Yeah, that's never a good sign.
I generally don't do politics on my blog. Okay, I haven't until recently with the Sad Puppies (click tab above for more details), but this week, I need to cover something. And it shouldn't offend you, because if it would, I'm reasonably certain you wouldn't even be reading this blog. You'll see in a minute.
But I have to ask. When did life become an evil? Don't leave just yet, because this has actually become a thing, and I'm seeing it more and more as time goes on. Life is not worth living and people are not worth allowing to live. I'm not talking about a John Ringo novel where the stupid are eaten / blown up / killed in various horrific ways. No, that's a straight up Darwin Award. I'm talking about a general contempt for life and living human beings.
Don't believe me? In 1998, there was a book called Rainbow Six. I'm going to spoil the book and the video game based off of it because it's 17 years old now, if you haven't read it yet, what are you waiting for? The bad guys in that novel were eco-terrorists who figured that the world would be just fine without human beings, and if the terrorists were the only human beings left alive to inherit the Earth, then the Earth would be just perfectly fine.
Our heroes couldn't arrest these sickos, so they invaded, took them outside of their modern compound in the midst of the rainforest, stripped them all naked, blew up the compound and said "Fine. You wanted nature. You got nature. The nearest town is a week thataway. Good luck."
Fast forward to 2013, and He That Shall Not Be Named wrote a book called Inferno that Dante would be offended by. The good ending for the novel was that 1/3 of the planet had been sterilized, and, "Oh well, the bad guys have a point. There really are too many people on the planet."
Uh huh. Yeah. You read that right. The bad guy was right. It would be too much trouble to fix it, and there are too many people anyway, so screw all of them.
Let us ignore for the moment that most of Europe has a birthrate that WILL NOT REPLACE the current generation. Let us ignore for the moment that the gender disparity in China will probably mean that they will not replace even HALF of their population over the coming century. Let us ignore for the fact that forcible sterilizations are the sort of thing that were only supported by Eugenicists the world over, like at Cold Spring Harbor in the 20s, Margaret Sanger, and Adolf Hitler!
Let us focus, for the moment, on the casual dismissal of life as a good. Honestly, "A third of the planet is sterilized, oh well, too many people." Where does this come from, exactly? Where does this man, where does anybody, get off by dismissing people as problems? Because that's what the root reasoning is: people are the problem, but only the right people are the problem.
And we know where this comes from, don't we? The overpopulation myth. PJ O'Rourke pointed out years ago that if we had the Population density of New Jersey, we could fit the entire population OF THE PLANET into Texas. If we did that with the entire population density of a major Indian city, we could fit everyone into, I don't know, Utah (this was 20 years ago. cut me some slack for memory). Granted, that was 20 years and two billion people ago, but congratulations, adding an extra two billion people probably just expanded that to, I don't know, Alaska.
Short version: You want overpopulation? You're going to need a consistent birth rate for, what, another century? Another two centuries? Hell, take Malthus -- please do, and throw him in a dungeon -- who stated that population produces and grows faster than agriculture, so we're eventually going to starve to death due to famine, and a cataclysm will correct the population to planet ratio.
Yeah, Malthus. What a guy, huh?
But here's one of many problems Malthus has. Agriculture of 100 years ago is different from the agriculture of today. Back then, they needed about 20 times the space to create the yield that today's crops produce. (Yes, if everything was 100% organic farming, we'd probably all be dead already). The people starving across the planet today are starving because of economic or political reasons, be they warlords, despots, or just crappy economies. Depending on who's crunching / spinning the numbers, we can probably feed ten times the word's population right now. Even if that's grossly exaggerated, and we can only feed twice the number of people on the planet, that's still a bloody awful lot of people.
But no, Inferno states that the Earth is so precious, and human lives are so cheep, we can involuntarily sterilize over two billion people without any problem at all. And that's the good ending.
Welcome to the value of human life as dictated by a leftist of a certain stripe. A bright red, utterly insane stripe, where nihilism is a poison, but the prevailing philosophy.
Even my own tendency towards mass murder usually has a specific focus. Like politicians or rush hour traffic. Not the planet.
But, no, people are the problem. But only the *wrong* people. The *right* people will treat the Earth right, and think the right way. And the eco-f**ks are the "correct" people, and everyone else can just die.
Now, contrast that with the latest Brad Thor novel, Code of Conduct. The bad guys want to depopulate the planet to only 500 million people, but only the "right" people, the people who believe the right way, think the right things -- the ones who don't believe in nationalism, who will be in harmony with nature, the people who will breed just the right amount, the pliable, the lockstep.
Anyone who googles the name of Brad Thor can probably figure out he's not exactly a left-winger. Heck, he's of the opinion that government's major function right now is just to protect itself. And he backs Rick Perry. Take a guess what side he's on....answer: America's.
I guess The Pius Trilogy is conservative, if only because my heroes want to save as many people as possible. I don't ask what they believe. I don't care what they believe. Unless they're trying to kill my heroes, my heroes will save them. Because that's what heroes do. They don't pick and choose who they save.
The authors of liberal-message fiction will stop and ask what you believe before they save you, if they can even save themselves. Conservative characters will simply run towards the screaming, and will have the gunpower to end the threat.