Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by noduerme 1 hour ago
The world is able to sustain billions more people than was thought to be the upward limit in the 1960s. The Malthusian idea that we would all starve when population reached 5 billion was proven wrong by that fast-growing rice and a lot of other improvements.

The global population is now close to going down again, but the hatred of too many people lives on in polite western society. It's just changed form. Instead of wanting to sterilize third world peoples, you find it more convenient to claim that modern tech should be stopped or rolled back because one or another doomsday scenario will take place. Tell me, what is the doomsday scenario causes by higher availability of faster growing rice? Will we all get cancer? In 1960, people in China and Africa died before there they were old enough to worry about cancer or chemicals or any of what you're so concerned about.

Your form of panic is just a new iteration of European panic about non-Europeans having independence. Cloaked in the language of social justice. When Euro-Americans freak put about climate change, all I hear is pearl clutching fear about what if those other people pollute the world as much as we did? And live longer lives while we've stopped having children? Whatever shall you do?

1 comments

> Tell me, what is the doomsday scenario causes by higher availability of faster growing rice?

In concrete pragmatic terms, "If you build it they will come" - eg: building out six lane highways results in more traffic (and more FF demand (until more green vehicles are available for masses)).

The direct result of improved food production has been significant post WW population expansion globally, and with that, hand in hand, greater human consumption leading to larger resource drains and greater impact on the insulation factor of the atmosphere.

Population is still increasing, it's on track to peak ~ 2050, then fall and likely stabilise at some as yet unknown lower level.

The still pressing issue is that the number of people with large western level consumption patterns is expected to increase, even as total population falls.

> Your form of panic

I'm Australian, I don't panic and beside I'll personally be dead before this is an issue for the people that come after me.

These are, however, real issues. Even if you personally don't see any problem.

The fact that you're acknowledging that this form of anticapitalism, environmentalism, fear of chemicals and global warming is about a fear of population growth, is extremely telling. You're explicitly saying that the problem with higher food productivity is more people. Even though you also acknowledge that population growth is peaking. 2050 is less than 25 years away. And populations in many first world countries may actually be crashing by then, but not because of starvation and not because of chemicals or cancer.

This fear of the hordes being fed on cheaper rice, it's and an explicitly European one, but it turns out not to be well founded.. The reason population growth peaks in each country is because along with better nutrition comes longer lifespan, higher education, women's rights, and more options besides marrying and having children.

Australia has perhaps the most dire fear of population growth, particularly nonwhite population growth, of anywhere in the world besides maybe South Africa. It's ironic. Deep fear of turning into a native tribe, like the Boers I suppose. That's what Mad Max was all about. Yet you burn an awful lot of coal for a very small rich country. Rail all you like about capitalism, I don't see you giving up your car to go roast kangaroos and eat ants off a stick.