Tuesday, March 24, 2009

United Kingdom Eugenics?

The UK TimesOnline reported on Sunday that Jonathon Porritt, one of Britain’s leading green advisers, will warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society. Porritt’s call will come at this week’s annual conference of the Optimum Population Trust. The trust will release research suggesting that in order to feed itself sustainably the UK population must be cut by 50% to 30 million, roughly what it was in late Victorian times.

Note that the advice is not to slow growth, but to cut the current population.

How would this culling be achieved? Where are 30 million people supposed to go? Deportation of immigrants? Deportation of criminals? Widespread use of the death penalty? Large scale doctor assisted suicides? Limited births? Forced sterilization? Forced abortions? Worse?

If births are limited, who will provide for the elderly and disabled? Will culling of the elderly, disabled and weak be necessary?

It seems that Porritt should look at other ways the UK could survive in a sustainable manner. Ensure that most food is grown locally rather than imported; reward home gardening and home food preservation; allow for backyard “farms” in urban areas; or adopt less wasteful lifestyles.

Read it here: UK TimesOnline


  1. It's hard to evaluate whether your "Note that the advice is not to slow growth, but to cut the current population" comment is fair or just sensational without posting the report. This article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5950442.ece seems to offer no indication that he's specifically talking about eugenics.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. I meant to post the link, but forgot. I'm glad you reminded me. It's up on the post now.

    Im glad that you took the trouble to read the article. You will find the subtle statement in the third paragraph - "population must be cut" and again in paragraph five - “Each person in Britain has far more impact on the environment than those in developing countries so cutting our population is one way to reduce that impact.”

    Eugenics isn't usually talked about in specific ways. It's far too controversial. So I look for the subtle code words.

    Those who want to control the people are subtle in their statements. Then when there is an outcry their defense is that this has been discussed for a long time without protest - and now it's too late.

  4. It just seems to me that an appeal to code words often says more about the biases of the interpreter than the biases of the speaker.

    I certainly wouldn't like to see anyone pursue the policies you're discussing - I agree with you on that!

  5. I don't deny that I am biased. I don't lay my core values aside when I consider a statement or belief, and I will try to always stand against attacks on life and liberty. That's the purpose of the blog.