Ok, so here goes nothing.
Humanity and our civilizations (especially the more advanced ones) for the most part are stuck in the progress trap. It's been sort of obvious to me
for awhile now but it has been made far more relevant to my thinking recently because of this documentary I recently watched on netflix.
This documentary goes into a great amount of detail to explain in very simple terms why infinite growth can not be sustained and at some point we
really have to put a cap on population. It's pretty obvious to anyone observing the world around them that global resource problems are an epidemic
and if the population continues to grow it will run into a very hard wall at some point and reduce itself naturally anyway due to a lack of
While this documentary and others out there go into vivid detail as to the problems very few of them offer any real solutions and that is where the
heart of my post really lies.
I want to discuss solutions to the infinite growth paradigm since genocide whether intentional or inevitable is certainly not something anyone really
desires and ultimately that's what a resource wall amounts to. An inevitable genocide due to lack of sustainability not caused by any one nation or
any one leader but by a sheer lack of ability to feed, water, or power vast populations of various countries, including the United States.
That being said the alternatives, at least the ones I've come up with in my head probably won't sound very appealing to most either, but ethically
they are the most fair ideas I have been able to imagine.
So, in the future in order to promote evolution and to maintain a certain level of population people will still need to have children obviously.
That being said, not everyone can have children in the future, it's simply not a realistic option. So how to determine in an ethic way who is
permitted to reproduce based on the best interests of humanity and what to do about everyone who won't be "allowed" to reproduce. Obviously any
policies along these lines would have to apply globally which is in itself a challenge that will likely never be addressed, but moving forward.
I personally believe that it would be easy to find out what population level is easiest to sustain based on resources available at least to some
degree. Hopefully we are not over that number already but we could be.
Either way, once the sustainable Earth population was determined we could begin to calculate exactly how many people could be born each year to
sustain that population level. If our overall population is above this point then the sustainable number of people born each year would be reduced so
that the overall population would reduce until it was at the level of population that was agreed upon to be sustainable.
Once the number of people needed to be born each year is known we could then begin determining who gets to reproduce.
For the betterment of humanity and to make the whole process fair if you wanted to have children, then you would apply for it, like you do a job. You
would have to qualify though in order to be approved since only a limited number can be approved. In order to be approved you would need to ultimately
have the best genetics can offer. You would be submitted to a variety of tests and your genetic background would be studied as closely as possible to
look for genetic defects. Obviously the best candidates would be chosen year to year, and you could apply as many times as you like but if the demand
was too high (for applying), you might have to pay to apply, which makes sense anyway as you should be able to sustain yourself and would help sustain
the program. These tests would be cover your physical prowess, your intelligence, and your genetic defects. In this way we would not only be able to
maintain a population but we would slowly weed out genetic defects/weaknesses and promote evolution of the strongest and smartest to even greater
heights which ultimately would only serve to better mankind. The program could be self sustaining if the cost of applications were enough and if there
was excess it could go toward financial aid for people to help raise the children they have already qualified to have or tax programs could be made to
financially aid already qualified persons.
There are some flaws to just this part of the concept which I have not fully worked out. Such as couples. Obviously you can apply as a couple but what
if one person qualifies and another person doesn't. As near as I can tell at this point either the qualified person could do a number of things, they
could try to apply again in a later year with their significant other, they could forget it if they are loyal to their significant other and they
don't wish to be a parent without them, or they could breed with another eligible candidate that is willing and the job of raising the child would
either be a forced cooperation or more realistically the child would go with whoever was already more financially stable or appeared to be more
qualified based on the living situation of the applicants.
Unfortunately this is not enough as people wouldn't necessarily want to follow such a process. In the case of accidental pregnancy, the party
involved could be tested to see if they qualify but otherwise abortion would be mandatory unfortunately as that is the only way this whole idea could
really work if we really wanted to make growth stagnant for the population and if a woman is guilty of multiple accidental pregnancies then a
mandatory hysterectomy would be applied since there is various forms of birth control (which will likely only improve) and multiple accidental
pregnancies would therefore imply guilt or negligence. Hysterectomy would guarantee that the system of abortion could not be abused by guilty or
negligible persons. This could also apply to men guilty of making women pregnant multiple times via vasectomy which would almost certainly apply to
any men who got more then one woman pregnant without being approved through application.
Not everyone wants to reproduce, so for those people, we simply make them sterile so they can have all the sex they want and not worry about
pregnancy. This could easily be accomplished especially via men as a vasectomy is a quick and relatively pain free procedure.
I admit my ideas are radical and I'm sure many will find them hard to swallow or will simply see them as unrealistic as it would certainly be a
massive undertaking to apply such a solution. I'm not suggesting genocide but at some point you can not consider all life sacred no matter what at
the cost of already existing life. Infinite growth is a myth and anyone who can't see that is woefully ignorant or delusional. My ideas may be
radical but I've seen no other realistic solutions to apply to this situation. If anyone has any constructive criticism or thinks they have a better
idea please speak up as I am all ears. I know I'm sure to get flamed and some may even consider me a monster for such thoughts but they are the most
ethical ideas I could come up with for what ultimately is a plan population control that avoids murder with the exception of the abortions that would
surely take place. I don't really have an issue with this as I don't consider abortion murder, especially in early pregnancies, but it doesn't
really matter. A line must be drawn somewhere or we all fall