Wired magazine recently published an article titled, “Boom! Earth’s Population Could Hit 12 Billion by 2100,” which despite the typical narrative of misanthropic population control that works its way into any Western mainstream article on the topic of growing populations, remained relatively positive.
Wired quoted statistician and sociologist Adrian Raftery of the University of Washington who stated:
“A rapidly growing population with bring challenges. But I think these challenges can be met.”
And Raftery is correct. Wired would also include in its article that:
…it’s worth remembering that human populations doubled between 1960 and 1999. That tremendous growth spurt occasioned fears of widespread famine and societal collapse. On the whole, though, we made it through in decent shape.
Many of those fearmongers between the 1960’s and up to the turn of the century are still deeply involved in manipulating the discourse on the topic of human population growth and measures they claim are necessary to curtail it. John P. Holdren, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, in 1977 ludicrously concluded that the United States would collapse when its population reached “280 million in 2040.” America’s population is now well over 300 million with nearly 3 decades to spare. Holdren would add in his now entirely discredited co-authored book titled, “Ecoscience,” that:
“…if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.”
Holdren’s “population control measures” included a despotic “planetary regime” that would have made the architects of the 3rd Reich blush.
Wired’s article does dabble in alarmism slightly, with some experts claiming rationing would be necessary while raising the issue of climate change in relation to growing populations. While resources and humanity’s impact on the environment are definitely challenges that must be overcome, Vaclav Smil, an energy, environment and food production researcher at the University of Manitoba, incorrectly concludes that cultural motivations rather than technical innovations will be the key.