A rant. Daine Rehm, who I normally love, has a show on right now where she is very uncritically discussing population control as it is connected to world sustainability. I guess it's in honor of world day or something. Some of the suggestions that have popped up as to how to lower world fertility rates have been contraceptives in the water, everybody who wants to be a parent has to "do something good," and those who are "good parents" can have four or five children and those who suck can't have any. Oh, and women empowerment. Because, you see, when women have power over themselves they "make the right choice" and usually limit their fertility to population friendly numbers. It's interesting how "women empowerment" is being discussed in terms of, you guessed it, third world/developing world women. Because it's third world/developing world women whose fertility is the *most* dangerous to the world, right? If they keep popping them out--mass starvation, global environmental destruction, civil wars, and mass hysteria will all break out. *THAT*, my friends, is how dangerous brown women having babies truly is. The destruction of the world rests on their vaginas. And meanwhile, this frontline program talks about how water from D.C. to Seattle in the U.S. are poisoned almost beyond recovery--why? Because of the unsustainability of a capitalistic system that prioritizes growth over interconnectedness, money over health, and toxicity over food chains. Whole ecosystems of fish, crabs, oysters, whales, and plants are literally dying out because of unchecked "growth pollution." Factory farm waste is being dumped untreated and unchecked into our water supplies. The dead zone area (unable to sustain any sort of life) in the Gulf of Mexico is the size of Massachusetts and only growing. But this is all apparently ok--because it's being done in the name of capitalism and growth. And isn't capitalism as a system of governance the only system in the entire world that has ever worked? Let's think about things logically here for a minute. When did issues of population unsustainability begin to rear its ugly head? Let's look at in the U.S.--post WWII. We've all heard scary stories about how the Baby Boom generation is going to break the U.S. economy. Well, what, exactly, coincided with post WWII baby making time? *ECONOMIC* prosperity, right? Ok, let's go back in time further. Back to that time when white Europeans were lecturing Native poeple about how they were not entitled to their own land because they hadn't *developed* it properly. When those white folks refused to negotiate with Native women (thus *disempowering* those women) in treaty negotiations, when those same white folks forced Native youth to go to boarding schools and taught the girls how to be domestics and proceeded to rape both girls and boys with impunity (disempowerment?). And yes, that was all done because capitalism *needed* Native land for "growth" and "development." And let's think about Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos,--and how many indigenous women were raped, murdered, forcibly impregnated, or forced into prostitution because of U.S. invasion (which, yes, was done in the name of "defending capitalism"). And how about Iraq and Afghanistan--what does "spreading democracy" really mean when free market unchecked capitalism is implemented as the form of governance by colonizing governments? And what has it meant for women? Does the increased rates of suicide, rape, prostitution, lack of eduction have anything to do with this capitalistic intervention? And these are all very blanket, non-nuanced understandings of how capitalism plays with the lives of women throughout the world. When you take the time to get more nuanced, you get an even more disturbing picture. Most pointedly--is it a surprise to any damn body that the work of raising children (i.e. future workers) is done for almost free of charge by most women throughout the world? We raise our children as if we had a choice in opting out of this system. As if we and our children some how exist independently of a structure that has a desperate need for cheap labor. In all reality, from the moment of conception, each child born has a realtionship with capitalism--a relationship with corporations. What will that child "be" when she grows up? Why is this question so important to us all? Point blank, women are creating more workers. Period. And yet we exist world wide as one of the largest ununionzed workforces in the world. Is there a reason for this or is it just coincidence? A joke: What would happen if mothers would unionize? Answer: fathers would suddenly get a lot more interested in raising their children. The point is here--it's not the scary brown vagina that holds the destruction of the globe in it's layers. And it's near impossible to me to fathom how capitalism as an entity can "empower" women when it has been so essential and necessary in the literal *enslavement* of women throughout the world. Capitalism is an unsustainable model of living. The destruction it has forced on the world in just the last 200 years alone is important to notice--how can a world live without capitalism for literally millions of years just fine--capitalism comes along and suddenly global implosion becomes a reality? It is NOT the best system we can come up with. And if we could all turn our violent "development" minded eyes away from the brown vaginas of the world and toward the destruction sitting in our own backyards, maybe there might be some space to hope after all.