimes) she sends 2,000 men, top hardware, and sets up a Syrian air-strike, no-fly zone, run by the best Russian equipment. If the US, Europe, France, care so much about Isis, they can help Syria and Assad defeat them by joining forces and coordinating with Syria as invited guests. Shouldn’t they? Don’t they want to? Of course they don’t and never did, but can’t admit it to the world and have to reluctantly “talk”, says John Kerry. Thus the apoplectic response to the construction of 2 whole helipads at an existing base in Latakia. However will the U.S. survive the terrible construction of 2 helipads and the paving of a parking lot by a third-rate power 12,000 miles away? Oh noes.

    So, yes. That’s why. Injecting several thousand hardened, bloodthirsty Isis fighters into the migrant stream to make trouble in Europe, as Syria leaked last week, is just a huge bonus. Europe naively buys the “humanitarian” side, “save the children” story, without looking deeper into the cynical, evil, premeditated destruction of it all, and of them, and of the refugees as pawns in it all. But why believe me? I’m nobody. Read their own white papers where they proudly plan and publish it all, including this on 4GW (Fourth Generation Warfare) planned in 1989 as a new Pentagon strategy – where we read,
    “Fourth-generation warfare involves an insurgent group or other violent state actor trying to implement their own government or reestablish an old government over the current ruling power. However, a non-state entity tends to be more successful when it does not attempt, at least in the short term, to impose its own rule, but ** tries simply to disorganize and delegitimize the state in which the warfare takes place. ** The aim is to force the adversary state to expend manpower and money in an attempt to establish order, ideally in such a highhanded way that it ** merely increases disorder, ** until the state surrenders or withdraws.”

    They idea is not to “win” or “organize,” or “take over,” it is specifically and only to “disorganize…and increase disorder.” In other words, this is the express stated and premeditated goal of the Empire of Chaos. Not an accident. Refugees need help. But not at the expense of destroying all that is Europe. Protect yourselves.


    Thank you Dr Diablo for saving me from writing so much. Great commentary. I was going to write 75% of what you wrote till I saw your note. ☺️


    Hoo, boy,,,can’t imagine what the refugee crisis will look like when the war mongering EU and US/Canada declare war on India and China. But, I guess war is an inevitable form of population control among those who have not been part of the process of evolution. Or, hell, maybe designing more efficient methods (and reasons?) for killing is in itself evolution. Just don’t know any more.

    Think it’s time to back off from all this and concentrate on the Zen thing at this point.


    Sorry Ilargi, you have the wrong end of the stick.

    These refugees are from the countries that have been destroyed by the USA and its vassal states. Many of the “Syrians” are actually Iraqis.

    It is ridiculous to blame Merkel for the results of the actions of the USA – she is only a stooge of Washington. She probably was working for Stasi as a youth and the Americans like to push such people to high levels of government – stooges who they can control. Their spying was used to ensure that she replaced her predecessor. There is a good reason for the spying on every phone call that she makes – they need to know if she is following orders.

    Let us be a bit honest and list the countries that have been active in trying to overthrow the Syrian government.

    1- Israel is undoubtedly top of the list – they have been actively working against Syria since the very earliest days of the creation of Israel. They have occupied a part of Syria since 1967. Only last week they claimed that Syria launched some short-range rocket against them and used it as a pretext to bomb government installations over 200km away from their border. Lots of Zionists want a “Greater Israel” and they invaded Lebanon twice with that aim.

    2- As usual, the USA is acting on behalf of Israel – ever since the Israelis realised that it makes much more sense to get the Americans to do the fighting. 9/11 was part of the deal.

    3- The UK has been much more active in the region than one would imagine. Blair tried to make a deal with Assad and invited Assad and his wife to Downing Street. All the British newspapers eulogised him at that time. When they failed to reach a deal, the tone changed somewhat.

    4- Turkey is in NATO and most of the supplies to ISIS come through Turkey – including the “foreign fighters”. ISIS still gets its supplies that way so Turkey could extinguish ISIS anytime it wants. Turkey has also occupied parts of Syria. Ordegan has delusions of resurrecting the Ottoman Empire. The only problem with this plan is that the Ottomans accepted and integrated into their army and bureaucracy peoples from all parts of the empire – which is the very opposite of Turkish nationalism.

    5- Jordan is a proxy for the UK and Jordan has also been training ISIS fighters – often with British instructors.

    6- France is trying desperately to reassert its dominance in the region – fat chance.

    “France attempts to block Russian military deployment in Syria”

    7- Saudi Arabia and Qatar have also helped finance all enemies of the Syrian government. It should be noted that the Saudi royal family has delusions of shifting to Damascus as their oil age comes to an end. The British put a monarch from Hijaz (Western Saudi) in Jordan when he got kicked out by abd el Aziz. Similarly, the British put another monarch who was kicked out of Syria on the throne of Iraq.

    Fact is stranger than fiction.


    Regarding Volkswagen.

    The initial discrepancy was discovered over two years ago.

    “The results of that study, which was paid for by the nonprofit International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) in late 2012 and completed in May 2013, were later corroborated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board (CARB).”

    In view of the fact that pretty well everything that comes out in the MSM is controlled, one is compelled to ask the question “why now?”

    Obviously, I have no idea “why now”. However, I suspect it is not unconnected to the fact that the Germans have agreed to build a second pair of gas pipelines under the Baltic to deliver gas from Russia. I am sure there are some other things going on that we will only know about much later on – if ever.

    “Gazprom Signs Deals With E.ON, OMV, Shell For New Pipeline to Germany”


    Supra: Nice assemblage of words that I would say are pretty much on the money (after a little interpretation). Yes, what we are seeing and will continue to see is the exceeding of carrying capacity commonly known as overshoot. Canton has pointed this out many times as did the Club of Rome in Limits to Growth. The sad part of it is this is just the beginning. The likelihood of generating a conversation on the topic is minimal at best as the topic is off-limits because of the implications to a very harsh reality. We are, I suspect, just observers watching the theatrics of many stripes of the human face.


    Where the hell does one go with this discussion? We have a situation that has been caused by a multitude of factors, many of which have be eluded to in this tread. Can’t really deny most of them—and still keeping in mind that some of the problems are self induced. It is not like the countries of the Middle East and North Africa are not without some blame as the religious bickering goes back hundreds of years. Then too, we must look at the elephant in the environmentally depleted landscape, and realize that just maybe there are too many people living in place that can no longer support them. When a country has a population growth rate of over 3% (until just recently) it should be obvious it is just a matter of time before floods of people begin moving to greener pastures— migration. Some one please tell me why we can not talk about this? What in hell is any country to do when millions of migrants are at their doors. Don’t tell me, just let them all in. Then their problem becomes your problem—and it is really a problem when the new arrivals bring a high birth rate with them. . Talk to me!


    Funny how some people love blaming refugees for their predicament. While I entirely agree with the basic conclusions of the Limits of Growth Model, what we have here is quite a different situation – unless the limits to growth are referring to the USA.

    Here are UN demographics for Syria:

    and here are the UN demographics for India:

    The Infant Mortality Rate of Syria (15.0) is a fraction of that of India (52.9) which suggests a far more prosperous country. The literacy rate is 80% in Syria and 70% in India.

    If you look at the population density for comparable areas, you will find that of Syria far lower. In sum, the Indians are far more population and resources stressed. So please find another chestnut to roast.

    Ceteris Paribus

    I agree with Dr. Diablo. This is not a genuine “refugee crisis” – if it were that easy, why didn’t the Palestinians come to overrun us decades ago? The guys I see here on the streets of Vienna don’t look as though they have travelled thousands of miles; one had plastic slippers that would break on the very first day. Some are very well dressed, and many hold smart phones. None look thin or exhausted. And all that I have seen in my neighbourhood are young men; where are the girls, the older people, the young children? People are understandably worried, yet the media propagate only soothing propaganda.

    Turkey was been beaten back from the walls of Vienna twice, after killing everyone to the south and east; are they now trying again, in more insidious fashion? I am convinced that whoever deliberately orchestrated this invasion has highly nefarious motives, even if most of the individuals concerned may be harmless. That they are almost all young men gives me pause – young men are the ideal sacrificial pawns, driven by hubris, testosterone, and inexperience. This will not end well.

    As for the responsibility, spare me. Austria has not participated in the bombing of Libya, Iraq, or Syria. We would like to resume our formerly good relations with Iran and Russia, if the EU and US were not constraining us in ways the public cannot even guess at.

    Let those who created this mess pay for the consequences, instead of dumping them on everyone else.


    Ceteris Paribus,

    Fully agree. This is an entirely engineered “catastrophe”. Many of these people have been in Turkey for months if not years. I guess Ordegan is not getting his way and wants to throw his weight about.

    The same thing applies about all the headlines regarding the Russians helping the Syrian government. The Russians have been providing weaponry for the Syrian government for around 50 years. Many of their officers speak Russian and have done military studies in Russia.

    Here is another angle on what is really going on. This time in Asia proper and against China. Again, Turkey (i.e. NATO) is implicated:

    “Turkish-Uyghur Terror Inc. – America’s Other Al Qaeda”


    Hello Supranational,

    Your post sounds interesting, but could you please rewrite it in a more understandable form?

    Also, do you use the term “problem space” as a synonym of “problematic” (the noun, not the adjective)?

    Thanks, I look forward to reading you,


    @ both XYZ and wrighttracks

    There are 3 articles that expand in detail this position and relevant definitions at the blog

    The subject matter is unpalatable, yet we must confront the truth of the matter.

    “How much truth can you bear, How much truth can you dare?”

    Dr. Diablo

    I’ll refute them. Again. But let me translate your proposition into something more direct first.
    Population Carrying Capacity is the largest-level issue here, with migration and war being a result and subset of that larger problem. Right. Population is the single, perhaps only issue facing mankind at all scales and the root of all problems. Wait, what? Really? “Using supply-side solutions” –I assume you’re talking about feeding and providing for people here, solving the problems of overpopulation–is an error, which I assume you’re referring to something like Jevon’s Paradox, where making, say cars cheaper, only leads to more demand for more cars and more gas and more resources, so that efficiency leads to MORE consumption, not less. Which feeding the population likewise does. Sure. I get that.

    Problems: on the highest level, the logic doesn’t follow because if population is always a problem at “ALL levels of organization”, then fewer people is always a solution. If 7 Billion are bad, 3.5 Billion is less bad, and 1 Million, and 1 Thousand, and 100, and 10. 10 would still be bad because 11 would be “Overpopulation”, raising the carrying load 10% with a single birth. I don’t believe that’s what you believe or mean, but if not then you must agree that there is some level that is not “overpopulated” and a level where population is appropriate. We may all believe that. But where is that level? Who gets to decide when “we” “stop supplying” that next person who arrives? Who gets to look them in the eye and kill them? You? Me? The IMF? Who? Who says “sorry buddy, we COULD feed you if we felt like it, we have the knowledge, the resources with virtually no strain on any of us, but we’re just not going to. Go die in a hole.” So you have to posit at what exact level you say is “overpopulated”, why, and how you plan to knock off that next person, and how you, or we, possess the moral right to do so. I mean, if THEY, the 11th person is the problem, well, you could just as easily solve it by eliminating yourself as the “other” guy. Wouldn’t sacrificing yourself to save a fellow man be more moral? Or is killing him so you can live in better clover more moral?

    Obviously I also disagree that ALL problems on earth are overpopulation. Clearly, humans had a lot of problems back when there were very few of us, possibly more than today. Why? Because there’s a reason why we wanted to make more food stability and control more of our environment: if we didn’t think it was on average “improving” our standard of living, we wouldn’t have done it. But it’s too easy an argument to point out that pretty clearly not all problems concerning humans on planet earth can be due to overpopulation. Unless you want to argue that volcanoes going off, drownings, or murder from and argument between two isolated natives is the fault of their unfortunate condition of being alive.

    Instead, I’d like to point out something far more obvious. That is that 7 Billion people are alive now. They’re being fed now. They live and sleep somewhere now. And that’s with a standard of living in the West that both is far higher than necessary, AND wastes perhaps enough resources on irrelevant things to double the population of the West without much strain. AND we are not using most of central Asia, which although desolate now, the same was said of the entire US plains, called the “Great American Desert”. Humans used technology, our smarts, to support millions of people there. It can be done more carefully without resorting to old aquifers, and the same thing can be done in Asia if anybody wished. We are not talking about the relatively sparse population of Africa which could also me increased–a continent that would fit China, the U.S., Russia, and W. Europe combined. Nor have we used that other vast area of central Canada, where surely another 100-300 million could live.

    Likewise, although Libya’s improvements under Gaddafi increased food showed they could greatly increase food in NEMA using normal, even primitive ways, we could also build desalinization plants to provide for millions, even billions more in the Middle East, while scarcely scratching the surface of Thorium fuel, nor creating all that much peril compared to the possible human gains. We could also do this with the sun, by simple-pumping seawater into pipes and letting it boil off into solar distillers, as India does. This could run your aquaponics system, which does not “waste” water (as if water could be wasted) for a continuous gain. This may seem high-tech or even unreliable, but crop rotation and the heavy plow seemed dangerously high-tech only 500 yeas ago. And I haven’t touched the surface of the gains in reversing the desert or permaculture forests, neither of which require a depth of fossil fuels.

    So question. If we’re more or less easily feeding 7B people now, and have since Malthus claimed we’d reached the limit in 1798, then why can we suddenly NOT feed them today? Yes, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, are in trouble, but they were feeding their large populations in 1999, so did the sun go dark? Did we have a crop failure? Did the U.S. even TRY to put their millions of miles of unused, subsidized fields back to work? Can we not ship food on the oceans? We grew more than enough food in 1999, 2012, and 2015, so how is it that it suddenly doesn’t arrive?

    Different question, isn’t it? As far as I know, the West has taken virtually no measure to economize their 30-50% food waste or harbor their fuels. No nation except Russia has put new fields to work. No one has attempted to change agriculture, restore the deserts, save or create water, or switch off fossil fuels to use that fuel effectively elsewhere.

    Also, man has always struggled to live in crowds. No doubt the first city said men would never survive there and not in the gentle wilds. But they did and prospered. You can’t say that if a city of 1M is “overpopulated”, a city of 2M is untenable, or 5M, or 10M. We don’t know what the limit is, but humans do not flee the cities because they are cities, quite the opposite, they flock TO the cities or else the cities wouldn’t cyclically expand. So it’s not that, at a certain population, nations MUST flee into and overtake wider, more open neighbor states. That’s surprisingly never happened: look at Russia for example. They’ve been empty with an overcrowded Europe, and Middle East, and China for 1,000 years.

    So what is actually causing the problems you attribute to simple, inevitable “overpopulation”? Could it be greed? Premeditated war? The hatred of humans as a very species? Because pretty clearly we could increase the population a lot still, and move on into space. Since we’re feeding everybody now, we can pretty clearly keep feeding them if we felt like it. Since nobody was migrating in 1980, 1999, or 2010, we can be pretty sure it’s not the population level that caused it. No. A few very specific humans caused the recent trouble, who very proudly published their names and actions for all to see. They very specifically and systematically destroyed all that makes life possible, just as they planned and promised back with Gen. Frank’s video on the upcoming “Arab Spring” in 2010, back as far as PNAC before 2001, as far back as Kristol’s “Dominoes of Democracy” proposed under Bill Clinton, or in a larger sense, even before. So these guys proudly and openly spent $1-2 trillion to destroy all that supports population, put it on the nightly news, watched them discuss it for 20 years, and you’re blaming it on…the population? On the audacity of people for being born? Howso? Which of the two is having a greater effect?

    I won’t attempt to pose what $1,500-4,000 billion from war could buy in terms of advancing population, much less the $23,000 billion for the all-in bailout—for example the now-small $700B TARP bailout would have paid off every mortgage in the U.S.–but I suspect that for $25,000 billion over 10 years you could colonize another planet or two, leaving a lot more room here at home.

    I can’t say that I personally like overpopulation. I also am not a fan of the things modern humans do to the environment. However, we have to be honest in our discussions. We aren’t anywhere near the carrying capacity of the earth. Not even close. We haven’t even tried any of the things that might increase it or make life and the environment better without increasing it. No one seems to want to try. They want to kill their fellow men instead. Money is both not necessary and not and obstacle if anybody wanted to do it. And most importantly, the problems–even recently of mass death and migrations–have nothing to do with overpopulation, but with people intentionally and with open premeditation, publicly killing and destroying millions of lives, just as they promised they would.



    I looked at the first of the three documents you propose (Treatise).

    It argues that “we” must kill or enable the death of 90% of the current population. “We” being “the most meritorious, intelligent, creative, rational, and willful, humans on the planet”.

    The others are “Saboteurs, Ignavi, the weak willed, guilty, stupid, irrational, apathetic, or non-meritorious”.

    Your document is clearly a spoof, if only because of the obvious question, i.e. who decides on the 10% worthy of living?

    To say nothing of the fact that you will have 90% of the people against you.

    We may perhaps arrive at a die-off of several percent, but not in the manner you suggest. No way. So do not waste your time on it.



    Hello Diablo & XYZ,

    One of the articles on the blog is a systematic destruction of Nicole’s Foss’s Postion. (TAE) At the end of the article I asked her and the audience a question that none have yet to answer:

    “If ANYONE can [demonstrate] a solution space that matches the supraordinate problem space, while simultaneously neutralizing the the selfish competition between sub-global actors for limited, highly leveraged, mutually exclusive shares of biocapacity in a zero sum game, PLEASE DO!”

    The Treatise Preamble is just the preamble; A call for action and a rally point for mobilization. It is addressed explicitly at motivated geniuses who have intelligence to understand the mathematical complexity of the Human Population Emergency and the Will to make difficult decisions defined by Lifeboat Ethics.

    Clearly you have no understanding of the mathematical boundary conditions or processes that define the Human Population Emergency, and lack the will to make necessary and difficult decisions.

    It appears you have made a critique without reading or understanding what you are critiquing.

    Read and understand the articles on the “depopulation treatise” blog and comment on that blog at the end of each article.

    Or, you could just keep posting content with ad hominem fallacies, no arguments, no new ideas, colossal misinterpretations, subjective appeals to emotional sentimentality, and appeals to mathematically impossible narratives.


    Hi Nassim, please consider for a moment that the US government is a vassal to something more powerful than itself – the creator’s of the money used to fund the United States – and the politicians that run it on their behalf.
    The “US” didn’t attack the Middle East, the Debt-Money Monopolists used their vassal states, including the US government, to attack the Middle East.
    It is critical to 1. define terms concisely and 2. communicate in those concisely defined terms.
    I’m from the US and my country has been hijacked by the most sophisticated criminals the Earth has ever seen. The best name I can think of that properly defines this criminal cartel of supranational bankers is The Debt-Money Monopolists.
    You could zero out the US government and even the US itself, BUT THE DEBT-MONEY MONOPOLIST ROOT CAUSE WOULD POSSESS JUST AS MUCH CONTROL…

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.