Gilgamesh - Rant time

Rant time

. Gilgamesh ponders for a few minutes on the question of to neuter or not to neuter hell he hasn't given a good rant lately and this is just the subject for it. He presses the rant button on his desk and the warning lights come on, Warning, warning, level 1 rant activating. All guild members please place their seats in the upright position and make sure your seat belts are fastened. A pre-recorded feminine voice says from a set of speakers.
Okay, we have arrived into debate territory, and I used to be the part time captain of the debate team at my school. They only used me when situations were dire and confusion and intimidation were required. So the question is to Neuter or Not to Neuter, should I take the affirmative or the opposing side? I don't allow such things as having to choose a side get in the way of a good rant, I'm going right down the wire and taking my own side here. Gilgamesh says bounding on to the stage.
Now we started this debate with cats as the subject, but it managed to wriggle its way up food chain until it got to humanity itself, well not so much wriggle as bounded. The sterilisation debate has been going on for more than a few centuries, domestic animals are neutered on a regular basis for the purpose of control. From the earliest times it was found that the quickest way to tame a male of the species was to chop the proverbial goolies off, this seems to drain the spirit out of anyone really. This also gives humans control as to how the domesticated species progresses, allowing only the placid and easily controlled males to breed creates an easily controlled species.
So we have a large number of species that would not last more than a few months in nature on their own, they are no longer equipped, humanity has removed their survival instincts. People talk about gene splicing and manipulation, well we've been doing it for the last few millennia, it's nothing new. These specie are so far removed from their ancestors that they no longer resemble them, I mean does a chihuahua look anything like a wild dog?
Nature no longer has a choice about these creatures, it didn't really create them to begin with. Nature however is a cruel mother, and finds myriad ways to kill or hamper the weak, survival of the fittest. Of millions born every day only thousands survive, that is the way our mother works. These animals are constantly being changed by humanity to defy the laws of nature, vaccinations, feeds with drugs and antibiotics. Neutering plays only a small part in all this.
Let's go back to cats, they are lovely creatures, and they are very close to how nature intended them to be. Yet they are not natural animals, how long would any of today's cats last in the wild? A long time actually, they are a rather tough species that's been around for as long as we have. Yet their mentality has been altered, most cats believe themselves to be human, they're just shorter and have more fur, but as far as the common house cat is concerned they are just like any of the other members of the household.
Cats in nature are meant to work in prides, like lions, or as couples, like cheetahs, or even as solitary animals, like leopards. They are meant to be on a set limit though, a pride of lions will have an area of a few square kilometres to themselves, the same for any of the other species. Cats being predators are closer to the top of the food chain, requiring a large number of animals to sustain them. The more cats there are, the more food there is required, the less food there is the more cats that will starve and die until only the best hunters will survive. Nature will find a balance.
So in reality cats depend on us for their survival, their current numbers would not be able to exist without us, nor would some of the more exotic breeds with their different coats and pampered ways. So nature would look after cats, yes, but nature would make sure there was fewer tougher cats left once she was done. The same goes for dogs and lots of other household pets. Well since nature's way is to limit the numbers by killing them off through disease, hunger and as food for other predators, well us limiting their numbers by sterilising isn't that terrible.
Now then we come to the other part of the debate, well humans are populating this earth at an alarming rate, there is 5 billion of us and more coming every day. Better medicines and surgical procedures mean that we live longer, so there are more being born and less of us are dying, surely the earth cannot cope with such a large amount of people, why not sterilise humans just like we do to cats?
I remember watching the late news about 2 years ago, there was a report about this new drug that would render cats and dogs sterile for I believe 2 years, my brain did a little twist and I said to the wife. If it works on cats and dogs, then it would also work on humans, all you need do is enter it into the water supply and you could sterilise whole communities. My wife told me I was sick, only people like me would think like that. Well the drug never made it to the market, and I am sure it's being worked on by US defence scientist as a long term weapon, does anyone know whether the birth rates are up or down in Iraq?
Well there is a reason why we don't sterilise people, remember Germany between 1938 & 1945, that's why we don't do it. So how do we fix this over population problem? I mean the earth can't go on supporting so many people. Well that's the crux isn't, it's all a lie. You can check my opinion, and if you look hard enough you will find that I am not that wrong. The earth can easily sustain 100 times the current population. Hey wait a minute, what about all the famines we've been having lately? People dying in the Sudan, Somalia, North Korea, and a dozen other places.
Well let me just say that not a single one of the famines we've had in the last 500 years has been caused by lack of food. An oxymoron? It's a fact, every single famine we've experienced for the last few centuries were cause by wars or political problems, not because there wasn't enough food to go around.
It is an interesting statistic that Europe alone can produce more food than the entire world needs, and in global terms Europe isn't that big. Ukraine can produce more food than Europe, and then there is the US, Africa and South America, don't forget Australia and Asia, in short there is enough food being produced every year to comfortably feed many times our current population.
Wait a minute, what about the forests? The Amazon basin is being chopped down every few hours so they can raise cows to make the beef patties that go in Big Macs and Quarter Pounders. What's the point, further south there is the Patagonian plains that are perfect for production of beef cattle, Australia also produces more beef cattle then the world needs and so does the US for that matter. Why would anyone want to tear down the forest to raise cows, when we already have more than we need.
Well the problem there is just plain have nots versus haves. We are privileged members of the global society. And I include every member of the guild in this statement. We are literate, educated and have 100s of commodities that others will envy, from the PCs we read our mails with to the clothes we wear. We are rich in comparison to the children growing up in a slum in the back of some third world country. And guess what, they envy us.
They envy us so much that they want to be like us. They have seen our lives on TV, commercials telling them about the cars we drive and the powerful PCs we use. That's why some Brazilian farmer burns down the forest to grow cattle we don't need, because he wants a PC some fancy clothes and he dreams of blondes in Californian beaches going out with him. I can't blame him, I dream of Christian redheads going on missionary journeys.
Is it land that we are short of? No, the world has vast areas of uninhabited land. The current population of the world could easily fit in the same area as Texas, and everyone would get a big house with a back yard. So who started this overpopulation talk? I must be wrong, because everyone else is going on about the fact that the world's population is exploding. Well, the problem is not the amount of people, it's the kind of people they are worried about.
See it's not blonde and blue eyed people that are over-running the world, it's Indians, Asians and people from third world countries that are good enough to mow your lawn, but you don't want them moving in next door and marrying your daughter. That's the real reason why there is a population explosion, because it's propaganda, it is a racist lie. Governments can't say that they are worried about the Chinese purely because they are Asian, it is because they are communists, it's not because they look different, it's because they are trying to push their beliefs on us and change our way of life.
So the world's problems aren't because of food shortage and land. It is because everyone wants to live like they do in Family ties and the Brady Bunch. Guess what, we could if we got our mess sorted out, there is nothing to stop us. And we could still have the forests and the earth would be no worse for it, all we need do is get rid of all the governments in the world, starting with the UN.
And that is how I won most of the debates I ever entered into. By coming up with strong facts, concise pieces of information that could not be doubted. The fact that the end of the piece has nothing to do with cat neutering, well that's irrelevant, by the time I finished most of my rants back in school the other debate team was so confused they were trying to disprove my points rather than go back to the original subject. Gilgamesh says with a smile as he bounds off the stage and presses the button on his desk again.
Normality will return in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 Rant completed, you may now return to normal posts. The recording says and things go back to as normal as they get around here.

front page