Blue Crab Boulevard

For Unto You A No Child Is Born

Mark Steyn muses on a Christmas - and a world - with no children. It is a dark picture and it is suddenly all the rage among the true believers of the new church of global warming.

As I say, the above demographic audit has become something of an annual tradition in this space. But here's something new that took hold in the year 2007: A radical antihumanism, long present just below the surface, bobbed up and became explicit and respectable. In Britain, the Optimum Population Trust said that "the biggest cause of climate change is climate changers – in other words, human beings," and professor John Guillebaud called on Britons to voluntarily reduce the number of children they have.

Last week, in the Medical Journal of Australia, Barry Walters went further: To hell with this wimp-o pantywaist "voluntary" child-reduction. Professor Walters wants a "carbon tax" on babies, with, conversely, "carbon credits" for those who undergo sterilization procedures. So that'd be great news for the female eco-activists recently profiled in London's Daily Mail who boast about how they'd had their tubes tied and babies aborted in order to save the planet. "Every person who is born," says Toni Vernelli, "produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases and adds to the problem of overpopulation." We are the pollution, and sterilization is the solution. The best way to bequeath a more sustainable environment to our children is not to have any.

What's the "pro-choice" line? "Every child should be wanted"? Not anymore. The progressive position has subtly evolved: Every child should be unwanted.

By the way, if you're looking for some last-minute stocking stuffers, Oxford University Press has published a book by professor David Benatar of the University of Cape Town called "Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence." The author "argues for the 'anti-natal' view – that it is always wrong to have children … . Anti-natalism also implies that it would be better if humanity became extinct." As does Alan Weisman's "The World Without Us" – which Publishers Weekly hails as "an enthralling tour of the world … anticipating, often poetically, what a planet without us would be like." It's a good thing it "anticipates" it poetically, because, once it happens, there will be no more poetry.

A cheerless picture, indeed. Many in the blogosphere - on the right side at least - cheered the fact that Toni Vernelli had decided not to breed, assuming that the madness would die out eventually. Unfortunately, the madness can do a lot more damage between now and the day the non-breeders eventually depart this earth. That, I think, is the biggest worry right now. The idea that the earth would be better off without humans is growing as the elites succumb more and more to the dogma of their new church.

Right now, brutal winter weather is sweeping across the United States, arctic sea ice is refreezing at rates never before seen, people froze to death in Argentina this summer - their winter and Australia suffered record cold. Yet the Bali conference went on anyway, throwing megatons of carbon into the atmosphere so protesters could parade about in polar bear suits in the tropical weather. The delegates, the media and the activists lived it up in a luxury resort and worked out a way to gut the western economies. With the assistance of the western economies.

How long, do you suppose, until some true believer suggests retroactive birth control? I expect it will happen soon enough.

Civilization, Environment, World news | Gaius Saturday, 15 December , 2007

By nigel, Saturday, 15 December , 2007 @ 6:43 pm

Yes, indeed. That’s really all this global warming nonsense is about: population control. The socialists can’t come right out and say they want to off 5.9 billion people. Their intentions would be too obvious and shock! People would disapprove! They like to be sneaky. Feminism kills million; that’s one of their approaches towards population control. Grrls, don’t have a family, ignore your biology and have a career! Now we get global warming and people are more than happy to not have children … “for the planet.” Give me a break. Socialism kills but they do so “like a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” Take a look at the Fabian Socialists plaque. Their intentions are made crystal clear.
By Mwalimu Daudi, Saturday, 15 December , 2007 @ 8:34 pm

P.D. James wrote a book called The Children of Men, which Steyn talks about in some of his columns. It is a fictitious story about what would happen if the human race suddenly and mysteriously lost the ability to reproduce.

I am reminded of the world described in The Children of Men when I read views like those of Walters, Vernelli, and Benatar.

BTW: The book The Children of Men is excellent. The movie version is a PC stinker - don’t bother to rent it if you have not seen it.
By FedUp, Sunday, 16 December , 2007 @ 7:09 am

Probably a good thing Toni decided not to breed… I think lunacy may be genetic!
By BadBob, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 1:10 pm

I’ve always contended that abortion never went far enough … parents should have the right to take the little bastards out until they’re 21! Solve a lot of problems …