Being Swedish Is Bad For The Environment Solution Don't Get Born

sputniknews.com...

Erik Isberg, a consultant in sustainable entrepreneurship and the founder of the NGO, Young Collective, exemplified this trend in an opinion piece for the Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter. Its headline alone, "Make a choice for environment — have just one child" epitomizes the message in a crystal clear form.

I don't see Sweden as being an overcrowded place.



www.growthbiasbusted.org...

I’m jazzed about this op-ed, because it’s high time the ultimate (and very necessary) green behavior becomes widely known, considered, and put into practice.

The blindspot here is who do you think is going to follow the example? All that will happen is fewer Swedes will be born and nature will fill the vacuum with other variations of humans.

originally posted by: Kester


I don't see Sweden as being an overcrowded place.

It's not. Only 21 people per square kilometer:

simple.wikipedia.org...

Only Norway has fewer in that area. And they are both WAY down on the list.

I'm not sure what the video has to do with population... I don't think it is a secret that trees are a renewable source...lol. Now if all their land was replaced by buildings with huddling masses living there then I would get it.

a reply to: Kester

This guy probably supports mass migration too. Dudes a clown brah.

originally posted by: Kester
The blindspot here is who do you think is going to follow the example? All that will happen is fewer Swedes will be born and nature will fill the vacuum with other variations of humans.

seems like he's talking about the total earth population. why would that be bad?

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: Kester
The blindspot here is who do you think is going to follow the example? All that will happen is fewer Swedes will be born and nature will fill the vacuum with other variations of humans.

seems like he's talking about the total earth population. why would that be bad?

In theory it wouldn't be, don't expect Catholics, Muslims, poor people in the US or anyone in the 3rd world to get on board. Going "green" is about the least of their concerns.

a reply to: redpills

He only means natural born swedes should have 1 child. That goes for the rest of Europe as well.

Mohammed tops the list of most popular baby boy names in England

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: redpills

He only means natural born swedes should have 1 child. That goes for the rest of Europe as well.

no, i get that... but he's talking about doing it to reduce carbon emissions in the developed world, to improve the overall global environment.

why do you have a problem with that?

a reply to: Kester

Don't get born ... Get Bjorn !

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: redpills

He only means natural born swedes should have 1 child. That goes for the rest of Europe as well.

no, i get that... but he's talking about doing it to reduce carbon emissions in the developed world, to improve the overall global environment.

why do you have a problem with that?

Improve it for whom?

All the other people with 8-10 kids?

How nice of them. Might as well just kill themselves, it's quicker.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

You forgot the Evangelical Christians and the Mormons. They tend to also have high birthrates too.

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Improve it for whom?

All the other people with 8-10 kids?

How nice of them. Might as well just kill themselves, it's quicker.

is reproduction a zero-sum competition?

originally posted by: Kester

The blindspot here is who do you think is going to follow the example? All that will happen is fewer Swedes will be born and nature will fill the vacuum with other variations of humans.

It's that kind of thinking that will result in far worse than "other people filling that gap." Which is a very tribal fear response BTW.

The way you're going we'll lose everyone instead.

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: redpills

He only means natural born swedes should have 1 child. That goes for the rest of Europe as well.

no, i get that... but he's talking about doing it to reduce carbon emissions in the developed world, to improve the overall global environment.

why do you have a problem with that?

yes, really. explain your thinking to me.

why are you upset if swedish people reproduce less?

a reply to: fiverx313

The two most civilzed groups in the world are Asians and Europeans. Both of those groups have pushed their reproductive rates well below sustainable already.

If the civilized cultures do not reproduce, they die.

The less civilized cultures are not absorbing the lessons of sustainability because they cannot afford to. They are onlyon survival footing, so they will continue in cultural modes that will see women popping out as many children as they can before they die.

So civilization dies and the over-population inherits the earth and everything you are whining about, you lose anyhow.

a reply to: ketsuko

I'll do you one better. I looked into The Young Collective, they are middlemen for other charities. The article was written as a guest Blogger and picked up for content, so leveraging him some media attention for his organization?
Yeah.

Obviously there are multiple issues with the idea of a reduced birth rate for Swedish Citizens. Firstly they aren't breeding like bunnies to begin with. Secondly a natural born citizen enjoys different rights than others. It's better for the government to collect taxes from non-citizens with no benefits owed to them than more citizens that ARE owed benefits.

Erik Isbergs organization currently is selling ONLY condoms for charity, so things are off to a slow start?

www.youngcollective.xyz...

Interestingly the Lund Article he cited was co-authored by a PerErik Isberg who I suspect is related to him, but am having problems finding info on PerEiks relatives....hmmm? My spider senses are tingling tho.

Have to ask fiverx313
Whats your connection to this organization?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: fiverx313

The two most civilzed groups in the world are Asians and Europeans. Both of those groups have pushed their reproductive rates well below sustainable already.

If the civilized cultures do not reproduce, they die.

The less civilized cultures are not absorbing the lessons of sustainability because they cannot afford to. They are onlyon survival footing, so they will continue in cultural modes that will see women popping out as many children as they can before they die.

So civilization dies and the over-population inherits the earth and everything you are whining about, you lose anyhow.

i think you're generalizing in a very broad way, to the point of stereotyping. your so-called less civilized cultures have nothing preventing them from picking up the lessons in sustainability when their cultures reach that point, as china is having to do now. your so-called civilized cultures are the ones putting the extreme burdens on our global ecosystem.

originally posted by: Caver78
Have to ask fiverx313
Whats your connection to this organization?

no connection at all, this is the first i've heard of it.

a reply to: fiverx313

Sorry!
It's just you were defending the article so fiercely.

You didn't address anything else in my post regarding that this is a newish start-up acting as a middleman making bucks off the Green Movement?

Or that it probably is an article deliberately written to garner some media attention for Eriks start-up? I'm confident in stating that since all of their other missions have literally nothing to do with a lower carbon footprint.

Donations for war torn children and condoms for charity really are pretty far afield from deciding a countries birthrate
defacto via a guest blogger article.