This revision is from 2025/11/01 05:29. You can Restore it.

The idea that there are too many people in the world and the Earth is destroyed by the fallout of so many people, others see it as a claim to evolution.

A person with the belief must push for some strategy against over population or for population control.

A little history...

• The Catholic Church and its morays on population control are by brainwashing. A cult member may be anti-sexual, delay or forego child bearing, education seperated by gender.
• The autocrat that achieves population control by murdering everyone. Communism and socialism are great for achieving population control while democracy is incapable, undesirables are simply executed away. The leaderboard is Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler.
• Adolf Hitler belongs to a different class, as the strategy is war for population control. For instance, WWI and WWII where the population control is continental wide or worldwide.

These methods are in the modern day considered unpreferred as they require cataclysm and a new range of devices were utilized, these are social devices that shorten life, things such as smoking, alcohol, driving unsafely, all cause mortality, unhealthy food. These are not cataclysmic, but do they even control population? The programs considered effective are "female education" which involves access to contraception, prenatal counseling, reproductive health services, later marriage, fewer children, higher income, birth spacing. As nations grow wealthier birth rates drop, higher cost of living, importance of money over family, space limitations, more confusion, social separation, obstacles and delays.

Under the United States, population has exploded worldwide, and it reflects badly on the United States in the view of systems and leaders because it is incapable of managing any system to any degree of competency. For instance, that Mao Zedong killed more people than Joseph Stalin is seen as bettered, that the US cannot make the leaderboard is seen as child like. Adolf Hitler is seen as competent and a good leader, and a shame that he could not complete world domination. People frown on England and the USA for being too small-minded.

The recent strategy was the pandemic and the vaccine, where the vaccine caused a delayed death, perhaps 6 months or several years away. It appears that the majority of people on Earth willingly accepted the vaccine could have potentially ended the lives of 95% of human beings on Earth. The major criticism is that it targets high IQ nations and leaves low IQ nations unaffected, by the fact that more affluent nations are likely to listen and implement WHO and UN plans and low IQ nations are at least smart enough not to implement "the white man's" maniacal schemes.

The solution to the conundrum has the least effect while achieving the aim, for instance it might as easy as a tax system based on the number of children, up to 2 children tax-free and any more hefty taxed. As you can analyze, this requires no bullets and no brainwashing, willing participants agree to 2 children families, while non-affluent nations are dealt with in the traditional way to avoid the brunt of this targeting educated and wealthy peoples.

A reaction to global vaccination of a delayed death vaccine is to deflect the situation to non-affluent peoples as they are less valuable, there are a grade of human beings barely higher than a monkey, this is called a fitness function and those that do not exceed it are eliminated. This is not racial, resources are better allocated to an unchallenging limbo stick of basic intelligence, if passed disregarding race, the person is exempted otherwise...

This horrible idea is the conundrum goes something like... land is finite and every additional human being means less and less space. New York can testify to that, and the result is hell. Getting rid of many people would free up a lot of space and general resources and make everything better. Take a cup, put a lid on it and fill it with peas, at some point squeezing more peas in is not possible.

Taking on the conundrum means you cannot repeat what has already been tried, especially cataclysmic strategies like world wars.

China has made advancements, while Britain has all but squandered its opportunity.