Why genocide probably isn't a good idea

We need less people in the world.
The economies of scale that large societies are able to create to grow and advance themselves are offset by the law of diminishing returns that resource depletion creates, and will continue to create at a greater extent into the future. It's clear that our society is the proverbial lazy horse that seems immune to whatever plagues of gadflies we can throw at it. it's too powerful, too big to fail. like an algal bloom.

we are animals. we require the same basic needs, on a survival level, as any other animals. we are subject to the same basic ecological patterns. the difference being that we are able to manipulate our environment. you would think that we might manipulate our environment to ensure that our distant descendants can live comfortably into the future, and who knows, leave earth some day.

but why would we bother doing this? evolution is geared by individual survival and reproduction. the lizard-brained among us will gather as many resources as they can while they survive. whoever dies with the most toys wins, right? lets reproduce and greedily consume while we have the chance, right? like an algal bloom.

those of us capable of feeling a sense of intergenerational empathy might disagree. perhaps its the natural sense of curiosity and wonder that amongst other things defines our species, that hopes that life can continue on indefinitely into the future, and that consciousness can continue to reach new heights and better know the universe we live in.

but for this to happen, it might be ethically permissable to kill a few billion people to bring us back withing our carrying capacity.
it is clear that our technological optimism in extending carrying capacity is growing more and more unfounded as economies collapse and bring ecosystem services down with them.

the inherent dignity of the human individual is diminished as our numbers grow. we become locked into buerocratic systems that systematically take away our need to think and reason. it turns people into safe happy consumption drones. few want to move from the foetal security of this society. any alternative movement will likely be crushed by fear of change and some sense of rose-coloured nostalgia.

so for genocide to work, and be ethically justifiable, three conditions must be satisfied:

1) it must be carried our to bring humans within a realistically sustainable carrying capacity.

2) it must defy all demographic boundaries. all victims must be chosen at absolute randoms; and carrying on from this:

3) the people charged with implementing the technology that kills billions of random people must also be subject to the killing.


my only objection to this genocide is a strangely misanthropic one: I don't think that we are intelligent enough (nor do individuals have the scope of compassion large enough to see the eventual good of such an undertaking) to implement this fairly. also, we would just repopulate.

That's enough drunk midnight blogging for me right now.
have a nice day.

Why Smoking isn't good for you.

I smoke, so this isn't some self-righteous tirade about how stupid smoking is. this is not a guilt trip or fear campaign about how smoking takes years from your life, destroys your family, and makes uncle mark fall face-first in the mud. I am not a heavy smoker, sometimes i just need to go outside to clear my head.

The problem with cigarettes is that they are just the right size. they provide an excuse for a 5 minute break, a chance to stop what you're doing, go outside, and clear your head for a bit. So why do smokers need a cigarette for this?

The point here is that there is a stigma in society about being alone. very few people enjoy being seen as a 'loner'. with a cigarette in hand, you appear to be doing something. the bloke sitting outside on a bench by himself, casually taking a break and watching the world go by does not appear approachable. people get suspicious. "what's he doing?" they think. "is he waiting for something to happen? is he some socially awkward weirdo with no friends? if i talk to him, will he try tell me about his pyramid scheme/ scientology/ how he puts clothes on his pet? probably best to avoid him."

No amount of tv commercials featuring gangrenous feet and lungfulls of tar will fix the fact that this is a social problem, caused by an intense aversion to being seen as an 'outsider'.

this affects introverts far more than others. people handle social situations differently. there is a view that when people want to escape a social situation, crowded gaggles of voices overloading their brains, that they don't 'like' the people they are with, that they are not enjoying themselves. smoking areas of pubs are havens for people who suffer from this, although very few will acknowledge it.

smoking reduces the stigma of being alone. there is an element of mystery surrounding loners - why is that person there? what are they thinking? unfortunately this is often outweighed by the groupthink that creates the aforementioned stigma. being seen to be doing something reduces this to the point of social acceptability.

the problem is not just in the health affects of smoking, its human weakness and pack mentality that in part perpetuate the cycle of addiction. many 'introverts' need to understand that their is nothing wrong with occasionally escaping social situations in order to recharge. many 'extroverts' need to stop the circlejerk about how fantastic it is to be outgoing and surrounded by friends all the time. i see this as a dependance, a weakness.

so i'm thinking about quitting. just as soon as i finish this pouch of tobacco...



thats it. theres no more.

Lewis Carrol, Evolution, and Taoism.

"It takes all --the running you can do, to keep in the same place."

thats a line from Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll. Its also where the name "The Red Queen Hypotesis" comes from, an evolutionary theory stating thusly:

"for an evolutionary system, continuing development is needed just in order to maintain its fitness relative to the systems it is co-evolving with."


And this is from the Tao Te Ching, chapter 2:

"...Nothing, and Heaven, Share the same root
Difficulty and ease are a part of all work.

The long and the short are in your hands,
above and below exist because they each do,
what you want and what you say should be the same.
neither future nor past can exist alone.

The Sage has no attachment to anything,
and he therefore does what is right without speaking, by simply being..."




In our evolutionary competitiveness, continuous progress is necessary in order to keep up. progress is relative. we must keep running in order to stay put.

the human-centric orientation of culturally ancient religions (eg. mohammejewchrist), could be argued to be a form of the 'evolutionary arms race' thats needed to keep us afloat in our ecological niche. evolution gave us power anxiety over other species. religion gave us the explanation, and humans enforced it with a will to beleive what probably isn't true. Mr Camus said:

"A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien. A stranger."

And instinctively nobody wants to be a stranger.

our brains are still wired like this, don't forget that our species is only 200 000 years old. Our basic desire is still control.



Yours Truly,
A Faithful Subject of Her Majesty's Whores.


thats the end.

Here is a photo of sunset on mars

thats it.