It’s A Ding Dong World #5,290

Here are the first three paragraphs of a story that appeared a few days ago in the Times of London:

“SOME of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.

The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

Described as the Good Club by one insider it included David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America’s wealthiest dynasty, Warren Buffett and George Soros, the financiers, Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, and the media moguls Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey.”

Now, I will not go around comparing these good people and rich to someone like the thug Adolph Hitler and his gang of murderers.  They prefer not to kill folks to remove the unpalatable poor and diseased and mongrelized among us.  They prefer instead to educate them away from breeding so many of themselves that they begin to crowd out a billionaire here and a billionaire there.

Unless my memory fails me, Bill Gates lives in a 66,000 square foot house.  My goodness, that may be big enough to hold a village full of toothless and AIDS ridden Africans.  Why, the money it costs to keep the carpets clean could probably provide a clean water supply for a whole province in, oh, somewhere in the Amazon jungle.  The cost of its construction would probably run Zimbabwe for a week or so.

But why pick on just plain old Bill, the richest guy in the world, who, the paper says is giving it all away.  (If his plans about population reduction come to fruition, there is a chance that there may be no one left to give it to.  Hurry up, Bill!)  As I said, why pick on him.  Smiling Ted Turner, among the world’s richest and most stupid men, (You see, Johnny, you really don’t need to read, or have a brain to be rich.  Leave school now.) owns a little retreat down in Patagonia where, lately, the natives aren’t allowed.  They aren’t worthy I guess.  Or, it may be the fact that Ted…and a few other of the world’s richest and most selfish folks who also own square mile after square mile of the place, just don’t like company…unless that is it’s folks like themselves.  Folks, I mean who understand what the earth is for, native species, innocent and free, and definitely not poor, squalid, bi-pedal natives who don’t speak English, drive Lambhorginis and know a clever wine when they smell it.

You see, Old Ted from Atlanta wants to turn his place into a combination exclusive retreat and private game preserve where the last few left on earth after all is said and done…they hope…will be able to relax in relative peace and quiet and watch a llama or two parade by.  Nothing wrong with that, I guess, except that the hoi polloi are beginning to insist that there oughta be a law allowing them to drive to the trout streams and what-nots deep in Ted Territory. Back in the country my starving ancestors lived in the place was full of guys like Ted who thought it jolly well good to hang the odd filthy breeder who had the cheek to fish their streams, too.  He realizes that the days of hanging peasants and serfs are over.  Best, then, to persuade everyone to stop breeding so many.

I don’t know too much about the others, Soros, Bloomberg and Winfrey.  But, if the company they keep is any indication, whatever smarts they had have long since left them in favor of their own self esteem.

The Good Club is about as asinine a group of self promoting bean bags as has come along in quite a few years.  It is no wonder that they want to limit the population, you know.  It is more than likely because they realize on some level that it will mean there will be that many fewer people to laugh at them as they parade their sheer nincompoopancy around.  No wonder they met in secret.

I especially like the fact that, as the article states, they will try to counter the effect of religion on population growth.  It is only too typical.  “The fool has said in his heart there is no God.”

Where do we get ’em?  What did we do to deserve ’em? And, God in heaven, why are we allowing them to walk around unleashed?


22 responses to “It’s A Ding Dong World #5,290

  1. Trevor S mythe Williams 111

    How increadibly short sighted .First your disparaging remarks re Mrrs G ates Buffett ,Turner et all betray a breath taking arrogance and are tinged by ,I venture to say,more than a bit of envy.I nstead of admiration of their success and gratitude they are willing to share a portion of their bounty with the rest of mankind you begrudge them their success and castigate them for not doing what exactly ;being poor and bitter as you seem to be.Would you perfer that the world were filled with an additional few billion more improvished, hungry,barely literate, diseased racked wretches.Would that make you happy,if we were all in the same boat ,ignorant,enfeebeled ,sick , hungry ,filthy
    and destitute.
    If you think the solution to the numerous problems besetting this world can be resolved by the addition of a few billion more people and the savageing of well meaning wealthy benefactors you are delusional! I’d like to hear your opinion on this matter ,that is if you are capable of anything constructive beyond angry rants

    • Dear T.S.,

      You have made a leap to conclude some things not supported, I think, by what I wrote. I am neither poor, bitter nor envious. Nor, Sir, do I think I am delusional, since I have neither savaged well meaning benefactors nor indicated or suggested anything about a few billion more “diseased wracked (sic) wretches” being a solution to the numerous problems besetting the world.

      I cannot conclude there is much of anything, let alone “well meaning”, about living in a 66,000 square foot home, or owning chunks of land the size of a small Central American…or European…republic and preventing others access to the natural resources or wonders on it…unless they can meet arbitrary standards of wealth and breeding. Be that as it may.

      What Gates and his chums in their self named “Good Club” are proposing is more tragic than silly, but I chose to think of it in the latter fashion, to make fun of their secret and silk clad pomposities, rather than deal with the sad truth that the “help” they propose is another discredited Malthusian alarum that the “wogs” are going to run us over and something must be done to put a stop to their incredible capacity to breed; the filthy disease ridden things. I happen to think that among the billions you, and the Good Club members, believe should not be allowed to be born are many people whose worth and beauty have immortal value. We are speaking about human beings, Sir, not swine.

      Dr. Swift would have put it much better than I have, and I apologize for not having his great gift. I do have, though, an equal distaste for rich phonies…and poor ones, too. In like manner, I have a great dislike for fools.

      Thank you for your trenchant observations and criticism.

      Yours etc.,
      Peadar Ban

  2. friarlawrencemp60

    You wrote: “David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America’s wealthiest dynasty.” David Rockefeller, age 93+, is the patriarch, he is not a junior, as his father was named John. His eldest son David Rockefeller, Jr. , at age 67 is not yet the patriarch, as he has cousins who are older and who, presumably will become the patriarch upon the demise of David, Sr.

    • Dear Friar Lawrence,

      I did not write “David Rockefeller, Jr, the patriarch, etc.” That was written by whomever wrote the story for the Times. I haven’t the faintest idea, nor do I care much, which of the several hundred, by now, Rockefellers is patriarch. I do know there is a Rockefeller wanna be on trial in Boston.

      Thank you, anyway, for the information.

      Yours Truly,
      Peadar ban

  3. Jan Petrovsky

    there’s too many of us there’s too many of us there’s too many there’s too many of us!
    Let’s have a war!
    We’ll start it in Pennsylvania! Or Morrrrrocaca!

    Infinite worth and beauty, bah! Most of ’em would as soon fish in Rockefellerian streams as poop in ’em and/or burn the surrounding forest down for firewood or a lark! Poor wretches my royal Macedonian toe.

  4. Dear Jan,

    I think you meant to say it the other way round…”would as soon poop in Rockefellerian streams as fish in ’em.” Truth to tell, there were probably quite a number of streams, and hills and vales destroyed and “pooped” up by Rockefellers, and forests felled in the bargain, that had provided food and firewood for those miserable disease ridden wretches. With more of ’em outta the way, and less of ’em on the way, why, the way is opened for the Rockefellers, Gateses, Soroses and what alls to continue as before.

    Now, that’s downright disparaging and shortsighted of me, I guess, but, nevertheless, it’s true.

    It always has been about more for me and less of them. (And that’s not a typo.) Ain’t no accident that the Rockefeller Foundation is a big backer of the Population Control…over there please in “wog” land…crowd. It’s the very rich man’s version of “not in my neighborhood”, which is, because the have the bucks, any darn neighborhood they decide to own.

    Controlled Regards,
    Peadar Roe

  5. Jan Petrovsky

    Lol, ok, ok; I repent…..BUT…them wogs are a plague unto themselves….Rocky fellers ain’t got a thing to do with it….if you killed off all the G. Cirrhoses and so on, wogland would not be a single mite better off for it….and as a matter of fact in all liklihood it’d be a lot worse off…yep…Malthus’ prediction didn’t fail to come to pass because of the cleverness of the woggers! Love the woggers as is your duty, but I say, don’t forget that the natural aristocracy of man is what benefits the woggers…it ain’t always about take take take, like you say, even if it may be so in the case of the Good-for-nothing club…


  6. Pan Petrovsky,

    I know, you gotta wanna, and all that, of course. And about the only tribe, aside from The Twelve, that wanna’d is the one of which we are both members, the European. The rest of them, without benefit of the Greeks, Romans, Jews and Christ, (to jell it all and make some meaning and worth out of it), have never, really, realized that the mess they’re in is exactly that, a mess.

    You got no sense of a goal, an end, then you got no sense at all. You got no sense of a Goal Giver and an End Maker, then whatever sense you got is nonsense. That’s what’s wrong with the Good Club, as big a bunch of fools as you can find anywhere this side of Mao, Stalin, Dolph, Marx, Engels, Napoleon, Caesar Augustus or Alexander of Macedon.

    Yrs. etc.,
    Peadar Roe

  7. Jan Petrovsky

    If wishes were horses, as they say…but a lot of woggers both near and far, whether among us or in distant lands, have been Christian for a good long time….even longer than Irish in some cases….being Christian didn’t do much of diddley to make them less materially miserable….that’s not what the religion is about…more like, makes life bearable while miserable…maybe even beautiful, if you are one of the blessed ones of infinite worth you mentioned….but there ain’t a lot like those.

    What makes poverty go away to some extent is good brains organizing stuff, not Christianity….now God in His wisdom has seen fit to populate this beautiful planet with lots of folks with few brains…and few folks with good brains….a good brain don’t always make you a good person, even if you are in the good club…but that’s how wealth is created and maintained…and even spread out for some of the woggers that otherwise would have even less than they have…so it don’t do any good blaming those with good brains as if the instances in which they are acting selfishly or stupidly towards their fellow men (woggers though they may be) has made them generally responsible for the whole of the predicament of those with bad brains….for example, take Christian Africa…please…

    Effetely snobbish and aristocractic regards,
    Jan Maceding-dong Petrovsky

    • Dear J.P.,

      It’s a lovely morning here in rock hard Cow Hampshire, the temperature a cool 50 degrees on the first day of June. And, it’s in fine keeping, the weather and the beginning of the day, dry, calm, cool, crisp and clear, with your post.

      It is not my intention to contradict the ruthless honesty of your logic above, nor to gainsay myself in the one above that. How then to effect a union of these two points of view is the knotty problem upon which I’ve had no sleep, and little enjoyment since first I read what you so cleverly wrote.

      Shall I rely, fall back on,…no pun intended…on that old comfortable bromide in matters like this…of The Fall? Well, it seems to me that I have to, in some sense, aver to that event however one may conceive of it…or at least its aftershocks. It’s downright icky nowadays to mention sin, let alone the seven capital ones; so prim, Victorian and, well, almost Methodist. But, I kinda think that there’s something of sinful activity going on with the members of the Good Club, and their fellow travelers; the arrogance of pride, the frenzied acquisitiveness of greed, the possessiveness of sloth to name a few. Snobbish and aristocratic folks tend to act that way; exclusive clubs, the very word POSH, homes high on a hill.

      Not that a little comfort ain’t a nice thing to have. Heck, any twelfth century English baron would give his best horse for the little house I live in, and the bed I sleep in. Spare me the Carthusian life.

      I’m more in the Benedictine line, and therein lies the way I’m going to take to get outta my own mess here. They know when to say, “Thank you very much. I am quite satisfied.” (I wonder now if all of those admonitions about thrift and stitches in time that BF was so fond of printing up may have had their beginnings in Sursa?)

      There’s no denying that Christianity brought with it something which was new, and that is not, I think, the Golden Rule. Without accepting the grace to do it, of course, that life cannot be lived, but approximations and attempts are to be made…for our own good, and the good of all. Until that happened the guy over on the other side of the valley, the guy across the river, the guy across the sea was beneath notice. And, that was just fine. No longer, until along comes the Good Club…and its progenitors in the “EEEEwwwwgenics” movement.

      Of course a lot of times today the guy across the street is treated that way, but you know why that is.

      Loving Regards,

  8. Trevor S mythe Williams III

    Mr Pertrovsky’s trenchent insights into the human condition ,are in their ruthless pragmatism ,brilliant !! Save us please from soft hearted sentamentalism We would all be better off with few billion less people,the only question is how to get there , anyone for mandatory steralization for all males over the age of 21

    • Dear TS,

      You mis-spelled trenchant, sentimentalism and sterilization. You are, obviously the poor victim of a modern education. I will go no further than that in listing them, but there are at least four other grammatical errors in your short post. It is a pity.

      How can one take you seriously?

      Your proposal has merit. Would you like to begin the process?

      Yrs. etc.

  9. Trevor S mythe Williams III

    Please be so kind as to enlighten me , we can all use a litkle help ,peehaps your generosity will be rewarded ,if not here on And please address the merits of my position or are you not capable of disputing my logic and must perforce engage in petty foggerie
    And I don’t know why the guy across the river is treated that way ,please explain or is this a closed conversation between you and the Polak.

  10. Trevor S mythe Williams III

    P.S after my 2nd child I was sterilized.So I do practice what I preach ,how about U

    • Dear TS,

      There are, as far as I can see, no merits beyond what a National Socialist may impute, to your position. There is, therefore, nothing for me to address.

      I suspect that you wish me to feel good about your decision. I don’t. You may take whatever satisfaction you are capable of taking from that, and from the decision itself, grim and hopeless as I believe such things to be.

      You preach to no choir, here.

      Yrs. etc,

  11. Trevor S mythe Williams III

    I guess this is a closed conversation,there are none so blind as those who refuse to see. G B Y

    • Dear TS,
      Well, the subject is closed. We’ve beaten it to death, and not managed to enlighten one another as to anything at all. You think we will all be swamped by little brown things not too very long from now, and everyone should do their duty, including, and especially, them, by not producing any more of ourselves.

      I don’t.

      What have I missed?

      Yrs. etc.,
      Peadar Roe

  12. Jan Petrovsky

    Whewie. It’s all about what constitutes genuine human progress, isn’t it?

    The Anglo-Saxon people have led the way on 2 continents, and the jealous latecoming Krauts tried to catch up, but to no avail. The Protestant method of progress was thus–get rid of these inferior dingbats, and replace them with us: that’s how to make the whole world a better place. Since we’re better, if there’s more of us, and less of them, the whole world will be better. It stands to reason. That’s how America and Canada came to be, and Australia too. Denizens of such places are all glad for it because, of a certainty, this place is only about a zillion times better off than when idiot Indians roamed freely without enough brain power to invent the wheel.

    But there is something about wiping out entire populations and replacing them with more of your own that, well, just ain’t quite right now, is it. Even if it be an unequivocal fact that you are better than they, still…that right-to-life thing seems to gnaw at the consciences even of those engaged in the gritty but seemingly necessary work of genocide, for, um, the sake of the greater good….whoa.

    History has offered us another model for spreading progress to the benighted millionen–the Spanish-Portuguese model (as a Catholic, I am naturally partial to it, since I am partial to Catholics): don’t kill all the losers; just take stuff enough to make the dangerous and daring mission worthwhile, meanwhile giving them the one true religion, AND civilize them as much as possible–which means, of course, enslave them, at least for awhile. But slaves have hope, and in Latin America, this hope did not disappoint. While the resulting miscegenated civilization was and is cartoonish compared to N America, at least the conscience of the conquistador race is perhaps less tainted with guilt. The people they conquered, they also bettered, and saved, rather than eliminated.

    Come to think of it, Protty Anglos did the same for India. So maybe the Prot/Catholic distinction is a little unfair to the Prots. Perhaps if the Spanish had found S America as depopulated as the English found N America when they arrized, the Spanish would have done the same as the English. In which case, the posing of an a priori religious solution to the vexing problem of inveterate global dumbness fails yet again. Well, as a Catholic, I had to try. (And as for applying the conquistador model to Africa, well…)

    God’s ways are mysterious. His truth is proclaimed throughout the world, and, He punishes the national vessels through which He spread the message. He also punishes those that received the message. Doubtless both deserved it, as when He punished the wayward Jews with even more wayward Babylonians, who were themselves subsequently punished too.

    That reminds me of 1Corinthians:

    25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

    26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

    27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

    28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

    29That no flesh should glory in his presence.

    30But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

    31That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

    And I say, Aleluia. 1Peter:

    24For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

    25But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

    Ok, ok; all Catholics can agree on that…it seems to conform to how the world works….but…it doesn’t tell us what we ought to do about it.

    Whereas Mr. Ban and I can agree, thanks to our being enlightened by the teaching of the faith, that sterilization, especially of so good a fellow as Mr Smythe, and even of woggers (with all due respect) who are his patent inferiors, is an evil act when done with the purpose for which he has done it to himself and would so do to others, its moral prohibition doesn’t seem to make the prospects of remedying the effect of dysgenic brains upon the knotty problem of planetary poverty any easier. Nor, however, does it necessarily make it harder, as Mr Smythe seems to think it would. Frankly, that a chap with as good a brain as his should be henceforth unable to propogate a good many more like himself seems to me both a shame and a crime. And whereas I would always say that such an action would be a crime, I wouldn’t always in every case think it as great a shame as in this case. Good chaps are always in demand and desirable, even if things get crowded. It is a pity that Mr Smythe didn’t think highly enough of himself to agree with that, as the genetic coefficient which measures woglike tendencies is in all liklihood extremely miniscule in his case. As a Spaniard once said (and this of course, doesn’t apply strongly when the woglike tendency coefficient is considerable): when a child is born into the world, not only is there another mouth to feed, but it also comes with hands–and brains.

    Personally, I don’t much fear being swamped by such as they. But woggers, on the other hand….that’s when I have my qualms…granted that they exist to confound and bring to naught us wise and mighty ones…yet are we commanded to love them….how best to do so, when we should also, perhaps, love ourselves somewhat? Shouldn’t we also love the beautiful, as well as pity the ugly? Is the ugly worthy of love, but the beautiful, no?

  13. Dr. Petrovsky,

    Now you have done it, gone and used the “C” word, which I was all along trying not to use so as not to show myself to be a right-wing, atavistic, dour, sour, anti-sex, religious fruit cake.

    I fear we have lost T.S. I had to delete his last comment because he made use of an old Anglo-Saxon word originally meaning “to push”, one of the few words he spelled correctly BTW, and I didn’t think…since I send this to a number of sweet old ladies, and my grand children…it was proper.

    Everything, even the beautiful, is worthy of love. But, we must be always aware that love has little or nothing to do with the way one “feels” about love’s object, or what one can “get” for oneself from it, him or her, I think.

    Finally, we are commanded, especially, to love each other in precisely the same way, and to the same extent, and with the same ending (lamentably in an awful lot of cases) as did the Late Great J.C. Our departed, disgruntled, wayward, and confused interlocutor, Mr. T.S., among the millionen who have found the single commandment given us by The Man unpalatable, would not agree, cannot even begin to agree. His distaste for mess extends even to self-mutilation. Alas.

    Peadar Roe O’Gallchobhair

    PS: You should find yourself a publisher and write a book or two. You will be publicly excoriated by many very upset people.

  14. Trevor S mythe Williams III

    I’m glad you saw fit to censor my comments, my apologies . I had thought this blog was for adults not for children and innocent little old grannies who G – forbig should they hear or see in print the bdreaded f- wurd would immediately go into cardiac arrest.Pray tell Dear Sir since you appear to be fond of Victorianisms do you cover the limbs I avoid the vulgar l – -‘s so as not to offend the delicate sensibilities of your readers ., of the tables and chairs in your abode ss with flounces amd ruffels eo as not to cauxe scandle amongst the innocent. When I was a teenager I can remember becoming aroused at the sight of a comely leg of a chair.

  15. Poor Trevor. He has no idea who he’s wrangling with. Pete doesn’t lose arguments.

  16. Jan Petrovsky

    In sync with the preceding comments regarding ‘mejorando la raza’ along the lines of the Spanish-Portuguese model–

    A Jamaican writes about slavery:

    “Have we ever stopped to consider where we black people, especially those of us in the West, would be right now if it weren’t for the Atlantic Slave Trade?… Do you think that we would have been better off without slavery? I don’t think so!

    “When the Europeans went to Africa to buy slaves, what did they find? They found a society and people vastly inferior to theirs. While the Europeans had emerged from their feudal practices, our ancestors in Africa, for the most part, had not developed for many centuries … Science and technology (and innovations in these areas) were non-existent in black Africa of the 15th and 16th centuries … In many respects, we were uncivilized …

    “Our relatively stable societies today, especially in the West, are testaments to the benefits of slavery. While it is true that black Africa has, for the most part, squandered the opportunities that slavery offered in the past, the positive influence of European civilization cannot be denied. The black nation states of Africa and the Caribbean have given black people a sense of nation, a sense of identity, a sense of order and a sense of purpose — things we never had before …

    “We blacks were changed, for the better, I might add, on account of slavery. We are a better race today because our ancestors went through slavery. The millions of lives lost were not lost in vain. The Europeans proclaimed the need for us to be civilized through slavery and though this may be hard to understand, they were right. Indeed, based on what is happening in black Africa today — slavery for us in the West was, in many respects, our salvation.”

    [Michael Dingwall, Slavery Was Good for the Black Man, Jamaica Observer, Aug. 9, 2008.]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s