Skip to main content
Green scary tale: population control to change climate change

Green scary tale: population control to change climate change

Vivian Bowden writes: ‘Climate won’t alter unless world leaders do something to curb population growth’, claiming that ‘[o]ur population has surged over the last 20 years and we now have a mass shortage of housing, the NHS is struggling, schools don’t have enough places, police can’t cope, our roads are just car parks and, despite the flooding this year, we have water shortages.’ She concludes: ‘Our Government should cut immigration as promised and also limit all Child Benefit to two children per family’ (Letters, Daily Express, September 22, 2021).  


Ms Bowden wants to address immigration but also to curb births, without asking where tax revenues are supposed to come from in our ‘ageing population’. And one population control measure applied with great enthusiasm in liberal democracies – getting women into the workplace – has resulted in public services ‘struggling’ because they employ so many women: they appear to be ‘short’ of workers because female employees rightly seek to work fewer hours so they can spend more time with the one or two children she would allow them.


Such ‘equality’ policies seem to be working, judging by the precipitous decline in birth rates not just here but all around the world, and this has led to a crisis, not in the environment, but in our human environment, with a lack of young people to care for the aged, as well as a loss of the tax revenue that we fondly believed would make up for the  human deficit.


The ‘problem’ of ‘overpopulation’ is not that we are having lots of children, but that lots of people are living much longer; houses that used to become vacant are still lived in; people continue to consume stuff and use their cars to get around. Living longer used to be seen as a positive development, but it has gone hand in hand with savage curbs on births via abortion – disproportionately affecting the poor/nonwhite

- leading to our ‘top-heavy’ population.


Abortion is the leading cause of death worldwide,

but if there really are ‘too many’ people, then the most practical approach would be to kill a certain proportion of those already born. However, even if we are comfortable with the mass killing of the old as well as the pre-born, it would not affect climate change, which has happened without human assistance throughout the earth’s history, although this inconvenient fact has been ignored or suppressed by ‘climate’ activists.


When discussing environmental concerns – more accurately, environmental catastrophe - we always end up talking about controlling population. But this is not too surprising, because population control was where the environmental movement started, and we have gone from legalising abortion to talking about euthanasia (sorry, ‘assisted dying’), two key demands of the population control movement, in the space of a few decades, as the effects of first disaster begin to make themselves felt.  


It is interesting that those who say there are ‘too many people’ never themselves volunteer to vacate the world, but if population control is adopted as the way to change climate change, and the measures championed by Boris Johnson to defeat ‘global warming’ are put into practice, it will create a world in which the human problem will be solved when the poor people freeze to death because of global warming. The ‘happy ending’ to the green scary tale is that those least responsible for the world’s problems must die so the miserabilists can live unhappily ever after.