John Holdren in his own
(radical) words
“De-develop” the U.S. & “reduce” its population?
May 31, 2014, by CFACT Ed, 37 Comments
_1QQ
8+1 6
El Like
{Z4k
El Share
3241
Email
Share
submitlEj submit
Did Obama science advisor Dr. John Holdren actually call for the
American government to “de-develop” the U.S. and “reduce” its
population?
Yes, he did.
Recalling Holdren’s radical prescription for
America is particularly timely with EPA
preparing for the Monday rollout of one of
the most destructive and useless
government policies in American history.
EPA is preparing to severely limit CO2
emissions from existing electrical power plants (the ones already paid
for and operating).
President Obama’s latest energy policy will increase electricity prices
and whack business and
family budgets right on
their bottom lines. It will
have no meaningful
impact on the climate. It
will certainly be cause for
joy for European
businesses whose
government’s have already
raised electricity prices too high to be competitive.
It should also cause smiles in the capitals of developing nations like
China and India where they are ramping up fossil fuel use as quickly as
their means allow, and are more than delighted to produce the goods
that the U.S. and Europe
will no longer be able to
afford to.
The rise of such
ideological driven,
destructive policies
certainly seem to be in
line with Holdren’s call
for “a much more
EU and G7 Household Electricity Prices Including Taxes, 2011
* <IW|c4 CW O g p t
equitable distribution of wealth than in the present one,” writing that,
“redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely
essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being.”
It is also consistent with the calls for central planning,
deindustrialization and redistribution made in the name of
“sustainability” by the acolytes of UN Agenda 21 and the UN climate
change agenda that goes with it.
Holdren has tried to deny what he wrote, which has caused
controversy and an ongoing war of words between the left-wing Media
Matters and Glenn Beck’s The Blaze. They call it a myth, but reading
Holdren’s words in their full context, what does Media Matters think
Holdren’s call for government to reduce population and de-develop
means? It certainly smacks more of authoritarianism than
voluntarism.
Do John Holdren and Barack Obama actually believe that other
nations will throttle their economies to fall in line with the American
example? If the lessons of the past are too remote for them to absorb,
they can look to recent history. Everywhere that the Obama foreign
and military policies have adopted weakness, other nations have seen
not inspiration, but opportunity. If you don’t want to take our word
for it, in today’s information age the people of Ukraine, Afghanistan
and Syria are but a phone call or email way.
A U.S. energy policy designed to replace efficient, affordable, abundant
electricity with expensive alternatives incapable of providing for the
needs of the American economy is foolish and self-destructive. It
defies any rational cost-benefit analysis even when factored through
the climate computer models which the administration wants us to
accept on faith, and which so far have proved inaccurate.
This is not rational science or economics in the true sense of those
terms.
Yesterday, Obama Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki and Press
Secretary Jay Carney announced their resignations. Science advisor
Holdren should do the nation a favor and join them.
Read what John Holdren recommended as the “responsible” course
for America’s future in his own words.
Human Ecology: Problems
& Solutions
Read as PDF
Paul Ehrlich, Anne Ehrlich, &
John Holdren
Chapter TEN
Synthesis and Recommendations
[Page 277]
Summary
To recapitulate, we would outline the present world situation as
follows:
1. Considering present technology and patterns of human
behavior, our planet is grossly overpopulated. Between 2 and 3
billion people are not being properly cared for now. Under such
circumstances, the contention of some that many more people can
be easily and properly cared for in the near future is preposterous.
When every human being has abundant and varied food, ade
quate clothing and shelter, first-rate medical care, ample
educational opportunity, and freedom from war and tyranny, then
perhaps consideration of whether more people can be given first-
class accommodation on Spaceship Earth will be appropriate.
2. The large absolute number of people and the rate of
population growth are themselves major hindrances to fulfilling
the above-named needs of all of mankind.
3. The limits of human capability to produce food by
conventional means have very nearly been reached. Problems of
supply and distribution already have resulted in roughly half of
humanity being undernourished or malnourished. As many as 10-
20 million people are starving to death annually.
4. Attempts to increase food production further will tend to
accelerate the deterioration of our environment, which in turn may
eventually reduce the capacity of the Earth to produce food. It is
not clear whether environmental decay has now gone so far as to
be essentially irreversible; it is possible that [Page 278] the
capacity of the planet to support human beings has been
permanently impaired.
5. There is good reason to believe that population growth
increases the probability of a lethal worldwide plague and of a
thermonuclear war. Either could provide a catastrophic “death-
rate solution” to the population problem; each is potentially
capable of destroying civilization and even of driving Homo
sapiens to extinction.
6. Perhaps more likely than extinction is the possibility that
man will survive only to endure an existence barely recognizable
as human-malnourished, beset by chronic disease, physically and
emotionally impoverished, surrounded by the devastation wrought
by an industrial civilization that could not cope with the results of
its own biological and social folly.
7. There are no simple answers to these threats, no
technological panaceas for the complex of problems comprising
the population-food-environment crisis. Of course, technology,
properly applied in such areas as pollution abatement,
communications, and fertility control, can provide valuable
assistance. But the essential solutions entail dramatic and rapid
changes in human attitudes, especially those relating to
reproductive behavior, economic growth, technology, the
environment, and resolution of conflicts.
Recommendations: A Positive Program
Although our conclusions are necessarily rather pessimistic, we wish to
emphasize our belief that the problems can be solved. Whether they
will be solved is another question. A general course of action that we
feel will have some chance of ameliorating the results of the current
crisis is outlined below. Many of the suggestions will seem
“unrealistic,” and indeed that is how we view them. But the world has
been allowed to run downhill for so long that only idealistic and very
far-reaching programs offer any hope for the future.
1 Population control is absolutely essential if the problems now
facing mankind are to be solved. It is not, however, a panacea. If
population growth were halted immediately, virtually all other
human problems-poverty, racial tensions, urban blight,
environmental decay, warfare-would remain. On the other hand,
direct attacks on these problems will ultimately fail if the human
population continues to grow. The situation is best summarized in
the statement: “Whatever your cause, it’s a lost cause without
population control.”
2 Political pressure must be applied immediately to induce the
United States government to assume its responsibility to halt the
growth of the American population. Once growth is halted, the
government should undertake to influence the birth rate so that
|e| population is reduced to an optimum size and maintained
there. It is essential that a grassroots political movement be [Page
279] generated to convince our legislators and the executive
branch of the government that they must act promptly. The
program should be based on what politicians understand best-
votes. Presidents, Congressmen, Senators, and other elected
officials who do not deal effectively with the crisis must be
defeated at the polls, and more intelligent and responsible
candidates must be elected. It is unfortunate that at the time of the
greatest crisis the United States and the world have ever faced,
many Americans, especially the young, have given up hope that the
government can be modernized and changed in direction through
the functioning of the elective process. Their despair may have
some foundation, but we see no choice but to launch a prolonged
and determined attempt to wrest control of the political system
from the special interests which now run it and to turn it over to
the people.
A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-
quality environment in North America and to de-develop the
United States. De-development means bringing our economic
system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the
realities of ecology and the global resource situation. Resources
and energy must be diverted from frivolous and wasteful uses in
overdeveloped countries to filling the genuine needs of
underdeveloped countries. This effort must be largely political,
especially with regard to our overexploitation of world resources,
but the campaign should be strongly supplemented by legal and
boycott action against polluters and others whose activities
damage the environment. The need for de-development presents
our economists with a major challenge. They must design a stable,
low-consumption economy in which there is a much more
equitable distribution of wealth than in the present one.
Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is
absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every
human being.
4 Once the United States has clearly started on the path of
cleaning up its own mess, it can then turn its attention to the
problems of the de-development of the other DCs, population
control, and ecologically feasible development of the UDCs. It
must use every peaceful means at its disposal to persuade the
Soviet Union and other DCs to join the effort, in line with the
general proposals of Lord Snow and Academician Sakharov.
5 Perhaps the major necessary ingredient that has been
missing from a solution to the problems of both the United States
and the rest of the world is a goal, a vision of the kind of Spaceship
Earth that ought to be and the kind of crew that should man her.
Society has always had its visionaries who talked of love, beauty,
peace, and plenty. But somehow the “practical” men have always
been there to praise smog as a sign of progress, to preach “just”
wars, and to restrict love while giving hate free rein. It must be one
of the greatest ironies of the history of the human species that the
only salvation for the practical men now lies in what they think of
as the dreams of idealists. The question now is: can the self-
proclaimed “realists” be persuaded to face reality in time?
CFACT Insights, Sources
Economics ► Environmentalism ► Holdren ► obama ► population ►
Population growth ►
About the Author: CFACT
Ed
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11