Apocalypse Now?

As many film buffs will know “Apocalypse Now” was the film that along with anti-war protests and activists such as Jane Fonda, eventually brought about the end of America's dishonourable war in Vietnam. The river scenes were filmed in the Philippines at Pagsanjan where I visited in 1980. Now a popular tourist resort with restaurants, back then it was basic with the river canoes being accessed by wading through foot deep mud and slime whilst fighting off mosquitos, more in keeping with Conrad’s brilliant novel “Heart of Darkness” which was in part an inspiration for the film.

Apocalypse though is the Bible’s version of the precursor to the end of the world, Armageddon and the battle between good and evil, and finally the Day of Judgement as mentioned in the Book of Revelations. Islamic eschatology (the study of the end of history / worlds end and the day of Judgement) is very similar to the Bible in that similar apocalyptic events are a precursor. This is more clearly mentioned in the Hadith (the recorded words of the Islamic prophet) rather than in the Quran.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, from the book of revelations are generally (though not unanimously) considered to be:-

·       First Horseman - Pestilence/Disease

·       Second Horseman - War

·       Third Horseman - Famine

·       Fourth Horseman – Death

For the non-religious the above is mere folk law written by Stone Age men.

However, Apocalypse has a much more serious meaning, and this meaning relates to World Population Growth and the inability for the world to cope and feed a world population that is growing at an unprecedented rate.

A world facing a crisis situation not seen since the famines of the 14^th century and the Black Death pandemics in Europe and China which reduced Europe's population by about half.

This was then followed by a period of revival in general brought about by Renaissance Humanism – the revival and reform of literature, arts, sciences, politics and most importantly widespread educational reform.

Already today, many of the world’s poorer populations are hungry, some starving to death through famine, lack health care, education, face violence and war, the effects of climate change etc., and live short wretched lives.

40% of all pregnancies worldwide in 2012 were unplanned. Of this number 50% ended in induced abortion.

Source: US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Citing 31 International research bodies.

Researchers: Gilda Sedge, Susheela Singh, Rubina Hussain

So if that is the situation today, what about tomorrow’s poor, when the world population – births minus deaths - is currently adding 70 million people per year?

And what about the richer nations? The only reason that some of us live “adequate lives” is because the others live a short wretched life. If everyone lived an “adequate life” the worlds resources could sustain 2 billion people long term. Currently there are 7 billion people and this number is rising rapidly towards 10 billion.

Simple formulas

Peoples Consumption + Number of Consumers = Impact on worlds ability to cope.

Over Consumption + Over Population = Unsustainability followed by Apocalypse.

Sensible Consumption + Reduced Population = The Path to Sustainability.

This video by Dr Joel Cohen, Professor of Populations at the Rockefeller University and Colombia University, gives a much more upbeat and realistic view of the problems faced, and the many possible solutions that can be brought to bear on the issues – technological, scientific, political etc.

Yet population reduction is still a significant component of the overall mix of solutions, and to achieve this two things are critical – Education (especially women’s education) and the availability of affordable Contraception and family planning services to all women.

©Big Think

So faced with such major issues of survival why do some religions believe in denying or restricting education to sections of the population, or condemning contraception. Also, why do some government and international bodies shy away from the problems faced?

Religions and Government.

Islam: Islam is the predominant religion in countries where literacy and educational levels are lowest. Most of these countries are also economically poor. In the few wealthy Islamic countries education is heavily curtailed and levels of religious indoctrination high. Female education is not allowed in many Islamic areas.

The reasons for this are that the Islamic governments, whilst paying lip service to basic democracy are theocratic in nature. To go against the theocracy would be political / oligarchical suicide.

There are too few Islamic clerics who believe in modernisation with most just regurgitating the same religious line of the past. Islam is basically a religion stuck in the 7^th century CE.

Fear of secular education eroding the powers and beliefs of their religion are uppermost. Therefore education is heavily curtailed, and without education, and indeed without literacy for many – particularly women’s education and literacy – knowledge of contraception is generally poorly understood.

The few exceptions generally come from wealthy families who have sent their children abroad for their education and “modern” orientation. They then tend to live abroad or return home to run businesses, join an oligarchical theocratic elite and / or live upper middle-class lives, but realise that to go against the religious side of the establishment is too great a risk – including a risk to life.

Whilst Islam generally has no objection to contraception or birth control, it is generally culturally expected that people have large families, and will continue to do so until literacy, education and contraception knowledge and availability become widespread.

At an Islamic Fundamentalist level, people are actually encouraged to have large families as part of the fundamentalists’ objective of increasing the world’s ratio of Muslims.

Catholic Church: The Catholic religion teaches that all forms of artificial contraception are in fact acts of abortion.

The only form of contraception allowed for family planning is sexual abstinence during a woman’s fertile period and for sexual activity to be limited to the woman’s sterile period – known as the “natural method”, or “cycle method” of contraception. A form of contraception known for its ineffectiveness and one that brings about great marital disharmony amongst many.

For it to be acceptable for people to “override Gods will” by planning when and when not to have sexual activity, but for it not to be acceptable to “override Gods will” by placing a barrier between sperm and egg – such as a condom - thereby causing abortion because the sperm is wasted is considered nonsense by the majority of today’s Catholics.

The church’s hierarchy however has written volumes upon this subject, most of which is painfully difficult to comprehend, goes in to circular arguments within the realms of not only religious historical teaching, but also semantics, ethics, morals, biology, science, genetics and more. However, the main purpose of all this literature appears to be more interested with maintaining the church’s position of power and tradition than anything else.

In 1966 a Papal Commission produced a report, proposing that artificial birth control was not intrinsically evil and that Catholic couples should be allowed to decide for themselves about the methods to be employed.

According to the majority report, use of contraceptives should be regarded as an extension of the already accepted cycle method. However, the then Pope Paul VI rejected the report because it was not unanimous - out of 74 commissioners 7 dissented. The “not unanimous” reason the Pope gave was untrue, the reality being that he gave way to heavy pressure from senior conservatives within the Vatican.

Allied with these arguments is the doctrine that the Pope is infallible. When a Pope makes a pronouncement, which is also in accord with the two other specifics of infallibility, then this pronouncement is considered infallible and instigated through the Pope by God, and therefore cannot be changed.

If you take time to study the history of the Popes since the beginning of the Christian church, their behaviours, pronouncements, actions etc., you will realize what arrant nonsense Papal Infallibility is.

Not that the Popes rejection of the commission’s report mattered over much, because the majority of the clergy as well as the majority of congregations ignored the Papal rejection, accepted the Papal Commissions report, and embraced contraception. It is estimated today that 85% of Catholics use or have used contraception for family planning, and feel no guilt from doing so.

Not only has the Catholic Church tried every effort to frustrate sexual education wherever it might occur, it has also for the past 150 years fought tirelessly to try to stop contraception being made available wherever it has had the power to do so. Finally, in 2014, the Philippine Supreme Court struck down a challenge instigated by the Catholic Church to the "Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act" sometimes known as the “Women’s Reproductive Health Bill” making the Philippines the last of the world’s countries to legalize the availability of contraception.

The Catholic Church’s teaching however remains the same and is still being pursued / indoctrinated in mainly poorly educated parts of the world – particularly in the African continent.

In terms of the impending population crisis there appear to be two views:

• Apocalypse and Armageddon would be welcome as they would bring about Judgement Day when all will be taken in to Gods presence.

• God will provide a solution that does not include birth control.

Protestant / Anglican: The Protestant / Anglican churches were initially “concerned” about artificial contraception especially when the oral contraception pill became available in the mid-20^th century, the concern being mainly related to women’s sexual freedom and the threat of promiscuity. These concerns not having materialised, contraception is now fully accepted by Protestant / Anglican Church’s for family planning.

Hinduism: All methods of contraception are permitted in the Hindu faith. Although because through culture and tradition it is important for Hindu’s to have a son, often family planning only commences after the birth of a boy.

Buddhism: Generally Buddhists believe that conception occurs when the egg is fertilized, therefor any form of contraception that prevents the egg from being fertilized is acceptable. Emergency contraception (after the egg may have been fertilized) may be unacceptable. However, as Buddhism is open to personal interpretation of its ethics, attitudes to emergency contraception vary.

Judaism: Jewish religious law says that men are forbidden from using contraception, but as there is no specific mention of women and contraception in the religious texts, most Jews use this omission to allow any kind of female contraception.

Atheism: Being an atheist simply means that a person does not believe in a God or Gods and therefore religions. That is all it means – nothing else.

Whatever else atheists believe, or don’t believe, is up to the individual’s personal choice. Therefore some may believe in contraception, others not, and some may have no opinion on the subject at all.

Humanism: Humanists are atheists or agnostics and nearly all live happy and fulfilling lives without reference to the supernatural.

Humanists believe that morality is an intrinsic part of human nature based on an understanding and a concern for others, needing no external sanction. These affirmations and beliefs make it self-evident that Humanism means the taking of an ethical stance on all issues with which humanity has to cope in life. Humanists believe in having a duty of care to all of humanity including future generations.

Humanism advocates the application of the methods of science and free inquiry to the problems of human welfare. But Humanists also believe that the application of science and technology must be tempered by human values. Science gives the means but human values must propose the ends.

In relation to family planning humanists believe that everyone should have access to free comprehensive sexual education. Also that family planning services should be available to all, and every woman should have access to affordable contraception, and its use should always be her own personal choice.

Governments: Politicians rarely take long term decisions, usually only having an eye on their own short term survival.

Democratic politicians will look after their own electorates short term needs (to ensure re-election) even when these needs are in conflict with the greater good.

American politicians who claim not to believe in climate change, usually represent areas heavily dependent on fossil fuel extraction or use, or industries that produce large amounts of pollution, are examples.

Non democratic countries are even worse with oligarchical cliques who look after their own narrow interests only, with theocracies being at the worst end of the spectrum.

All of them for one reason or another pay lip service to the world’s long term problems with a “when I’m gone it will be someone else’s problem to solve” attitude.

World Health Organization – formed by 61 nations in 1946

Edited extracts from discussion: Professor Milton Siegel, who for 24 years was the Assistant Director-General of the World Health Organization, speaking to Dr. Stephen Mumford in 1992, revealed that although there was a consensus that overpopulation was a grave public health threat and would be a major cause of preventable death not too far in the future, that the influence of the Vatican in shaping WHO policy, particularly in blocking the adoption of the concept that overpopulation was a grave public-health threat—a concept which, in the WHO’s early years, enjoyed a broad consensus among member countries, created exactly the situation they were trying to prevent.

The WHO had always wanted to promote contraception and family planning, the logic being that over time families would become smaller and as a result better fed, more prosperous and better educated, in turn resulting in overall improved health.

Africa was seen as a major risk of an overpopulated region unable to support itself with food and water. WHO leaders realised that unless action was taken to reduce population levels in Africa, overpopulation would become a major – and preventable – cause of starvation and death on the continent.

But these people of vision lost that debate in the 1940s, due to the Vatican’s stance, and now premature death on an appalling scale is just getting underway in Africa. It is reasonable to predict that more than half of the Africans alive today will die prematurely, and that a substantial majority of African children born in this decade will die either in this decade or the next. Mostly as a direct result of Vatican policy.

Milton P. Siegel is considered among the world’s foremost authorities on the development of World Health Organization policy.

Whilst WHO programmes relating to improving health through vaccinations, research, outreach clinics, maternity programmes, mosquito control etc., etc., have been hugely successful and beneficial, progress on contraception and family planning have been abysmal.

The Catholic Church’s policy and influence is the only reason for this failure in that direct lobbying of the WHO and the countries, politicians, charities and donors who support the WHO have been hugely successful in keeping family planning off the WHO’s agenda since day one.

Despite its best efforts the WHO was unable to get family planning on to their agenda because of this lobbying and background manipulations of the said supporters.

In three World Health Assemblies, whilst Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) a predominantly Buddhist country, tried to get family planning on to the agenda, due to Vatican pressure - especially through the predominantly catholic Irish and Italian government delegates – got the proposals vetoed. In the third assembly, Ireland, Italy and also now Catholic Belgium delegates directly told the head of the WHO that if any family planning programme or budget was on the agenda, they would withdraw from the WHO, set up a new international health body, and ensure that the WHO was effectively destroyed. Such was both the overt and covert despicable power of the Vatican.

As a result family planning was left to others. India developed its own family planning programmes as early as 1952, and around the same time the International Planned Parenthood Foundation and the Population Council were established. Whilst in the USA private donor organisations were active, later the American government, and other governments (especially Sweden) took active participation in developing international programmes, also sponsored by the World Bank and the United Nations Fund for Population Activities - the UNFPA was basically set up to counter the Vatican’s blocking of the WHO.

The statement “Development is the best contraceptive,” made by Dr Karan Singh at the World Population Conference in Bucharest in 1974, highlighted a change of thinking and the need for a more balanced approach to population control. Social development had a role in reducing the fertility rate at this time by creating a more conducive environment. By the mid-1990s, however, the focus had moved from the narrow area of family planning to reproductive rights and reproductive health.

In 1992 Siegel stated in his interview that he thought that the Catholic Church still had considerable (negative) influence on the WHO. Also that the Vatican's organizational structure was probably the best in the world, and being well used to subvert State and Church separation.

With the recent and rapid decline in the Catholic Churches influence, particularly in the first world, family planning was finally brought to the forefront at the WHO although 60 years late.

Not that the Vatican’s fight is over…

In Mumford’s book “The Pope and the New Apocalypse : The Holy War Against Family Planning” he records that in the 1975 National Conference of Catholic Bishops there was formulated and published for internal Church use the “Pastoral Plan for Pro-Life Activities.” A shocking document to be used in the main by NON CATHOLICS forwarding Catholic policy to undermine American democratic principles in areas related to the church.

"In 1975 the National Conference of Catholic Bishops formulated and published for internal Church use the “Pastoral Plan for Pro-Life Activities.” This Plan can be found in Appendix 3. The plan is directed toward creating a highly sophisticated, meticulously organized and well financed local, state and national political machine. In 1980, the Vatican went to great lengths to assist in the election of an American president, using the infrastructure created in accord with the Plan. Though the plan says that this political machine was created to combat legalized abortion, it has become obvious during the Reagan administration that the issue of abortion is simply a clever pretext for building a political machine designed to impose a much broader Vatican political agenda on the American people.

The plan frankly states that the Church will undertake activities to elect officials from local to national levels who will adhere to Vatican­ ordained positions; that it will seek to influence policy in ways that will eliminate the threat to the Church; and that it will encourage the Executive Branch to deal “administratively” with matters that are unfavourable to the Church.

Starting with Parish, Diocesan, and State Coordinating Pro-Life Committees, the Plan concentrates on organizing all 435 Congressional Districts in the 50 states. The plan blueprints in detail how each congressional district machine will be organized, how it will operate, what it will do and how it will respond to the National Conference of Catholic Bishops."

A major part of the plan is to put NON Catholic representatives in to influential positions, especially Protestants, to implement Catholic policy whilst the Vatican's policy makers stay in the background providing funding and pulling the strings.

For further details see:

http://churchandstate.org.uk/2015/02/the-pope-and-the-new-apocalypse-the-holy-war-against-family-planning/

Gates Foundation. (Launched in 2000 and the world’s largest private foundation)

The Gates Foundation charity (Bill and Melinda Gates) as well as supporting WHO general health objectives and programmes relating to vaccinations, clean drinking water, mosquito control, poverty reduction, education etc., are pumping millions of dollars in to sex education, contraception and family planning around the world.

Melinda Gates, herself a catholic, schooled by nuns, has been at the forefront of the programme and a vociferous critic of the Catholic Church’s stance and objections to family planning, whilst the church continues to blast Melinda through whatever media channels it can.

The foundations high profile and Melinda’s rhetoric is however helping to break down support for the Catholic Church’s opposition to family planning.

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/

Abortion: In a utopian world where sex education, family planning services and contraception were available to everyone, the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions would be ended – unless you believe, as the Catholic Church still teaches, that all forms of artificial contraception are in fact acts of abortion.

Paradoxically, in the eyes and teaching of the Catholic Church, because 85% of practicing Catholics use artificial contraception, the church therefor oversees the largest single group of abortionists in the world!

Can the Apocalypse be survived?

Nations will do whatever it takes to survive. I can envision an America that has a population doubling time of 80 years, being large enough to be capable of self-sufficiency, with closed borders.

Western European countries similarly could be self-sufficient (although less so than America) with stable or reducing populations (Germany’s population pre-Syria was reducing and the UK’s population doubling time is 250 years), also with closed borders to the east, and closed shorelines to the south. Australia and New Zealand would also probably do well.

Wealthy Middle Eastern desert countries who cannot provide their own food are already buying up vast tracts of arable land in developing countries, as is China.

Russia, already happy to annex countries for military purposes will likely do so again for survival purposes. China, already attempting to claim vast swathes of ocean from its neighbours and also from international waters is doing so to protect its future and also threatening military action against those who object.

The poorer overpopulated nations are the ones that will initially suffer. Currently, due to globalisation of trade, these countries already suffer from neo-colonialism. I can envision a future whereby military backed imperialism / hegemony resurfaces with the wealthy and well-armed countries using their wealth and military might to subdue poorer countries, thereby to use both land and labour for their home country advantage.

War between the advanced nations will probably be avoided, with the share of the poorer nation’s resources being carved up by the new imperialists.

A far better solution is for the religions, politicians, agencies and such to get their heads out of the sand and start taking practical steps to start reducing the world’s numbers by urgently educating people about family planning and providing affordable contraception to all. With the long term objective of creating a manageable, clean and equitable world.

To quote a recently heard Philippines comment: "Get off your knees praying to God for change, instead take action and make change happen!"

Charles