Nature and Environment 4995 Views Paul Joseph Watson

Hypocrisy of Overpopulation Alarmists



Following the birth of the David and Victoria Beckham’s fourth child last week, the modern vanguard of the elitist, arcane and racist eugenics movement, now re-packaged as “overpopulation,” reacted by lambasting the Beckhams as a “bad example” for families, labeling them “environmentally irresponsible” for having too many kids. However, the leaders of this movement are almost exclusively comprised of ultra-rich elitists who themselves have numerous children and are rampaging hypocrites.

“The Beckhams, and others like London mayor Boris Johnson, are very bad role models with their large families. There’s no point in people trying to reduce their carbon emissions and then increasing them 100% by having another child,” said Simon Ross, chief executive of the Optimum Population Trust.

The scope of this article is not to debate the validity of the overpopulation argument, which in other reports we have vehemently debunked as unscientific quackery (the population of the planet is set to rapidly decline after 2050 and is already doing so in many countries), it is to expose the rampant hypocrisy of those telling us to lower our living standards, reduce CO2 emissions and have less kids while they themselves live in luxury, fly around in private jets, and procreate with little concern for “overpopulation”. 

Just take a brief look at the lifestyle choices of some of the leading proponents of global warming and overpopulation movement, who while telling others to reduce their living standards and have less children, are themselves living in opulence with their giant families.

As the leading luminary of the global warming movement, you would expect Al Gore to live up to the standards he lectures everyone else about. Gore recently called on women to access “fertility management” (abortion) in order to stabilize global population.
However, Gore has four children of his own, who presumably enjoy the luxury of his $8.8 million seaside mansion in Montecito, California (absent any worries about rising sea levels).

Gore is set to become the first “carbon billionaire,” but he offsets his 12-times the average power consumption by purchasing carbon credits, bought largely from his own company, Generation Investment Management.

Prince Charles, the next King of England, routinely lectures the unwashed masses about sustainability and reducing their living standards. While stating that the “age of convenience” must come to an end to save the planet, in 2009 he embarked on a 16,000 mile round trip in a luxury converted Airbus with 14 of his staff at a cost of half a million dollars to browbeat people into limiting their carbon dioxide emissions.

While ordering the peasants not to eat beef to help mother earth and insisting that people “use less stuff,” Charles gorges himself on the finest cuisine prepared by the royal family’s chefs as he relaxes in the surroundings of his four mansion estates, including his Highgrove estate which covers over 900 acres.

The fact that the leaders of a movement that is trying to guilt trip the middle class into shying away from having children, suppressing their quality of life and obsessing about CO2 emissions, are ultra-rich elitists who come from huge sprawling family dynasties and spew carbon dioxide from every orifice as they gallivant around the globe living a life of opulence, should tell us something about the credibility of the message.

The overpopulation myth is a tool of control freaks, a discredited and arcane reinvention of the eugenics dogma, designed to oppress, micro-manage and enslave the population by imperiling them to stunt their freedom, prosperity and happiness, while its proponents are stinking hypocrites who would do the planet a huge favor by following their own advice and disappearing off the face of the earth for good.

Read more:

Internet site reference: LINK


Comments

There are 1 comments on this post

Overpopulation being a myth flies in the face of such evidence as collapsing ocean fish stocks and thinning topsoil on vast tracks of farmland, just to name two problems.

A long-term economic decline is likely, similar to the Great Depression of 70 tears ago, but longer lasting, because that one had a mass psychological cause while this decline will be because of the finite circumstances involved in human existence. The globe is limited in resources, especially oil and gas, and the human brain has intelligence limitations that keep it from understanding the science needed to advance knowledge where it matters to sustain civilization.

Leave A Comment