Denmark Vesey: Denmark Vesey Elevation of The Discourse Award

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Denmark Vesey Elevation of The Discourse Award

Classical One said...

DV,

The problem nowadays is not reproducing, its reproducing too much. The world is so vastly overpoulated and becoming more so every day. Global warming, water shortages, destruction of ecosystems, high food prices and sky rocketing oil prices can all be traced back to too many people.
Kalena said...
Is Classical One a part of the Illuminati? lol Wow. Global Warming - Industrialization. Pumping nasty ass gases, chemicals and fumes into the atmosphere to produce, like 2 Ford Explorers.: Water Shortages - Do you know how much water is used each day to water the golf course's in California alone? The average golf course uses about 50% more water PER DAY than the average family of four uses PER YEAR. (about 315K gal per day versus 200K per year)

High Oil & Food Prices - Let me guess, supply vs demand? Wrong. But i won't answer this one, my boy Ahmadinejad can school you on the 'Food Shortage'.

Denmark Vesey said ...

Ahhh .. the sweet irony. "K-gamers" fuck up the planet and commit collective suicide in the process, yet come up with grandiose conspiracy theories that point fingers at people who haven't poisoned their wombs - to the point where they can barely reproduce - as the culprits behind global devastation.

Funny thing is that when it's said and done, Becky from Harvard will go the way of the dodo bird and Shaniqua from South Side Jamaica Queens will be fussin' wit her baby daddy into the next millenium.

"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth." Matthew 5:5

20 comments:

Anonymous said...: K-gamers may consume more resources per capita...but r-gamers breed younger with bigger litters.

Therefore, even if they use less resources per capita, they make up with more capita.

But either way, more people (r or K) = more resources gobbled up and more waste produced.

And if you define reproduction as success and overpopulation a lie...how successful will this world be if the population hits 50 billion (and mostly single mama r-gamers)?; Jun 19, 2008, 8:09:00 PM
Denmark Vesey said...: I dunno Byrd ....

1 hamburger eatin', minivan drivin', pill poppin', retired golf course livin', A/C runnin', blue haired "K-gamer" with Shaky Leg Syndrome leaves a footprint on this earth greater than 50 Ethiopians.; Jun 19, 2008, 8:53:00 PM
Intellectual Insurgent said...: More like 5,000 Ethiopians.; Jun 19, 2008, 9:15:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Hard to say...you'd have to crunch the numbers with birthrates, lifestyles and ecological footprints, etc.

The scary thing though is that our world seems to be headed for the worst of both K/r worlds.

R-gaming breeding patterns combined with K-game consumption habits.

Bling & Hoz.

I think either alone is bad enough. But when you combine both - that's a dangerous combo.

When really at this point in the global game, r-game consumption & K-game breeding would be a better ecological cocktail.

Oh well, I guess that's what WWIII is gonna be for...sayanora.; Jun 19, 2008, 9:40:00 PM
Denmark Vesey said...: Nah Byrd ...

Don't work that way.

"K-Gamers" tend to be self-obsessed and take themselves far too seriously.

As if their demise means trouble for the planet.

You see, the most powerful weapon known to man is not nuclear. It is the penis.

One takes life, the other gives it.

The population "problem" is only a problem for the penile and ovary challenged.

God got a sense of humor don't he?; Jun 19, 2008, 10:15:00 PM
? said...: Why do you think the Chinese put in place a one child rule? Becuase a billion plus people in that amount of land is too much.; Jun 19, 2008, 10:25:00 PM
Denmark Vesey said...: Chinese K-Gamers, spoon-fed apocalyptic propaganda by Chinese Illuminists exercising totalitarian control over the masses of Chinese R-Gamers in a vain attempt to play God and preserve disproportionate quantities of resources in the hands of a few.

For people supposedly "controlling" their population - The Chinese have grown from 1B when I was a child to 1.5B today.

Chinese Population Control is a Myth.; Jun 19, 2008, 10:39:00 PM
? said...: The chinese population will begin a drastic decline with in the next couple of decades due to the One Child Rule, they are already trying to prepare for it. True, the west uses enormous amounts of resources but countires with huge populations are usually the poorest and suffer from the highest levels of inequality. There is substantial evidence that slower population growth and investments in reproductive health and HIV/AIDS prevention (particularly among adolescents), education, women’s empowerment and gender equality reduce poverty. People in the west need to do their fare share by drastically cutting consumer oriented lifestyles that contribute to the problem, but fat chance of that happening. There is great research linking overpoulation to environmental damage and poverty, check it out, it's no secret.

P.S. DV

I don't look like some bizarre Polo model. I'm not a
member of the illuminati and I'm too young to have kids.; Jun 20, 2008, 12:18:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Actually, Chairman Mao initially told people to mass-reproduce to create a bigger "labor force" when he first took power.

Later, as they plunged into poverty - they realized the profound error of this policy and reversed it in 1978 with their 1-child policy.

And since then their population has tapered off, their GNP has blown up and their economy is surpassing many others by leaps (including the US). Remember, they have currency reserves while we're wallowing $10 tril in debt. Their population control policy worked for all its intents and purposes. Where all other 3rd world charity policies have failed.; Jun 20, 2008, 12:28:00 AM
Denmark Vesey said...: LOL. Hey Classical. My fault my man.

Didn't realize you weren't a polo fan. I was just playing off the "Classical" moniker.

Doubt my man Byrd looks like James Bond, not that you mention it.

Feel free to make a suggestion.; Jun 20, 2008, 3:05:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Don't take it so seriously Classical One. I went from Franz Fanon to Jackie Robinson. At this point I'm just hoping to make a brief walk-on appearance in the Denmark Vesey movie. :); Jun 20, 2008, 8:58:00 AM
Intellectual Insurgent said...: And you don't want to see the f'd up photo DV picked for me at first. Had to call and yell at him to take it down! :-) LOL!; Jun 20, 2008, 9:07:00 AM
Anonymous said...: This was great. DV you made some great points here.

Speaking of photos, i'm digging the chick in this one waaaaaaaay more than the other, but i didn't want to say anything cause I'm trying to tone down on the vanity tip.; Jun 20, 2008, 9:43:00 AM
Anonymous said...: By the way, I'm surprised to observe Denmark Vesey deluded by the Aristotelian configuration of r-gamers and k-gamers.; Jun 20, 2008, 10:39:00 AM
? said...: I'm just fuckin with you DV, I actually thought the photo was pretty funny.

Submariner,

Jackie Robinson is pretty damn good

I love Mike's photo though, that is actually how I picture him now.; Jun 20, 2008, 11:04:00 AM
? said...: Your right though that here in the states we are making a terrible example. We are about 5% of the world's population but we are using 25% or more of the world's resources. That's a statistic that just can't carry on for much longer.; Jun 20, 2008, 11:05:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Here's what the world needs:

r-game "under"consumption
K-game "under"breeding

Unfortunately, we seem to be combining:

r-game "over"breeding
K-game "over"consumption

Almost all growth will take place in the less developed regions, where today’s 5.3 billion population of underdeveloped countries is expected to increase to 7.8 billion in 2050. By contrast, the population of the more developed regions will remain mostly unchanged, at 1.2 billion. The world's population is expected to rise by 40% to 9.1 billion.

More on China's population control & poverty:

By 1981, the population in China broke the one billion mark

By now, the Chinese government realized they already had too many people for them to feed. Any economic growth was offset by the rapid growth of the population. The unemployment pressure, the demand for improved living standard and many other factors forced the government to adopt the stringent one-child policy starting in 1979. It's not the best policy, and we will see it that it brought a lot of problems in the years to come. However, the government didn't appear to have much choice. In the 1950s, the president of Beijing University, Dr. Ma Yinchu (Master of Economics from Yale and Ph.D from Columbia) saw the necessity of family planning. But his suggestions on the subject were not taken seriously. As a matter of a fact, he was criticized for his insightful vision. Some of Mao's senior advisors, Kang Sheng and Chen Boda actually attacked Dr. Ma for his insistence on the family planning suggestion. Since Both Karl Marx (Ma Kesi) and the political economist Thoms Malthus's (Ma Er Sa si) translated Chinese names are surnamed Ma, just as with Dr. Ma Yinchu, some people questioned Dr. Ma Yinchu as to which "Ma" camp he belonged to. His advice was not taken and China lost its opportunity to have a more reasonable population growth. In fact, Ma was forced to quit his position at the University. There is a saying in China, "We lost one Ma Yinchu but we gained an extra 300 million people."

Thanks to the one-child policy, the population growth in China was brought under control. By the end of 2003, China's population stood at 1.292 billion with the birthrate of 12.41/1000 and a natural growth rate at 6.01/1000 (http://www.cpirc.org.cn/tjsj/tjsj_cy_detail.asp?id=1591). The net population increase last year was 7.7 million compared with 23 million per year at the end of 1960s and early 1970s. When the government started the family planning policy three decades ago, its goals were, by 2005, to achieve a natural growth rate of less than 9 and have a total population of 1.33 billion. It predicted the population would peak at 1.6 billion around 2050, followed by net negative growth. Now it seems the government reached its goals ahead of time. The natural growth rate in 2003 was 6.01, well below the targeted 9, and the population won't reach 1.33 billion until the beginning of 2009. In fact, at this rate, China will never reach 1.6 billion. Experts now estimate that the population will never exceed 1.48 billion and a negative growth rate will be achieved before 2050. China is already at the top of the S-curve that means that the decrease of the population will soon materialize.

Fact is, China's population now is under 1.3 billion - and is estimated to never even reach 1.5 billion before it actually starts declining before 2050. China's strict 1-child rule may be harsh, but has been the only one so far to actually work at reducing both population and poverty.

Meanwhile, no PC policy has been instituted in Africa - with the highest birthrates in the world. And whom Western nations have given $5 trillion in aid over the last 4 decades.

So, just compare the results here. China is becoming an economic superpower...while Africa is still mired in AIDS-ridden poverty and warfare.

Look, we really are in unprecedented times, people. Just check out this historical population curve chart. Not only has our population gone exponential, but the technology we are using now is dirtier than ever. At least when they built the pyramids or Stonehenge, it was all green technology. They didn't use plastics and toxic chemicals back then.; Jun 20, 2008, 2:26:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Check out Malthus.; Jun 20, 2008, 5:24:00 PM
Submariner said...: Still stuck on r-game and k-game, I see. It's regrettable that one can invest so much time and energy on something so patently false. The great thing about history is that it's the equivalent of videotape review in sport. Being an avowed Sinophile, I know a little something about China. It isn't the product of popular narratives being current on television and paper. Instead, it is the result of prolonged and sustained study of works by Franz Schurmann and John K. Fairbanks among others.

It was not too long ago that China was under the heel of traditional western powers plus czarist Russia, imperial Japan, and the United States. Like Africans and Indians, Chinese were readily dismissed as immoral dope fiends. (Just read some British news accounts around the time of the Opium Wars and Boxer Rebellion.)

Byrdeye, if you want to discuss the geopolitical skeins in Africa, I would refer you to my man Temple3. Start there then get back to me. Birth patterns are not a cause of prosperity but a result. If you must persist on false dichotomies, at least acknowledge that the history of international relations after World War II has been one of r-gamers kicking k-gamer ass.; Jun 20, 2008, 7:16:00 PM
Anonymous said...: @ Byrdeye,

"Meanwhile, no PC policy has been instituted in Africa - with the highest birthrates in the world. And whom Western nations have given $5 trillion in aid over the last 4 decades."

Just a fact that may enlighten you

For every one ($1)usd Africa receives in aid, they give back seven ($7) usd in interest payments. I won't talk about all the underpaid for natural resources that leave the continent.

So please check your Rgamer PC theory.; Jun 21, 2008, 1:49:00 PM

Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. P

Lord Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science On Society (Routledge Press: New York, 1951).

"At present the population of the world is increasing at about 58,000 per diem. War, so far, has had no very great effect on this increase, which continued throughout each of the world wars.. War has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove effective. If a Black Death could spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. The state of affairs might be unpleasant, but what of it?"