Democracy is merely a tool that only exist because human thought exist. Humans are prone to failure. Ideas and support structures are indeed prone to failure, based on human interaction. The Democratic Party of the US sucks, because most the people in it suck.
Yawn. A number of factors cannot sustain this. Location, geography, resources, consumption, waste.
Simply put the impact is alarming. Even on the nukables. More energy, more products. The products today are consuming the most resource heavy productions in history, and require more products and services to utilise than at any other point. They aren't lessening with nukables, (renewable nuclear electricity) they're increasing, where any lifetime is redundant; on products like phones, computers, TVs, cars, every electronic, plastics, cosmetics, medicine, foods, products, houses, etc, into a population of increasing wealth demanding more products and services.
By geography the more population gains the more it has spread out, populating all over the planet, increasingly. Rather than theoretically at better points of management, lessening the affects caused. Any impact increasingly consumes resources affecting natural supplies, ground water, soil, trees, mines, crops, infrastructure changing that landscape adversely.
The problem of course it changes regardless. But by doubling the global population every 3 decades for the last 100 years, it has been devastating.
Unequivocally No. The population is at a tipping point. Unmanageable by every solution and system imagined. It cannot keep up with its needs and costs and towards this planet. If it does any impact will simply affect far more, rapidly.
The entire current 8 billion could each have 1/4 acre (an acre for a family of 4) in just an area smaller than the size of north america. With urbanization, even less space needed. Do the math.
Cars and engines could run on aether or water. And everything could be built to last 100s of years. Supressed tech.
Alternative and better societal structures are unthinkable. For most.
The entire population of the Earth could live in the state of Texas, if it had population the density of New York. Human freedom within and without national boundaries precludes this level of mouse house building.
Human nature, which is unchangeable, makes for perpetually failing societal structures/institutions.
Many things could be built to last hundreds of years, but at what cost? I'm the first to argue against planned obsolescence and shitty crap made in China on the cheap, but building things to last hundreds of years presumes that there is a need for said things hundreds of years from now...which is unnecessary for most things other than bridges and maybe a few other things.
There is no such thing as aether, and nothing runs on water but a water wheel.
SOVEREIGN, adjective - "supreme in power" + SUPRE'ME, adjective [Latin supremus, from supra.] - "highest in authority" + POW'ER, noun [Latin potentia] - "expressed force"
The highest value (perceived balance) represents the evaluation (perceiving choice) within. Yet...authority is suggested as meaning "being the object that subjects"; which represents the inversion of perceived "being the subjected choice within the objectifying balance". Therefore; the the highest authority of "free" will of choice can only exist within and in response to the "dom"inance of balance...free-dom (aka free and dominance in coexistence with each other).
the minority who cannot control 8 billion sovereigns
"8 billion" represents a suggestion by the parasitic few (minority) to deceive the many (majority) to count others ones; while ignoring to represent the ONE (choice) within ALL (balance). It's this consent to suggestion; while ignoring perceived which gives the suggesting minority the power over the consenting majority.
Can you perceive "8 billion"; cause I gets dem confusion bout all them chickums runnin in my yard?
Yes, the "Great Leap Forward" did result is a mass starvation and death situation, but you said Mao took power with popular support, when it'd be more correct to say that he took power because his armies won more battles.
"Political power flows out of the barrel of a gun" - Mao
Mao had the guns, the regular people didn't, and this is China, a country where obedience to authority is inculcated via Confucian values culturally for millennia.
32 scientists say more than 8 billion are ok.
33 scientists say 8 billion or less.
UN twists this to say a majority of scientists state there's too many people.
Democracy is merely a tool that only exist because human thought exist. Humans are prone to failure. Ideas and support structures are indeed prone to failure, based on human interaction. The Democratic Party of the US sucks, because most the people in it suck.
If whites took over Africa, that could be 20bn
I don't see why they couldn't. I think they just get a kick out of killing people
Yawn. A number of factors cannot sustain this. Location, geography, resources, consumption, waste.
Simply put the impact is alarming. Even on the nukables. More energy, more products. The products today are consuming the most resource heavy productions in history, and require more products and services to utilise than at any other point. They aren't lessening with nukables, (renewable nuclear electricity) they're increasing, where any lifetime is redundant; on products like phones, computers, TVs, cars, every electronic, plastics, cosmetics, medicine, foods, products, houses, etc, into a population of increasing wealth demanding more products and services.
By geography the more population gains the more it has spread out, populating all over the planet, increasingly. Rather than theoretically at better points of management, lessening the affects caused. Any impact increasingly consumes resources affecting natural supplies, ground water, soil, trees, mines, crops, infrastructure changing that landscape adversely.
The problem of course it changes regardless. But by doubling the global population every 3 decades for the last 100 years, it has been devastating.
Unequivocally No. The population is at a tipping point. Unmanageable by every solution and system imagined. It cannot keep up with its needs and costs and towards this planet. If it does any impact will simply affect far more, rapidly.
It depends on how the 8 billion live. Do they live like a typical American, or someone from shithole-istan?
The population increase in Africa is the big problem that world has to deal with, that is, unless we don't let the keep exporting themselves.
The entire current 8 billion could each have 1/4 acre (an acre for a family of 4) in just an area smaller than the size of north america. With urbanization, even less space needed. Do the math.
Cars and engines could run on aether or water. And everything could be built to last 100s of years. Supressed tech.
Alternative and better societal structures are unthinkable. For most.
The entire population of the Earth could live in the state of Texas, if it had population the density of New York. Human freedom within and without national boundaries precludes this level of mouse house building.
Human nature, which is unchangeable, makes for perpetually failing societal structures/institutions.
Many things could be built to last hundreds of years, but at what cost? I'm the first to argue against planned obsolescence and shitty crap made in China on the cheap, but building things to last hundreds of years presumes that there is a need for said things hundreds of years from now...which is unnecessary for most things other than bridges and maybe a few other things.
There is no such thing as aether, and nothing runs on water but a water wheel.
The highest value (perceived balance) represents the evaluation (perceiving choice) within. Yet...authority is suggested as meaning "being the object that subjects"; which represents the inversion of perceived "being the subjected choice within the objectifying balance". Therefore; the the highest authority of "free" will of choice can only exist within and in response to the "dom"inance of balance...free-dom (aka free and dominance in coexistence with each other).
"8 billion" represents a suggestion by the parasitic few (minority) to deceive the many (majority) to count others ones; while ignoring to represent the ONE (choice) within ALL (balance). It's this consent to suggestion; while ignoring perceived which gives the suggesting minority the power over the consenting majority.
Can you perceive "8 billion"; cause I gets dem confusion bout all them chickums runnin in my yard?
The people will control their own...and YOU.
Must have had a shtty life eh amigo?
Mao or Hitler don't take power without that many popular support.
Hitler, yes, but Mao taking power was the result of a long running civil war.
The Cultural Revolution killer rampage.
It's a thing.
Yes, the "Great Leap Forward" did result is a mass starvation and death situation, but you said Mao took power with popular support, when it'd be more correct to say that he took power because his armies won more battles.
Because of popular support, he consolidated unlimited power.
"Political power flows out of the barrel of a gun" - Mao
Mao had the guns, the regular people didn't, and this is China, a country where obedience to authority is inculcated via Confucian values culturally for millennia.
And the United states government
The US backed Chang Ki-check, or however you spell it, the other major faction.