Fervent Reader Comments

I received the following letter from an Okanagan Life reader, Vern, in response to my column in the January/February 2008 issue. I think the letter speaks for itself, but I give him props for having the courage to share these views publicly. What are your thoughts about what he says?

I read with great interest your editorial "Houston We Have a Problem", and I must say "right on". However, as someone who has seen the problem coming for about forty years, and someone who can read the English language, my criticism is that, number one, you did not use language that the average Joe Blow Sixpack can understand, and number two, you still talked around the subject.

You, as I understand you, believe that the elephant in the room is world overpopulation: that there are just too many of us using the world's resources, especially if we all want the standard of living that North Americans and Europeans have; that at the present time, we are using up thirty percent (30%) more of the planet's ecology every year than it can replace; that to get back to replacability, we would all have to scale back to a position where we would all be living at about a standard of that of the meanest third world economy, and thus the current population of about six and one-half billion is unsustainable. It is the technology, the tools that we have learned to make and use, and our over-use of energy and resources that has allowed us this unbridled growth of population. This is a position that I have held for over forty years and for it I have been roundly excoriated, called every sort of radical, lunatic and nut-case.

If, as I believe, this is what you were driving at in your editorial, then you must say so in language that the average person can understand and you must not just allude to the disaster that is coming due to our nonsense of believing that uncontrolled growth in the economies of the world, and in world population, but you must say so in understanable four letter words that everyone can understand, and you must say so forthrightly, not talking around the subject and being politically correct. It is just that, which has gotten us all into this mess; we must not hurt anyone's feelings; everyone must feel good. This is not a feel good subject and it is deadly serious. It is so serious that I frankly don't believe that we are anywhere in time to do any good; that nature will take care of the problem for us and it will not be pretty.

David Suzuki, Al Gore and a host of others have made an industry out of talking around what we must do, but I'm afraid that getting rid of the automobile, re-cycling, smokestack scrubbers and all of the other "solutions" that are talked about by the "Granola Crowd" are just feel good little thingees that every one would like to think are going to help, but they are just little feel goods. There is no such thing as sustainable growth, either in the economy or in population. The one thing that may help, before nature does it for us, is first, zero-population growth, RIGHT NOW, then second, begin reducing the worlds population down to at least pre-WW1 levels. Then perhaps the planet stands a chance, but really only likely a slim chance. I think that in our lifetimes, certainly in yours as I am quite alot older than you, we will see some pretty brutal changes coming. If we want to mitigate these ugly changes, we are going to have to all get on board with such things as banning all unnecessary use of the internal combustion engine. By that, I mean all recreational uses: boats, ATVs, ski-doos, auto-racing and a host of others. We will have to get on board (and here I know I will hear all sorts of screams) with population reduction: allowing those that are born with no chance of a normal life, or to be able to look after themselves, to expire naturally; allow those elderly who are unable to survive without extraordinary means to expire naturally. This, I know, sounds draconian, but if we do not take measures then nature will do so and it may mean the end of all life, as we know it, on earth. It would be a shame if we were the cause of the demise of this lovely planet.

Thank you for your time. I must repeat, I did enjoy your editorial and realize that if you went as far as I just did that there would be no way that you could have printed it or on the other hand, you would likely have been drawn and quartered.