I had a better title for this essay but I have forgotten what it was. But let us run with ‘Over-Population’.

But it isn’t really so much about the total human population of the world. After all, it is still true that, if the whole human population was stood together, side by side, front to back, in a tight formation, the whole population could be accommodated on the Isle of Wight.

So it is not really the numbers. Well, not at the present time. But the numbers will become important eventually, if the human race continues to expand exponentially.

So why are the UN, WHO, EU, World Bank, etc, trying to force the population to live longer? It makes no sense. There is no doubt that the aim of tobacco control is to make people live longer lives. They say so. They say, “Half of smokers will be killed by smoking”. That is what they say, and they say so blatantly. But they never, ever, ever, talk about the other half. What happens to the other half?

Are half of non-smokers killed by not smoking? Statistically, it seems to be so. How can it be otherwise? Half of a population will die before the other half, and half of the population will die after the other half. It cannot be otherwise. That is a mathematical FACT.

What I have just said is a ‘statistical abomination’, of course, but tobacco control uses such ‘statistical abominations’ all the time.

But why does tobacco control want people to live longer when the big problem in the future is going to be the increase in the world human population?


It isn’t that difficult to figure out what is happening.

The human population of the world is, in itself, not the problem – yet. What is important is per capita use of resources and the total availability of those resources. You might ask why it is that Europe seems to have been at war, one State against another, for hundreds of years. Why did Spain launch an armada with the objective of defeating England? It can only be that Spain had no real intention of invading England. It can only be that Spain wanted to control the seas. What happened at Trafalgar, was that England defeated Spain and France and gained control of the seas. No one could trade without England’s permission.


It has been a laudable objective of the EU to stop these European wars. Some commentators have claimed that it has been the EU which has stopped these wars.

That is crap. The reality is that the main countries of Europe – Germany, France, Spain, England, Italy, and others – have stopped trying to divide the world up into possessions. Rather than grabbing resources, European States BUY those resources.

What would happen if all the people of Africa, the middle East, India, Pakistan, China, etc, suddenly demanded their share of the resources of the world? What if they all demanded the same standard of living which pertains in the healthy, wealthy West?

It cannot be done, so the answer is to diminish the healthy, wealthy West. A certain level of poverty must be introduced into the healthy, wealthy West. Western Wealth must be redistributed so as to level the playing field, so that poverty is universal, among the masses, apart from the Elite.

It seems odd, at first sight, that Cameron, the Prime Minister of the UK and England, is agitating for the EU Elite. Perhaps he does not know the history of England. It was England, not Scotland, not Wales, not Ireland, that changed the world.


There is no doubt that UN fanatics are intent upon forcing Agenda 21 upon the world. Agenda 21 would limit the population, which is not necessarily a bad thing. The problem for Agenda 21 is: “Which population is to be reduced to start with?” It cannot control Africa, but it can influence the healthy, wealthy West.

The best way for the Elite to control is to create mayhem.

Why do so many commenters about smoking display hatred?


I keep drifting away from ‘Over-Population’, but, like Trafalgar produced control of the seas for England, Climate Control is intended to stabilise the whole world under a ‘One World’ Government. And then population control will follow to maintain climate control.


4 Responses to “Over-Population”

  1. Samuel Says:

    Not just population control viz a viz limiting the number of people born versus the number who die but limits on those who use (and benefit) most from the available resources. The billion low resource people of India, the billion (relatively) low resource use (they ship them to other people) people of China and the (soon to be) billion low resource use people of Africa are not being pressured to stop having seven or eight children each nor to simply die. They are being pressured to live longer (the failed impetus seems to be that people who live longer and healthier lives have fewer children but this is cart before the horse thinking).
    More importantly, as can be most clearly seen in China, the great mass of people are being pressured, everywhere, to live in cities. I think this is an important and little noticed phenomenon that began even before WWI. Before that time there were very few large cities despite the growing Human population. Most people lived in small towns and produced their livings from agriculture and small manufacturing. Now, most agriculture is produced on mega farms that use little Human labor and the rest of the people eke out whatever living they can doing… something… in the cities and are totally dependent on world wide distribution of food and other commodities and would quickly starve from the slightest disruption in those supplies or in the flow of money. I see the recent move toward a “cash less” society just a further step down the road to total control of all resources and all people.

    • junican Says:

      I read somewhere that the UN/WHO wants to concentrate humans, apart from themselves, into warrens in cities so as to free the countryside for forests, etc. Trees are more important than humans.

      But it is true that a runaway human population cannot be sustained, any more than a runaway population of rabbits can be sustained. There must come a point…..

      Malthus has had a bad press. He said that the population would outstrip resources. He got a bad press because his estimates were way off. But he was right in the sense that the Earth can only sustain a certain level of human population. We do not know what that level is.
      It seems to me that all the blather about windfarms etc and energy production is a distraction.Only the population really matters.

  2. Rose Says:


    Junican, you may or may not have a email from me this morning and I didn’t keep a draft, could you tell me if it arrived?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: