Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The 25 Illuminati goals:

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucifer777

Over-population is a myth.



The World Food Crisis, Capitalism and Collectivism.


Unfortunately, the science doesn't support your dismissal. If food were distributed to all of the poor we could probably feed the world for the present but without controlling population growth we would rapidly exceed the global carrying capacity. The video you posted suggests that we produce more food on less land, and this is true however this is the result of technology generally frowned upon as these methods lead to soil erosion, and pollutes the water with pesticides. On the other hand, organic farming methods which maintain the fertility of the soil actually requires more land for lower yield.

Pros and cons of organic farming


Originally posted by Lucifer777There are probably "up to" and estimated 30,000 animal species, some of whom have dietary requirements which are far greater than human beings; yet nobody really speaks of the animal over-population problem, because there simply is no problem.


If only this claim were true, but alas there are scores of news articles detailing overpopulation in the wild and methods of control.

Feral cat overpopulation
Deer overpopulation
Mallard overpopulation
Rabbit overpopulation
Jellyfish overpopulation
Buffalo overpopulation


Originally posted by Lucifer777The problem is not over-population but the Capitalist system; millions starve and are impoverished, not because there is not enough food, but because they do not have the capital to buy food; if there is a demand for food but no Capital, then the farmers are not incentivised to grow food.

Especially in the Third World agricultural collectivism is urgently required, where food could be grown as a "public service" and rationed, not as a Capitalist commodity. In Cuba for example, the basic monthly food allowance for a person costs around one US dollar and must be accompanied by a ration card; it is a very simple way of making sure that everyone at least has the basic foodstuffs for survival; the Cubans may not be as obese as the Americans and their supermarkets are not full of junk foods, but they are not hungry.

Of course "collectivism" and feeding the poor is a diabolical and "Satanic" idea to the American Christians and anti-Communists, whose religion is the accumulation of Capital, rampant consumerism, and whose Capital can incentivise farmers in the poorest regions of the earth, where food is in the most demand, to export foodstuffs to fill the supermaket shelves of the most morbidly obese nation on earth. Such is the genocidal morality and selfishness of Capitalism.



If "swords are to be turned to ploughshares," this would of course effect the US economy since half of the world's entire defence budgets of all the nations on earth is spent by the US, and the US is the world's leading arm's exporter, while the USDA pays farmers not to grow food rather than subsidise them; however much of this defence spending is not "defence;" it is imperialistic aggression whose purpose is the demand for global resources, economic imperialism and the debt slavery of imperial colonies.

If the proletariat are to "inherit the earth" it is only likely to happen with the defeat of the militant proponents of the dictatorship of Capitalism and of US military and economic imperialism.

Lux


I thought that with your academic credentials that you would have been familiar with the Tragedy of the Commons, an essay written by Garret Hardin. The problem is that it is not possible to maximize two variables, we can maximize population size or we can maximize quality of life for each person living, we can't do both. The essay is critical of the strategies of capitalist and the communist systems as this grapple with the issue.

The Tragedy of the Commons

edit on 22-4-2011 by no1smootha because: to cite source




posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by no1smootha

Originally posted by Lucifer777

Over-population is a myth.



The World Food Crisis, Capitalism and Collectivism.


Unfortunately, the science doesn't support your dismissal. If food were distributed to all of the poor we could probably feed the world for the present but without controlling population growth we would rapidly exceed the global carrying capacity. The video you posted suggests that we produce more food on less land, and this is true however this is the result of technology generally frowned upon as these methods lead to soil erosion, and pollutes the water with pesticides. On the other hand, organic farming methods which maintain the fertility of the soil actually requires more land for lower yield.




Only certain agricultural products require organic field based farming. Modern agricultural technology, such as polyhouse, hydroponic and aeroponic farming, such as used by the Israelis, Saudis and the Dutch for agriculture and floricultiure and, for example by the Dutch and Californian marijuana growers, can produce large yields using organic fertilizers; crops which might produce around 1-2 tons per acre can produce "up to" ton tons per acre with such methods; since plants take in most of their water from humidity in the air, rather than the soil, humidity tent farming is vastly superior to soil based farming. This is not "rocket science;" it is a very simple tried and tested method. I have had spectacular results with indoor farming myself in the past though at the moment I am growing outdoors on just about a sixth of an acre, and that is hard work for much less yield.



Originally posted by Lucifer777There are probably "up to" and estimated 30,000 animal species, some of whom have dietary requirements which are far greater than human beings; yet nobody really speaks of the animal over-population problem, because there simply is no problem.


If only this claim were true, but alas there are scores of news articles detailing overpopulation in the wild and methods of control.

Feral cat overpopulation
Deer overpopulation
Mallard overpopulation
Rabbit overpopulation
Jellyfish overpopulation
Buffalo overpopulation


In the context of the "world food problem," none of the above is really such a problem when millions of people are starving, since all of the above are edible, even jellyfish, which is rich in protein. Cats, and even dogs are a traditional delicacy in China and Korea. In the Capitalist West they are pets and are often fed on chicken and expensive foodstuffs; the thought of eating them may seem even more outrageous to an American than the image of starving children, but it is the starving child which is the obscenity, not cats and dogs in butchers shops.


I thought that with your academic credentials that you would have been familiar with the Tragedy of the Commons, an essay written by Garret Hardin. The problem is that it is not possible to maximize two variables, we can maximize population size or we can maximize quality of life for each person living, we can't do both. The essay is critical of the strategies of capitalist and the communist systems as this grapple with the issue.

The Tragedy of the Commons



The Return to Year Zero.

Hardin's argument with the present world population is a "capitalist" and "consumerist" argument, not really a scientific argument, though certainly he states it in those terms. Obviously there are limits to the population of human beings which planet earth could support, in which case he is speaking simple common sense, but since much of the world is uninhabited, and most of the land is not farmed, we are a long way from that.

Since we are living in a global Capitalist dictatorship, then certainly there "seems" to be an overpopulation problem, but this is caused by Capitalism and the selling of food as a commodity. In the current system the Chinese "one child" policy may not be such a bad idea; it would not be necessary in the First World where population is relatively stable, but it would be more appropriate for the the Third World and the Developing World where the populations are spiralling food prices are rising and especially in urban areas this causes people to live in greater destitution and squalour.

Half the world's population now live in cities and very few of them produce food. Pol Pot's "Return to Year Zero" was a diabolical, genocidal, primitivist solution; one cannot have an overnight instant agricultural revolution; nevertheless the urbanisation of Capitalist societies also causes mass deprivation and impoverishment; in a world of millions of hungry people argiculture, fishing and livestock should be a priority, and this would require de-urbanisation to a great extent..

In much of the Third World, especially in rural Africa, having a large family is a sign of prestige, and since there are little or no state welfare systems for the elderly, having many children provides security in old age, thus there would be massive cultural barriers to introduce a Chinese style "one child" policy, and it would probably be fervently resisted anyway. Further, contraception in Africa is not free for the entire population and most of the income of the poor goes on food. If it is between purchasing a pack of condoms or eating for a day, people will tend to eat.

Collectivism and Capitalism. Public Property, Private Property and "use value."

Hardin suggests that as population increased, the quality of life reduces and that one can either have a lower population with a higher quality of life or a higher population with a higher quality of life. This is just common sense, but only at a point where the human population has become out of control, however we need to also ask, "what is quality of life?

By the consumerist values of American Capitalism, the American Dream seems to include such things as rampant consumerism; shopping malls full of trinkets which are often manufactured by vast armies of labour slaves in poorer nations, such as the millions of Chinese workers working to fill the shelves of the world's largest corporation, Walmart; a mega-corporation which has decimated small independent business in the US and transferred much of US consumer manufacturing overseas. The American dream also includes supermarkets and fast food chains full of foodstuffs guaranteed to create the most obese nation on earth, and all the health problems which go along with that. It is also desirable in American style Capitalism to have one or more homes, the larger the better, one or more cars, sufficient money to gamble and to accumulate a mountain of private property, etc. Not so long ago Emilda Marcos caused a sensation when it was discovered that she had 100's of pairs of shoes, but today many American women have 100's of pairs of shoes, and labour hours which could be invested in agriculture and food are diverted to feed the needs of the Capitlist's addiction to over-consumption and greed.

In a collectivist / kibbutz system there would be no need for everyone to have an American style detached home; people simply need somewhere to sleep and socialise. There would be no need for everyone to have a kitchen if there is a communal canteen. There would be no need for everyone to have a car. I barely use my car more than a few hours a week, and the rest of the time it sits around idle, but in the Kibbutzim there are shared communal cars; there is simply no need to have one car for one person. Some people don't use their PC's more than a few hours a week, and the rest of the time they sit idle; in an agricultural or technological collective it would not matter if a person had a PC as private or public property, as long as they could go somewhere and use a PC. The same goes for all the tools and equipment that sit around in the garages of homes as private property.

When you go to a public park, it does not matter that it is not your private property; and the "use value" of public transport or shared transport has nothing to do with whether you own it or not, similarly with technology, homes, tools and just about anything you can think of. There are of course very rare exceptions; a short sighted person would need their own customised pair of spectacles, but there are very few things that we need to own as private property since public property has the same "use value " as private property.

I think that it is just that Capitalist society makes us familiar with the idea of rampant consumerism and a life spent in the acquisition of personal property, but the recipe for "quality of life" or "human happiness" is rather simple and universally applicable; we are social creatures and a person can have an abundance of love and happiness without accumulating private property; it is simply our conditioning in a Capitalist society which makes some of us think that way and turns human beings into Capitalist devils.

This is all not "theoretical" as far as I am concerned by the way; I have lived in "communes" for around eight years of my life in the past, though I no longer do so for various reasons, however my personal happiness and "quality of life" had absolutely nothing to do with the amount of private property I owned; indeed apart from a few items of clothing, I did not own anything and I did not need to; this is not to suggest that I did not work and that I had no Capital; on the contrary when I walked off the property I was back in the Capitalist system and I felt sorry for most of those who had to live that way.

Anyway in a future post-revolutionary world, once the US Imperialists have been defeated; we will have to think of something to do with the US miltiary and all the militant ideological Capitalists, state terrorists and assorted economic parasites who would oppose revolution, and since the Christians anyway believe that "the wheat shall be separated from the chaff and the caff cast into the fires;" once their bodies are burnt, their crushed remains would make excellent fertiliser to assist agricultural revolution ("sword to ploughshares") and were they to be placed in industrial microwaves and carbonised, their carbon would make excellent cooking fuel for people in the Third World who have no electric cookers. So you see, you ideological Capitalists might even have some "use value" for the 1000 Year agricultural revolution after all.

"Another world is possible."

edit on 22-4-2011 by Lucifer777 because: Text was not blasphemous and diabolical enough; not enough Christian flesh and blood sacrificed and devoured.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
whats the best way to win a football game?

Own BOTH sides...



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by unknownman024
whats the best way to win a football game?

Own BOTH sides...


The oakland raiders knew:

Fire Jamarcus Russel!



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by unknownman024
whats the best way to win a football game?

Own BOTH sides...


L.O.V.E. I.T.!!!!!

FINALLY!!!! Someone who "gets it!!!"



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE
 


The true goals of the illuminati and secret societies of the new world order is this exactly. They focus on targeting individuals who live in poverty and who have nothing left in life but family. When they find someone who fits this description they send out there recruiters who can seem like an average joe, but they give you an offer, it could be anything from just a job, to opportunites. they do this because they know that the person will be more than willing to agree because they have nothing to lose. then they persuade you into selling your sould without you knowing and it could be anything as simple as signing a application or contract. after you sign it then pretty much they brainwash that person and point them into the right direction of what they want them to do they become a puppet. and continue the work of the illuminati and will recieve money and happiness. this is how they get most of their celebrities and famous people then they use tv, movies, music, and everything else that people need and they have complete control of it to influence the choices that we make in life. 2012 is not the end of the world it is a new world order which means that things will run differently and the right people will have ultimate control and power. they want to be the higher ranks in society and they want to dumb us down. so that they make the decisions for us take a look in todays world im sure you know what im talking about ahahah



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 07:28 AM
link   
A little off topic, but something struck me today when walking around. The Bible describes Moses coming down from the mountain with the 10 Commandments and that he gave off rays of light. Some interpret this to say he was enlightened or illuminated. An Illuminati analogy? Am I way off base? Moses the first Illuminatus? Or does that title belong with Eve who ate first from the Apple?
edit on 29-5-2011 by KSigMason because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join