The Depopulation Agenda

Fusion development is a markedly international effort, so the spoils would be shared from the outset. At present, globalism has little to offer except sophisticated communication technology for the serfs, shit preachy politics, and immense riches for the already wealthy. If it also offered access to infinite, clean energy, people would be less suspicious and more open to their hegemonising.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
what are the biggest and best arguments for a human cull on a massive scale?
carbon stuff, pollution more generally, plastics, soil erosion, habitat destruction,
loss of biodiversity, people are annoying and get in the way of a nice view....
This is what it boils down to, I think.
 

shakahislop

Well-known member
what are the biggest and best arguments for a human cull on a massive scale?
carbon stuff, pollution more generally, plastics, soil erosion, habitat destruction,
loss of biodiversity, people are annoying and get in the way of a nice view....
psytrance
 

shakahislop

Well-known member
what are the biggest and best arguments for a human cull on a massive scale?
carbon stuff, pollution more generally, plastics, soil erosion, habitat destruction,
loss of biodiversity, people are annoying and get in the way of a nice view....
man city
 

version

Well-known member
 

luka

Well-known member
Monks wore hair shirts to chastise themselves, it's an ascetic thing, self flagellating thing. They're uncomfortable
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
can you copy the article? i can't read it?
I would, but I've already clicked away from it and I've now used up my month's supply of free articles.

The basic gist is that when fusion power comes online (and he thinks it's a question of when, not if), it will solve all our energy problems forever, and that greens hate this because they're weirdos who hate technology and want us all to go back to living in the middle ages.

He does have half a point, in that there are elements in hardcore eco activist circles who are strongly technophobic and disapprove of any solution to climate change other than radical degrowth. (What's more common, I think, is people who are strongly in favour of some technological solutions - solar and wind energy, very often - and strongly opposed to others, mainly conventional nuclear energy, while ignoring that no technological solution is perfect, and all manufacturing has some unavoidable ecological footprint.)

But he also thinks, or wants us to think that he thinks, that climate change is something that might happen decades in the future, rather than something that's been going on for over a century already.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
But as per @luka, it's the Telegraph, so it's not really for reading, so much as inhaling a sort of ambient "harrumph" from.
 
Top