"you hire a fecund woman and she eventually sprogs."

http://timesonline.typepad.com/alphamummy/2008/04/natasha-kaplins.html

Article provides mildly interesting analysis, but that subject line
(lifted from it) is priceless!

Frish

Essence: thanks for the fantastic post!

This was my rfesponse to a post on a YAHOO group I belong to...

Essence: You wrote a terrific response to SA Wendy (to a post I never read!).

You wrote:
Give or take variations in morality and intelligence what have you, the same
base instincts are in us all and there is no preferable breeder IMO.

TOTAL AGREEMENT, IN GENERAL people are moral actors and of average
intelligence and NO ONE SHOULD REPRODUCE.

You wrote (and I'm not sure what you mean by the first sentence, but...):
Left alone in a smaller population I would expect the rich to be led
by ego and breed their resource hungry numbers up freely. After all
it's near impossible to impose ecological ethics on every single
individual and who would they answer to?

YOU HAVE RAISED THE VERY ISSUE THAT WILL THWART ANY CHANCE AT ENOUGH
CHANGE IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR.
It requires draconian action to get all of us to do ANYthing and even
that will cause rebellion.
The power to enforce such ethics either violates every moral teaching,
or will not ever be capable of enforcing them!

This can be seen, in trivial microcosm, in the abreaction
conservatives have to the very concept of "Global Warming", what a
hoax, etc....which of course is simply delaying any action to reduce
human caused climate and other Earth systems' chaos.

It may well come to military and swift justice situations as the water
runs out, but it won't make things sustainable.

You Said:
The nature of the human virus is to fill up and dominate the
surroundings and I don't believe those responsible for the western
model are responsible enough. Nor are the poor, middle class or
otherwise.

EXACTLY RIGHT, and worse than that, there is no one "responsible"!
Culture has a momentum of its own, we can only attempt to shift it's
course.

The "human virus" is characterized by human physicality (we eat and
shit, not much going on there from a disruption to ecology standpoint)
and HUMAN CULTURE that is what we use as a specie to take advantage of
an ecological niche.

The NATURE OF LIFE is to evolve, thanks to competition, to take
advantage of another ecological energy niche. (I'll eat at night, no
one is up then...etc.)

HUMAN CULTURE AND HUMAN NATURE (THE PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL)
impacts the world in an EXACTLY analogous way...

NO ONE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF IT, IT IS SIMPLY CULTURE DOING WHAT
CULTURE DOES...

Why have an igloo (human culture and technology) unless you eat seals
(raw blubber anyone? feast away, we're omnivores!)?

Why not have full blown cities, like Chicago or Minneapolis, where
people ought not exist at all...thanks to coal, oil, nuclear power???

The "organic" "natural" "evolution" of human culture has now taken
charge of the planet's climate...our accumulative activities
(basically uncontrolled) in toto are just the inevitable outcome of
cultural progression.

Can our Social Evolution proceed in time to allow us to sustainably
manage the planet?

Eight Ball says: NO.

Excellent post, thanks a lot!