In a rather shocking op-ed for the Washington Post this week, former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta made the case for fighting climate change…by endorsing programs that will help “stabilize” the population. In other words (and Podesta was careful to use ANY other words), it would probably be a good idea to prevent and abort quite a few pregnancies in the future, because goshdarnit, we’ve got Mother Earth to think about!
“Population projection experts estimate a worst-case scenario in which we grow by 70 percent and reach a population of 13 billion people by the end of the century,” Podesta wrote. “But if we continue to invest in sensible international family-planning programs and accept the challenge of meeting the needs of women and families, we could potentially stabilize the population at below 10 billion.”
It’s really interesting how Democrats claim to be the “party of science” and base quite a few of their political arguments on that point – including their platform of climate change extremism. It’s interesting because by taking this issue and rolling it over to the issue of population growth, Podesta is taking leave of most of the scientific community. Very few legitimate scientists will endorse the idea that population growth will strip the Earth of its resources. This is basically the same kind of armchair “science” that gave us the anti-vaccine movement (which also began on the left). But here Podesta is in the pages of Ye Olde Washington Post, telling us all about how we need to “family plan” our way out of a coming disaster.
“Family planning ranks as one of the 10 most substantive solutions to climate change, according to a recent analysis of peer-reviewed research,” wrote Podesta. “In addition to being cost-effective from an emissions reduction perspective, the co-benefits to women and families across the globe are enormous.”
So you get the idea. Podesta is actually less concerned here about some imaginary and apocalyptic population explosion than he is about the old, tired climate change conspiracy. He saw an opportunity to promote abortion, blast the Trump administration for imposing a global “gag rule,” and pay allegiance to the global warming masters all in the same op-ed. Who can blame a leftist for being a leftist, after all?
On the other hand, these Democrats claim to be the party of science while endorsing ridiculously unscientific positions, claim to be the party of morality while endorsing abortion, and claim to be the party that’s above demagoguery while engaging in literally nothing but. The hypocrisy gets to be a bit much sometimes.
