Hi Alison
I want to make clear that only gross criminals need fear my judgement; so
apart from what follows opening the ballot boxes to find just who voted for
Blair and Thatcher consistently, there will be no culling of anyone at my
hands when I take power
What you say, Alison, is the sort of thing I was thinking of.
We are in a position with over population which is akin to greenhouse
effects. We must act now.
But when one mentions it, the response is much the same as it used to be
over greenhouse hases. In response to the news that the world's climate is
about to go doolally, the outraged driving citizen demands to know how they
will get to work often despite the fact that they live on a bus route
Just now quite intelligent people in UK are suggesting that we should allow
mass immigration in order to keep things going as they are - i.e. black
johnnies to clean the toilets tho no one would say that
Exactly where they are going to live and where their children are going to
live is not discussed. Simply, if the labour supply is short, get more
people
That is unsustainable. So a start must be to make people accept the problem
exists. Which, on the basis of advertising and political evidence is just to
keep saying it. Then to stop making pointless nasty things and start
educating people
Most of the economy could be closed down because we dont need most of what
it produces. So no more about wealth creation; and no more pretending that
people rushing around under managerial control means that something
worthwhile is going on; and a lot more concentration on making things to
last
L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alison Croggon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: connection
> On 26/3/04 8:00 AM, "Lawrence Upton" <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > or we might raise the question and cull all those who give a
triviliasing
> > answer, Patrick
>
> Do I need to quake in my slippers? Or could I get away with providing a
> profound triviality?
>
> I'm actually quite unsure what is being discussed, apart from the general
> destructiveness of the human race.
>
> It's generally accepted that reproductive rates go down when women are
given
> education and some measure of economic autonomy. So there is part of an
> answer to overpopulation. It would be interesting to see what would
happen
> if most of our resources weren't put into polluting devices like cluster
> bombs or precision guided missiles or those weapons which are supposed to
> ignite the atmosphere and destroy every living thing in their radii and
> into, say, making sure that people who didn't have enough to eat could
> develop biologically diverse, self sustaining agriculture, or addressing
> climate change and the cultivation of poetry as a pedagogical tool for the
> evolution of consciousness and the enhancement of all life. Unlikely to
> happen, but interesting. Culling might not be necessary after all, and
> poets would be rich as arms dealers.
>
> Best
>
> A
>
|