Poll Of The Month: Do you believe in ecological overshoot theory?
July's, 2026's poll in the Mirrors For The Mind, Heart and Soul series
The following poll was inspired by this note by Max Wilbert
My response to Max’s post was this:
Ecologically depleted statist / capitalist human factory farms/ tax cattle/ corporate consumer pens like the one you see in the image (above) represent a massive failure of imagination and squandering of human creative gifts , we can do better.
“Humanity could learn so much about successfully living harmoniously with each other and all life on the planet by following the ancient trees of the forest. We need only go into the forests and actually watch how life unfold there to see the truth”
- Johrey M. (from “The Ancient Forests Teach Just By Being”)
That many people crammed together in one place is certainly unhealthy, unnatural, inherently degenerative and corrosive to the spirit, though if they were not crammed in (what this tree hugging nature lover sees as) crappy hell holes like L.A. and more evenly distributed in a larger area, that many humans does not necessarily have to have a degenerative impact on ecology IMO.
In other words, I would never describe places like NYC, Mexico City, Toronto, Shehnai or L.A. as being communities of humans capable of living with a reciprocal relationship with the land, both the technology that builds and maintains such modern cities is inherently parasitic and exploitative of vast lands, breeds oppression and war and, even if that many millions of people were living in a low tech capacity it is just way too many humans for that small of a land mass. That said, if the current inhabitants of cities like those were not all unnaturally crammed into such a small area and the people were using their unique gifts to live in service of life, as As Lyla June says in this video clip, we could use the many human hands on Earth now to proliferate amazing abundance, becoming an asset to the Earth and making her feel grateful for our presence.
In my opinion, the ecological decimation resulting from modernity is less a matter of “overpopulation” (as a number we have already reached globally that exceeds the Earth’s carrying capacity) and more a matter of the Wendigo sickness (anthropocentric/ materialistic greed) guiding modern people’s choices and priorities.
Many of the governments on Earth promote the Malthusian theory of human overpopulation and they connect this idea to “ecological overshoot” interchangeably. Proposed by economist Thomas Malthus in 1798, the Malthusian theory states that human population grows exponentially, while food production increases only arithmetically.
His metrics lacked imagination, ecological awareness and were ignorant to regenerative agroforestry practices.
“It isn’t that the earth cannot sustain us... it is as Mahatma Gandhi said, “the world has enough for everyone’s needs, but not everyone’s greed.
If there are indeed 8 billion people on Earth, every person on Earth could live on 2.3 acres per person worldwide within temperate zones (excluding extreme arctic, mountainous and desert lands). That is 9 times as much land as I live on and steward currently and I am fully capable of growing what we need to survive on our urban lot.
Do we have too many people on Earth? Or it is just that we have too many people guided by exploitative thinking?
Check out my post below for some examples of how we can feed a large population while enriching biodiversity rather than depleting it.
Max never responded, and when I asked my own subscribers/followers the question posed above, only one person responded (thank you DJ ).
Thus, I will now elaborate on what I meant by the question, provide some basic info on prevailing conventional thought surrounding “overshoot” and “overpopulation” and then pose the question again to all of you fine folks. I think this topic deserves some vigorous discussion as many of us may have subconsciously adopted thinking on this topic from institutional propaganda without assessing all the data for ourselves and really thinking about what potentials exists outside the boxes presented to us as “limits the growth”.
Our governments and the benevolent organizations like the UN and WHO, as well as David Attenborough and others at the World Economic Forum keep on telling us that there are too many dirty polluting humans on the planet (while they fly to climate conferences in private jets to sit in AC controlled buildings built on top of clearcut rainforests) and we need to reduce how many are on the planet.
Many have internalized these misanthropic narratives and promote depopulation agendas and see themselves as an imposition on the living planet (instead of putting their gifts to use in service of life as their animistic ancestors did).
There are a great many people that view humanity as a virus of sorts.
People like Lyle Lewis, Elisabeth Robson and Erik Michaels and and their cult followers that show up when I posted something about how to naturally enhance human fertility with a specific food to complain about how I should not be helping people have more healthy babies because that is “bad for Gaia”.
These people often hide behind the false stance which points the finger accusingly at anyone highlighting examples of ecologically sound and archeologically verified precolonial cultural practices that enhanced biodiversity (while feeding their communities) by saying that is “romanticizing”. Meanwhile they engage in the whitewashing of indigenous cultures and dismisses their proven regenerative land management practices (based on their animate worldview) that have observable multigenerational / regional influences by ignoring those examples of human behavior and saying that all humans consume until their local ecology collapses.
There are certain second coming eager religious people that are similarly told “no point in trying to help the planet because the end is coming soon anyways”. Only difference is that these people do not even offer the false promise of a ticket to an eternal four seasons resort in the sky if you do certain rituals (like the fire and brimstone preachers do) they just basically tell you “humans are innately greedy , destructive and like parasites and we will make all species go extinct and then go extinct ourselves , so you might as well just sit back and enjoy the show”.
This combination of projecting their own self-hate and cultural orphanhood/ spiritual poverty onto others often culminates in a vaguely racist attempt to diminish the valuable accomplishments of cultures that chose a different path than over consumption. They put themselves on a pedestal as the champions of truth (which according to them, is all bad news) and they speak diminutively and dismissively about indigenous peoples by describing their lifeways as some small anomaly from the distant past.
“The myth of humans as inherently selfish, brutish, and destructive does not fit alongside alternative mythologies and the current lived realities of many cultures.
One of the tragedies of colonial history in North America is that our textbooks took our Eurocentric, dominant ecological views for granted. In Canada, we learned that we had hunted the bison into extinction and fished the cod into severe depletion. We learned about forest fires and fossil fuels as some sort of necessary evil that could only be solved by better (still Eurocentric) climate policy and “reduce, reuse, recycle” habits.”
Ashely L. Crouch ( from her essay titled “Humans Are Not a Planetary Virus, but Our Ideologies Can Be” )
The misanthropic views they promote is something I discussed with James Corbett in our conversation about eugenics and “psychological toxins” that lower fertility in humans. The anti-human rhetoric these (sometimes well meaning folks) espouse is exactly how the oligarchs want us to view ourselves, for it is how they view us (dirty, polluting , wasting space, unable to use our own free will to responsibly govern our own actions and in need of being culled through depopulation schemes “for the greater good”).
The spiritually impoverished statist education and oligarch infiltrated universities many have been indoctrinated in have created a Stockholm syndrome where they churn out people that promote the same self destructive and anti-human rhetoric of those that would wish them dead in the eugenicist oligarch circles.
“Money is the new false god that they want people to worship and give their life for. This isn’t something that has just happened recently. It has been happening for more decades than we may realize and it has happened so slowly and so subtly that most have accepted it because they grew up in it and think this way is normal.
But it is not normal. That is easy to see when we put down our devices and walk into nature. We feel the change in our energy and we relax and feel peaceful. That in itself should scream the truth. We were not meant to be hedonistic, nor to spend our life working our days away just to accrue things. We were meant to connect with all of nature as well as each other, to work with our hands, to create together, to pursue our purpose and choose actions that are fueled with compassion, respect, appreciation, understanding and unconditional love.
To some, that may seem like idealism but i believe we need to start sometime and why not now? Why not... not just for ourselves but for all that are yet to live on this earth?”
Many of these people espouse views that are clearly based on the same delusions of grandeur inherent in the egotistical atheistic viewpoint of modern scientism (which covetously claims sentience is unique to humans, refusing to acknowledge the existence of spirit and denies all other beings agency through promoting the simultaneously defeatist and elitist view that humans are the only beings with free choice but that we are also inherently degenerative and destined to misuse our free will).
Many of them embrace fallacious colonial dogmas that are blind to spirit while attempting to veil their colonial and misanthropic eugenicist thinking in environmental rhetoric.
“As the narrative of humans as a virus continues to spread (pun intended) across the internet, we must push back against it.
If our mythology is one that we are undeserving of being part of this world, our actions will begin to confirm it until we allow ourselves and our civilization to be swallowed by a metaphorical (or literal) tsunami.”
Ashely L. Crouch ( from her essay titled “Humans Are Not a Planetary Virus, but Our Ideologies Can Be” )
This often leads to instilling a perpetual glass half full worldview that refuses to engage with an honest assessment of the state of things for they refuse to look at any evidence that would compel them to have to do real work regenerating ecology rather than sitting around creating doom scrolling / fear porn material for social media.
Given this rampant counter-intuitive thinking that justifies laziness, apathy and instills self hate, I would like to now pose the following question and open it up for discussion.
“When we call ourselves a virus we also relinquish personal responsibility to be the change. We are myth makers. We can create a new story, drafted out of the longing to reconnect to the things that matter: community, nature, and allocating resources to advancing longterm, sustainable interests.
The ideology of environmental stewardship has been drowned out by one of dominion, accumulation, and endless growth. It does not have to stay this way.”
Ashely L. Crouch ( from her essay titled “Humans Are Not a Planetary Virus, but Our Ideologies Can Be” )
Now that I have explained my own stance on the question posed for this month’s poll, I want to know what all of you think.
Perhaps I have not considered all the variables and my understanding of these issues needs a lot of improvement. If you believe that to be the case, please let me know by voting in the poll below and then explaining your vote in the comments section.
Do you believe in ecological overshoot theory?
(The theory that declares the planet is overpopulated with humans and that the human population’s demand on the global ecosystems that support us has exceeded the ecosystem’s regenerative capacity, or essentially, in other words, that there are too many humans on Earth and we need to get rid of some for the benefit of the earth)
I would appreciate it if you could elaborate on your reason for voting for what ever option you chose in the comments section to promote constructive discussion.
Thank you in advance to those who are taking the time to vote and comment to promote constructive discussion and hold up a candle to the mirror.
For context on the images in the collage above, here are some links:
the picture on right that says 2001 and 2019 shows what this Brazilian couple did by planting over 2 million trees on a degraded landscape.
the image that says before and after and the one with Loess Plateau refers to one of the most impressive desertification reversal projects in modern history. The Loess Plateau Watershed Rehabilitation Project in northern China, made famous by filmmaker John D. Liu. The loess plateau of this region was a cradle of civilization, exceeded only by Mesopotamia in its antiquity, and suffering a similar fate. According to Liu, by the year 1000 deforestation and unsustainable agricultural practices had reduced a lush land of forests and grasslands to a parched, eroded wasteland that looks like a desert even though it receives modest rainfall. That is because 95 percent of it runs off immediately, forming huge erosion gullies and giving the Yellow River its characteristic color. The results of the rehabilitation project can be seen in Liu’s stunning before-and-after photographs—the land has literally come back to life. Local residents were recruited in large numbers to build small earthen dams, terraces, and other water retention features. They planted trees, abandoned slopelands unsuitable for planting, and restricted the grazing of sheep and goats. In the end, an area of 35,000 square kilometers (the size of Belgium) was restored to regenerate the water table, soil ecology, food production and wildlife in the area.
These projects show what is possible when the collective human will is brought into alignment with Earth’s capacity to heal. It shows what is possible when we make a collective choice toward beauty rather than quantity. And here is the caveat—it does require will, an active choice. Otherwise, we will continue to slide in the direction of our inertia.
Is something like this possible globally? Is it practical? Realistic? No, if we accept the permanence of society as we know it. Yes, if we are prepared to let go of what had seemed unchangeable. A half billion dollars over ten years is nothing in comparison with, say, global military budgets, which total about 3,300 times that. Devoting just 10 percent of military spending to watershed restoration would fund 330 loess-sized projects.
image in bottom left shows one of the US’s Largest Community ‘Food Forests’ in Atlanta, for more info https://www.wabe.org/atlanta-is-creating-the-nations-largest-community-food-forest/
Pertinent posts and articles:
Are There Limits To Growth?
Many people who work closely with the living Earth have concerns about the trajectory of our modern industrial civilization. These are people who will put the comforts of modern life as a secondary priority to giving a voice to wise and ancient beings that cannot speak for themselves
Poll Of The Month: Are All Involuntary Governance Structures Inherently Ecologically Degenerative?
I`ll just say right off the bat, that I am sure most of you know where I stand on this. That said, I would like to invite discussion and expose myself to views that are different than my own to hone my solutions based approaches in the future. So firstly, I will elaborate on why I answer yes to the above question, and then I will invite you all to vote …
The Spiritual Destitution of Statism, Perpetual manufactured cultural adolescence and their ecological impacts
I stumbled across the post linked below yesterday
Fertility and Reproductive Health Enhancing whole foods and naturally occurring compounds
This information is for those of you out there that see the potential of our human family to serve a sacred role as stewards, agents of regeneration and as a keystone species and you want to bring another human into this world and nurture them with that knowing.
Old Growth/Tree species distribution, soil depth and linguistic artifacts as indicators of cultural maturity
This post serves as the 31st post which is part of the (Stacking Functions in the Garden, Food Forest and Medicine Cabinet : The Regenerative Way From Seed To Apothecary series).
Hi Gavin, I wrote this on my substack, what I see as being a vast potential, (human) which we are for whatever reason not tapping into, but rather suppressing, in favour of mechanical 'intelligence:
'How can I effectively encapsulate with not too many words the picture I have in my mind of what life on earth could be like? Quite a challenge.
What if I start off with giving birth, because that is the start to life for all of us.
In many parts of the world, women still give birth without the help of a doctor, possibly on their own, but most often with older women who’ve had experience, giving a helpful hand as needed. In many parts of the world, not so long ago, women in what we would call primitive conditions used to simply squat, push, deliver, give titty, cut the cord, or more likely bite through it, and get on with the day, baby tied to her back safe and secure. We in the modern world aren’t fit enough any longer to give birth in such an easy manner. Which is not to say there were never any problems back then, there must have been, and deaths too, but seeing that the human population has grown continuously, the majority of confinements and births must have been ok.
Taking such thoughts into account so as to postulate a modern equivalent, we could start by ensuring that our educational system allowed children to be physically active much of the day, which is what our natural physiology requires, it certainly does not need hours of sitting around, possibly holding onto ones wee. A strong healthy body whilst growing up helps make a healthy adult; women who’d be less likely to suffer period pains, or lack the strength to tolerate the pain of giving birth. It does hurt and sometimes might need some herbal infusion, or homeopathic remedy to make the delivery easier, but none of the toxic painkillers that totally numb both the mother and child, not allowing them to experience the wholesomeness of the process, which are being used these days. Granted there would always be the odd birth that requires medical intervention, but not as par for the course to make the doctor feel safe from prosecution. This is also not to say that a woman shouldn’t have the choice to knock herself out with chemicals or to stop her having a caesarean if she so desires, it’s rather to give both mother and child the greatest possible strength and situation in which to give birth as naturally and healthily as possible, with the least chemical interference, with no anxious, negative docs around, but with the help of women with experience and a positive attitude, a good midwife. This really could and should be the bottom line, it is the start to life and needs to be as nature intended and gave us women the capacity to achieve, being fit and strong enough to bring into being healthy boys and girls.
Then I could imagine relationships and how western, and some other religions have demanded of couples that they stay together even when they no longer love or respect each other. Nowadays these strictures have to a great extent fallen away, at least in the western world, but very much to the detriment of friendship between partners wishing to separate, especially if lawyers or social services are involved which adds more possibility to anger between the parents, and could compromise the welfare of any child outcome from their bond. Our modern way of dealing with the failure of a relationship often leaves single mothers without the support of extended families, and estranged fathers with child maintenance to pay. and possible restricted access to their children, also helping in many cases to destroy a child’s sense of security.
Again I’ll look to some of the benefits from the past which we have lost, such as the extended family (that existed in tribes and even in villages not so long ago), amongst whom a child would most probably be attached in varying degrees to several members of such a community of all ages, meaning that said child or children would continue to have peers and adults it trusts to whom to turn to if there is any acrimony between their parents, whether it be a split or simply a nasty argument. There might exist a bit of ‘taking sides’ amongst relatives, but in a reasonably large enough community there are usually older, wiser (been there) types able to help both partners and those around them, deal with a fraught scenario intelligently, kindly, creatively and to the benefit of all involved. Within such an extended family/community, there are always varied talents available to which one can turn for advice and assistance.
Which brings me to our psychology, our mindsets and what creates them, to the education we receive from early on. ‘Education’ that comes at us from our parents, schools, TV, films, various other forms of media, news and politicians. One could call it brainwashing, conditioning, or just plain info, truthful or not, its verity dependant on its source, and any agenda guiding that source, be it parental or other. Because there are many vested interests at work in the society in which we live, deciding what a young person can, should, or should not be told, the guarantee of the ‘education’, ‘conditioning’ ‘brainwashing’ or information received in childhood being true or for that matter useful in any way, is very debatable, all we have to do is look around us, and see how much pain and dis-functional family life exists. We would do well to change the information we give our children to types that could serve each person to develop into honourable, truthful, ethical, empathic, responsible, co-operative, interested in the world around them sorts of beings, instead of trying to mould the majority into obedient ‘law abiding’ clones, homogenising people in the same manner that has been done to cities, clothing, monoculture farming, fast growing pine forests for industry, fast foods, cars, or shopping malls which have all supplanted the colourful diversity of life that existed not so long ago.
We could if we wanted to, make education something exciting for all children, allowing them to adventure into what appeals most, what excites each one of them. With the technology we have, the computer, and with the help of a good teacher, education could create societies of people who find intelligent ways of guiding themselves through the challenges that are inevitable if one is alive, being actively responsible instead of obedient to rulings that many a time serve only the few, leaving the rest of humanity to struggle (that’s life they tell us) through a mostly unsatisfying list of ‘jobs’, and if you ‘work hard enough’ you may be lucky and own a house (except you won’t own it until you’ve paid off the mortgage) by the time you’re old. That’s the kind of life most people will have. School, fall in love, get hitched, have kids, pay ever rising taxes, retire and die. Yes, I know, even with such a life, one can be happy if one has a positive attitude. Too bad if ones ‘conditioning’ has fed one fear, anger, competition, distrust, lies, to pass the buck, to not take responsibility for ones actions. Such negative mindsets could be avoided if, after as natural a birth as possible, surrounded by a supportive community, and an education giving one the tools with which to face adversity or challenges in a none aggressive, creative way.
Imagine this massive inventive, creative potential and all the possibly beautiful outcomes!
How much better could life be if we all took responsibility for the realities we help create by at present allowing ourselves to be led towards dystopia by people who are frightened, and want to control everything possible, an insecurity which no doubt stems from their childhood experiences.
That was as short as I could make it😊♥️
It is only a small group of very disturbed individuals who are so out of touch with themselves they are also out of touch with nature. However we stupidly and naively listen and follow them. We have to grow up and start thinking for ourselves no matter the programming. We have been made to think we cannot shoulder the responsibility of thinking for ourselves but we uniquely able to do this if we practice. The next generations if not programmed are open to this connection. Guilt is a big tool used against us - they cause the damage and it is our fault and because we see things are wrong we accept that especially as now pushed from early schooling. They are left brain clever and so know how to press our buttons by promoting our left brain thinking and denigrating our right brain thinking. I suppose we have to try to bring the left and right brain together in ourselves before we can make good decisions for ourselves and the realm.