you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Malthus was correct, we just pushed the timeline back with accelerated technological development that he could not have predicted

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I don't think it's that simple. IMO, Malthus was "correct" only because TPTB goals align. I don't buy into prophecy either, yet they are making some of it "come true".

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I don't think it's that simple. IMO, Malthus was "correct" only because TPTB goals align.

I would point to peak phosphate as just one example. Producing food for 8 billion people without synthetic chemical fertilizers is not possible, and we do not have an unlimited supply of phosphate to mine from the ground. The population is already higher than what can be achieves by sustainable means, which the estimates put at somewhere between 0.5 - 2.0 Billion people without relying on techniques that cannot be sustained

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Who's "science" are you using? They tell us this stuff and what can and cannot be done.

Worse, they control us via this centralized consumer culture. If everyone, or at least more people, had a modicum of self-reliance with their own gardens and such it would make a huge difference. Instead they shame the individual for not using the correct light bulb and ignore the corporations' roles in the environmental consequences of "our" actions.

Stop building suburbs around huge cities and make small towns and villages bigger to decentralize and distribute more evenly.

It's all mismanaged intentionally. And of course, with the rise of Tesla robots most human debt slaves won't be needed anymore. Thus the culling of the herd of sheeple.

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So he wasn't correct then.

Humans adapt and problem solve. If you don't take that into account then you are an idiot.

Marx made the same error.