Demographic control, Eugenics, or the Chinese way?

To the main argument of this article « what overpopulation arguments frequently miss is that it’s not just about how many people are on the planet, but also how sustainably we live » I would answer that it is easier and faster to control demographic growth as the Chinese did it than changing human drive to reproduce, « progress » and « keep up with the Joneses », which would take for ever. Call ethics to the rescue of the most favoured, candidates to the « transhuman » status, and prospective colonizers of Moon and Mars sounds highly unethical.

That should be good news. But instead

https://www.vox.com/23971366/declining-birth-rate-fertility-babies-children

If there were a consciousness of the species – what the UN should be – it would manage and compensate regional reductions of birth rates. But instead some nations states prefer to accelerate the pace to collective auto-destruction

A propos du réchauffement même souci de la part de The Conversation, mais en français, de ménager le statu quo et ses bénéficiaires

En 1974, alors que j’étais étudiant aux USA, un condisciple américain voyant un numéro du Nouvel Observateur sur ma table me demanda si c’était une traduction du Times Magazine ou de Newsweek. C’est maintenant chose faite ! Avec des magazines comme The Conversation, Contrepoints et Le Grand Continent, l’aanglosphère a enfin coupé le micro à l’Europe continentale, avec la complicité bien sûr des Scandinaves et des Polonais.

Kissinger not so bad after all?

27/05/2023

Jacques Huynen

https://asiatimes.com/2023/05/us-china-competitive-peace-or-road-to-war/embed/#?secret=u4PFBZ37ZK#?secret=lh3vvIi9P1