In the U.S. political-economic-military system, $$$ is ALWAYS more important than human lives or the planet itself. Planning omnicide is lucrative, just as are waging endless, unwinnable wars and supporting an empire of more than 800 military bases in more than 70 countries.
It isn’t just the loathsome nuke-happy Trump. Obama also signed on to a 10 year $1 trillion “modernization” program for nuclear weapons. This sickness to possess and potentially use weapons that could bring about the end of humankind is found in both parties. A recent report concluded that even a “limited nuclear exchange” between India and Pakistan could result in the eventual deaths of hundreds of millions of people.
Barring liberal humane overpopulation management and economic stability, conservative inhumane overpopulation management and economic chaos take over.
"A first step is for schools to be more transparent about their involvement in the nuclear weapons complex but that’s not enough. “Universities would not willingly participate today in research enabling the production of chemical and biological weapons. Nuclear weapons are morally equivalent to these other weapons of mass destruction.”
Well… chemical and biological weapons have a stench of misery and suffering about them. Nuclear weapons on the other hand offer clean, crisp, vapourized finality. Just sayin’. If we’re gonna be a pathetic university, might as well be objective and direct.
Interesting how often here , when I suggest the over population is a big problem, I get jumped on as being anti-poor people.
Over population is a big problem
You comment ignores the reality that most devastation wrought upon the natural environment is from do to the wealthy few, not the billions of poor slobs struggling to eek out an existence despite the oppression of this wealthy minority.
Not for everyone “vapourized finality”. Ask the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I tried to get engineers and scientists to sign a few pledge not to participate in R&D related to usable nuclear weapons. Very few takers even among folk in leadership roles in the March4Science organization. Responses I got ranged from:
- Science is apolitical.
- A lot of good comes from military research.
- It’s never appropriate to prohibit research.
- We need these weapons to fight terrorism (or Putin).
- It will jeopardize my funding.
- I’ll lose my job.
- I won’t get tenure.
Nukes were invented before overpopulation.
there it is. Tx for proving my point…and for missing the point.
The problem of Over population has nothing to do with income, race, location…
But thanks for playing
It is very easy for members of the elite who benefit from the status quo, to ignore the fact that the wealthy few are responsible for most of the environmental devastation in the world.
Actually, Steve, EVERY human creates a net loss of biodiversity and biosphere/ecosystems integrity, generating tons of pollution and other harms that help destroy life on earth.
There are scales of negative impact, with the wealthiest people in First World countries often doing the most ecological damage, but ALL humans contribute to the death of the biosphere known as anthropogenic mass extinction, and human population overload is the driver of our worsening worldwide ecological catastrophe.
It doesn’t matter how poor or rich a person is or what economic system they live in, their survival depends on harming the biosphere to one degree or the other.
Isn’t that special, we get to pay for and support not only the largest nuclear threat, but man the largest military as well. Do we need both?
And tested on the Japanese, whom conservative Americans called “the Yellow Peril” and whose populations they wanted to exterminate.
When they corporatized our Colleges/Universities the greed for money was
immediately filled by MIC and its need for weapons research.
Just more corporate-fascism destroy democracy; paving the way for chaos of war/Empire.