Heinberg: Urinetown Population Resources & Human Idealism:
To advocate for human rights, peace & social justice while ignoring their necessary ecological basis is intellectual fraud. – Richard Heinberg; Population, Resources & Human Idealism.
Al Bartlett, retired professor of physics at the University of Colorado, developed a lecture in the early 1970s that he has since delivered over 2000 times. Titled Arithmetic, Population, and Energy, the talk takes his audience along on an exploration of the meaning of steady growth (so many percent per year)—which is of course the sacred basis of all modern economies. As Bartlett makes clear, no steady rate of growth in population or resource consumption is sustainable.
During the course of the lecture, he asks, “Well, what can we do about this? What makes the population problem worse, and what reduces it?” On the screen he projects a slide with two columns of words. On the left-hand column are the principal factors leading to population growth; on the right, factors leading to a decrease of population.
Table of Options
Increase populations Decrease Populations
Large Families Small families
Immigration Stopping Immigration
Medicine Public Health
Law and Order Murder/Violence
Scientific Agriculture Famine
Accident Prevention Accidents
Clean Air Pollution (Smoking)
Ignorance of the Problem
Bartlett notes that population growth will cease at some point: the mathematics assures us of that (otherwise, in just a few centuries, the entire surface of the planet would be covered with humans). Moreover, we need not do anything to solve the population problem: nature will take care of that for us. Sooner or later, from the right-hand column nature will choose some method or methods of limiting human numbers. But the options chosen may not be to our liking. The only way we can avoid having to live with (or die by) nature’s choices is to proactively choose for ourselves which options from the right-hand column we would prefer voluntarily to implement. Hesitating in our choice, or failing to implement it, leads us directly back to nature’s options.
» IGN: Population, Resources & Human Idealism, by Richard Heinberg.
» IG: 17-03-22_rheinberg-urinetown-mcoetzee-licencetobreed; 17-04-04_eopalasad-michaelcoetzee-licensedtobreed; 17-04-22_eop-v-wip-academia; 17-05-08_eop-v-wip-religion; 17-05-08_eop-v-wip-law.
Putin: World Order: New Rules or No Rules?
Putin: Valdai: New Rules or No Rules:
Welcome to Truth or Consequences: EoP New Rules or Masonic War is Peace No Rules: Kremlin:Meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club: The World Order: New Rules or a Game Without Rules; Club Orlov: Putin to Western Elites: Play Time is Over. Valdai 22-24 October 2014: New Rules or No Rules: All speeches: Full: 02:58:34; Putin Speech: Full: 41:31; Excerpts: War & Peace: 32:03; Key Quotes: 05:39; Russia Today.
» IG: 16-08-16_vputineopwipsocialcontract; 15-01-03_putin-newornorules-truthorconsequences; 15-07-27_putinbear-eoptruth-wipconsequences; 17-04-11_eopntegmru-eoporwiprules; 17-04-12_eop-ecoegoftprintculturerevolutionnewrules; 17-04-19_eopntegma-overview; 17-04-22_eop-v-wip-academia; 17-05-08_eop-v-wip-religion; 17-05-08_eop-v-wip-law.
Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education
‘Howard Law School became a living laboratory where civil-rights law was invented by teamwork. The school worked because of the driving purposefulness of one man: Charlie Houston. He kept hammering at us all those years that, as lawyers, we had to be social engineers or else we were parasites. The whole atmosphere of action-oriented learning under Houston was heady, and every scholar was eager to relate classroom work to social action. We all worked on real briefs and real cases and accompanied Houston and other faculty members to court to learn procedure and tactics. Charlie Houston set out to teach us the difference between what the laws said and meant and how they were applied. His avowed aim was to eliminate that difference. He made it clear to us that when we were done, we were expected to gout and do something with our lives. He was a man you either liked intensely or hated.’ – Former Howard Law School student.
Charlie Houston and Howard Law School’s top graduate of 1933, Thurgood Marshall, later to become a US Supreme Court Justice, demonstrated another knack that would enhance his career: he listened. It was not simply that he was deferential; rather, he never thought he knew all the answers. His way to wisdom was to hear out others who might or might not know any more than he did and then to sift it all through his own mental strainer. He never tried to score points as an original or especially creative thinker; his skill was in figuring out who made the most sense – or what parts of other people’s ideas to sieze upon and fuse into a prudent plan of action. “He’ll take ideas from a chimneysweep if they sound right to him,” said a former associate.
— Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education, the epochal Supreme Court decision that outlawed segregation, and of Black America’s struggle for equality, by Richard Kluger, 1975. – Amazon; Google Books. Yale Law School: Review by Burke Marshall.
» EoP ADR: Ecology of Peace Alternative Dispute Resolution.
» IG: 17-05-08_eop-v-wip-law.
Conflict of Cultures: EoP & WiP or WiP Only Judge or Arbitrator:
An EoP v WiP ‘Conflict of Cultures’ court or arbitrator — as occurred in SA Concourt: The Citizen v Robert McBride — would allow submissions and consider culturally based evidence from any individual whatever their EoP or WiP culture; even if none of hte courts judges or arbitrators were members of one or both of the parties cultures. A WiP Only Conflict of Cultures Court will consider only culturally based evidence form WiP cultures: which could be racial, religious or ideological. A WiP Monoculture Court will consider only culturally based evidence from a particular racial, religious or class culture; and exclude all other EoP or WiP culture evidence.
» EoP ADR: 28 Oct: J Gauntlett & Adv Group 621: Req for Info: Alternative Dispute Resolution; Conflict of Cultures policy.
» IG: 17-05-08_eop-v-wip-law.
CCT 23-10: The Citizen v Robert McBride
The case was about a dispute between Robert McBride and the Citizen Newspaper.
During Apartheid Robert McBride was a member of Umkhonto we Sizwe, the armed wing of the African National Congress, who was convicted of terrorism after he bombed the “Why Not” Restaurant and Magoo’s Bar in Durban on 14 June 1986; and sentenced to death. He was later released after applying for amnesty to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), which provided for amnesty in return for complete disclosure of acts of politically motivated violence after the ANC changed its early denials of involvement to a claim that they ordered the bombing.
This case issues in dispute involved Robert McBride suing the The Citizen for calling him a murderer; even though he had been pardoned by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The Supreme Court of Appeal granted McBride’s defamation request and issued a judgement for damages. The Citizen then appealed the SCA Judgement to the Constitutional Court. The Citizen argued that the SCA erred in its interpretation that the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, which states that amnesty expunges the conviction and sentence from all official records, and also that “the conviction shall for all purposes… be deemed not to have taken place.” and hence reference to the McBride’s ‘murder’ conviction was considered as ‘defamation’, because it was false. The Citizen argued that the SCA ruling shall require that a falsification of history be required, and deny the Media the right to freedom of expression of the truth.
The EoP Amicus argued that South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission was a fraud, denying both sides – Apartheid and Anti-Apartheid – an honest enquiry into the root — breeding & consumption above ecological carrying capacity limits — causes of racial, religious and class resource conflict; including South Africa’s Apartheid and Anti-Apartheid resource conflict.
» EoP Leg Sub: The Citizen v Robert McBride.
» IG: 17-05-08_eop-v-wip-law.
EoP v WiP Psych:
Ecology of Peace Psych — like EoP law, media, religion, charity, academia, etc — is founded upon EoP Radical Honoursty Factual Reality; providing advocacy and information for individuals on how to cooperate to shut down the WiP Ponzi profiteering of resource conflict and misery economy, by turning off the tap; — i.e. the breeding / consumption above ecological carrying capacity limits — causes of — racial, religious, economic, ideological, political, psychological, academic, media, military, etc — resource conflict and war; by implementing an EoP international law social contract that requires all the worlds citizens of all races, religions and ideologies to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits.
Ecology of Peace culture is unaware of any scientifically based ‘mental disorder’ legal definition. Consequently, there is no such thing as a ‘mental disorder’ in the Ecology of Peace culture. The Ecology of Peace culture’s working hypothesis conclusion is that much of what Masonic War is Peace culture’s refer to as ‘mental disorders’ are simply individuals consciously or unconsciously rebelling or emotionally, psychologically, economically struggling to authentically relate and/or existentially cope in a Masonic War is Peace society focused on parasitically profiting from – gender, class, racial, religious, psychological and military – resource war conflict misery. ‘War is the organizing principle of [the Left and Right Wings of the Masonic War is Peace] social contract’ – [EoP Amended] Mr X, JFK. See also EoP v WiP STRATINT & EoP v WiP National Security.
Masonic War is Peace Psych — like WiP law, media, religion, charity, academia, etc — consciously or unconsciously ignores or avoids educating their readers, customers, clients, etc of the — procreation and consumption above ecological carrying capacity limits; enabled by the WiP right to procreate and consume above ecological carrying capacity limits clauses of international law — root causes of all — racial, religious, economic, ideological, political, psychological, academic, media, military, etc — resource conflict; enabling them to socio-politically, economically, etc profit from the racial, religious and class resource war conflict misery, resulting from overpopulation/consumption colliding with finite resources.
Masonic War is Peace culture’s have various different cultural – political correctness conformity – based ‘mental disorder’ definitions [Dr Jeffrey Schaler: Psychiatry is a Fraud]. Not an obedient Masonic War is Peace culture communist, you have a mental disorder. Not an obedient Masonic War is Peace culture capitalist, you have a mental disorder, and so on [Dr John Breeding: Political Psychiatry].
Put differently: Masonic War is Peace psychologists and psychiatrists, consciously and/or unconsciously to greater and lesser degrees, do not currently base their psychological doctrine social conflict mitigation and reduction management psycho-therapy practice upon Ecological Reality Facts; recognizing the possibility that their patients alleged culturally based ‘mental disorder’; is a direct, or at least partially a direct result of alleged social conflict experts — psychologists, lawyers, social workers, religious workers, charity workers — failure to expose the root cause of all military, economic, political, religious, racial, gender, psychological resource conflict: the right to breed and consume above ecological carrying capacity limits Masonic War is Peace clauses of international law. Some psychologists are heading in the direction of root cause problem solving, such as Dr. Paula Caplan: Losing Labels to find ourselves; Dr. Mary Boyle: Is clinical psychology fearful of social context?. Why we might be, why it matters and what we might do about it.
» EoP v WiP NWO Neg: EoP v WiP Psych.
Ecology of Peace Therapy:
Ecology of Peace therapy, like Ecology of Peace alternative dispute resolution; focuses on the root cause cause of the particular problem, and most problems are a direct or indirect result of military, religious, racial, economic, political etc resource conflict; and all resource conflict problems are a result of laws that allow beings who call themselves humans, to breed and consume above ecological carrying capacity limits, pretending the earth’s resources are infinite; and that resource conflict is the fault of some racial, religious or ideological group of individuals.
If your activism to end racism, slavery, oppression, climate change; food shortages, food inflation, cost of living increases, urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, pollution, peak oil, peak water, peak food, peak population, species extinction, loss of biodiversity, peak resources, climate change, feminism, nazism, Islamism, capitalism, communism, militarization of police, etc; does not include discussion of the root – ‘right to breed / consume with total disregard for ecological carrying capacity limits’ clauses of the Masonic War is Peace social contract –overpopulation and consumption causes of those socio-economic, psycho-political and ecological resource war problems; your activism is just another ‘Its not about the Nail’ Masonic War is Peace Bullshit the Public Relations Stunt.
If the nail you are hammering is to abolish the Masonic War is Peace social contract and replace it with an Ecology of Peace social contract; then that nail is simultaneously addressing a multitude of ecological overshoot problems: whether crime and violence, unemployment and poverty, food shortages, inflation, political instability, loss of political freedoms, conformist political correctness, vanishing species, garbage and pollution, urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, resource depletion, etc.
Put simply the nail is in the bulls eye target zone, and each hammer strike, sends problem solving solution ripples to each of all of these problems; whereas if you find a nail and stick it in only one of these problem areas; each hammer strike is pointless; because in the absence of addressing the root cause of the problem: Masonic War is Peace ‘right to breed/consume with total disregard for ecological carrying capacity limits’ social contract; the particular problem you are focussed on is only going to get worse; as the tap of overpopulation / overconsumption-ecological overshoot resource scarcity grows and grows and grows.
» EoP v WiP NWO Neg: 28 Feb: Malcolm X Grassroots Movement .. COWS: Context of White Supremacy.
» EoP v WiP NWO Neg: EoP v WiP Psych.
EoP New World Order Social Contract Options
EoP NWO SCO: eop-nwo-sco.
EoP Scientific and Cultural Law
EoP NTE GM: EoP Scientific and Cultural Law.
EoP RH FR: EoP Radical Honoursty Factual Reality
EoP RH FR: eop-rh-fr.
Eco / Ego Literacy
Eco / Ego Literacy: ego-eco-literacy.