Since when was growing an exploding population a good thing - particularly when it is a highly hierarchical and unequal one where those at the apex of the pyramid of power thrive on the backs of those they oppress?
I realize I've given you a lot to read, but I've already addressed this here:
It is this Nordic invasion (rather than the invention of agriculture) that resulted in mankind becoming chained to a system that could build the Pyramids and many other monuments to central authority, far too numerous to count; but could not free the vast majority from lives of poverty and want.
Indo-European Origins of the Flavian System
"This division of labor and social inequality had very real consequences. For instance, while the majority of people had disastrous health compared to their hunter-gatherer ancestors, the skeletons of Mycenean royalty had better teeth and were three inches taller than their subjects. Chilean mummies from A.D. 1000 had a fourfold lower rate of bone lesions caused by disease than commoners.”
Actually, what we see over and over again in times of crisis is that overwhelmingly people come together and help each other.
"Communities that have been devastated by natural or man-made disasters almost never lapse into chaos and disorder; if anything, they become more just, more egalitarian, and more deliberately fair to individuals. (Despite erroneous news reports, New Orleans experienced a drop in crime rates after Hurricane Katrina, and much of the “looting” turned out to be people looking for food.)
Before the war, projections for psychiatric breakdown in England ran as high as four million people, but as the Blitz progressed, psychiatric hospitals around the country saw admissions go down. Emergency services in London reported an average of only two cases of “bomb neuroses” a week. Psychiatrists watched in puzzlement as long-standing patients saw their symptoms subside during the period of intense air raids. Voluntary admissions to psychiatric wards noticeably declined, and even epileptics reported having fewer seizures."
I'm not blaming you, but you've been completely and thoroughly indoctrinated into all the ways that the patriarchal dominance hierarchy continually justifies itself - none of which is actually true or holds up to scrutiny. I've been studying and writing about this for more than three years and almost every cultural narrative that we have about the benefits and the inevitability of this sort of social system are nothing more than propoganda - in part because it ties in so easily with the brutul type of capitalism that we practice in the US.
bell hooks aptly identified our culture as a patriarchal capitalist white supremacist one - in other words a dominance hierarchy. Will it be easy to move away from such a deeply entrenched set of cultural beliefs? Of course not, but that doesn't mean that we can't try to begin to envision something more equitable and sustainable, and I believe we do that in part by pointing out how it hasn't always been this way, and by talking about the places in the world that do not operate this way.
Here's a great resource for more information about that if you are at all interested.
"The Center for Partnership Systems (CPS) — formerly the Center for Partnership Studies—is dedicated to research, education, and building tools to construct economic and social systems that support human beings and the planet that sustains us. This site provides a wide array of resources about the history and foundations of Partnership Systems that will empower you to apply partnership principles in your own family, community, workplace, and government.
The Partnerism Movement is a CPS initiative to accelerate the shift from Domination to Partnership Systems. We start with a caring economics of Partnerism, an economic system that, unlike Capitalism and Socialism, values and rewards caring for one another, nature, and our collective future. We invite you to join the Partnerism Movement."
