ah ah, in the west, it's called a marriage of convenience, but for russia in china, their relationship is strategic and an alternative to the west, so called the rules based order. what the west refuses to recognize the russians in the chinese practice. and it's called multi polarity over the world and now stands any record 8000000000 people that it a 1000000000 people requiring food, natural resources and energy. however, the. ringback population boom is not coming from the most fluent countries, rather in those regions already struggling for adequate provisions that driving the

growth. on this edition of 360 view, we're going to look at what this could mean for the geopolitical landscape in the future. let's get started. ah, thank you for doing this. you know, every day, 227000 people on average are added to this planet. and as a population continues to grow, sort of the demand for food, natural resources, and energy. but while some might worries, civilization is on the brink of overcrowding and starvation. the world today looks nothing like the population apocalypse doomsday years have been warning about for decades. and this doesn't mean that there is challenges which will need to be addressed. ultimately will the more developed countries who is a trend is to be below the replacement level, be responsible for those countries who continue to produce

a surplus of babies. and it does just the number of citizens in a country granted more power, or does it matter the quality of life of the population. now, one of the most important trends and understanding global development is called a demographic transition. and this is where the wealthy societies tend to give women more opportunities outside the home, thus making the average family size smaller. now, most in fact are below the replacement level, which means a set of parents has fewer than 2 children. this causes the population to shrink over time. now this is true in countries like japan, south korea, the e u in the united states. africa however, seems to be going in the opposite direction. the sub saharan region had the world's highest average fertility rate at $4.00 with a niger topic, the list at $6.00 children poor women, followed by somalia at 6 congo. molly and chad. each having fertility rate of over 5. in fact, according to you and projections,

the number of africans will double by 2050, and make up a quarter of the world's population. now the availability of family planning, including access to contraception and abortion, as well as the government population planning initiatives also can help keep a certain population limited. but even with all of these in place, the global population will continue to grow. hence why planning and development is necessary all in order to prepare for a growing population. to discuss the population boom, we are now joined by john wilma, who is the u. n. director of a population division. thank you so much for joining me, john. on this happy to be here. so what are the main population concerns of the un is grappling with at the moment? well, concerns were we track the, the growth and the change of the global population. i think you expressed it well, that is there the view of this is a doomsday scenario because of humor over population is, is perhaps,

has been exaggerated and we focus more as much on the opportunities that a larger population as we do on the, on the challenges so, you know, we're, we're, we try to see what's going on. i think an important point to keep in mind, just reflect on what you were just pointing out. it's true that most of the growth currently is happening in countries of the global south particular in subsaharan africa. and that will continue over the next few decades. but they are going through a process of demographic transition. that's very similar to what has happened in other parts of the world. the growth rates are going to continue slowing down worldwide. and that's also true in africa. we expect that the fragility rate will continue to come down in those african countries that you mentioned. they may be a 5 or 6 berths per woman. now they used to be at 7 or 8, you know, so the numbers have been coming down and we expect that that will continue and the growth will continue to slow down globally and in different parts of the world. ok, so then i'm going to ask you to put on your predicting had, i'm sure you look at statistics and numbers all day long. what do you expect the

world population to basically look like, what's even short term by 2050, which will still be in and hopefully in my lifetime, but 2100. $2100.00 itself. what are we expecting the world to look different and it will be different from what we're seeing now? well, it will be a larger world and it will be an older world. i mean, this is the key thing to keep in mind. this process of demographic transition towards longer lives in smaller families, it brings 2 major changes. one is growth because the death rate tends to fall before the birth rate in our society is figure out how to keep people living longer saving children from premature death. and so forth, and that, that's what causes the growth is the decline at the depth rate. eventually then societies figure out, well, we don't need to have as many children in that situation in order to keep in or just replace that generation to generation. and so the birth rate comes down as well. and in that, so, but in between those 2 changes, there was a period of growth. and so for the european countries in north america,

the richer countries of the world, this happened, you know, 100 years ago that we were in this period of growth are really coming to an end of that period of rapid growth. for asia and latin america happened much during the latter half of the 20th century for africa still going on and we'll continue through the next few decades. so there's a period of growth. and then at the end of the demographic transition, there's a much older population because people live longer and we have fewer births relative to the rest of the numbers of population. and so therefore they're more and more people and older age, the fewer a younger age. so the planning that needs to take place is due and dissipate the further increase in the size of the human population. but also to anticipate that we will continue to have an older and older population in all countries of the world. this is not just limited to the wealthier countries, this same transition is taking place in poor countries as well as they develop

economically and socially i. it's all part of that process of economic and social development. what's interesting, you bring that up to you, right? we talk about age, but i do look at these concerns and are you finding, are you a little bit more concerned about the populations of developed countries and the more developed world versus those that are less, are you seeing any difference or is it the same standards being applied or you're seeing in trends in both countries, but we're seeing very similar trend in the sense that, you know, throughout the world and there has been the increase of human life expectancy that's, you know, the technologies that have made possible and the economic changes that have made that possible, you know, the increase of the food supply, the better nutrition that's, that's really a global phenomenon that, that it has, has had the same impact worldwide in terms of raising life expectancy. but some countries are much farther ahead in that process. and so much further behind. likewise, all of the incentives around having children, you know, populations were education as highly valued and where women have opportunities

outside the home. those are populations that have smaller families, as you mentioned, that. but in that situation, people do not have the same incentives to have large families, as long as they have access to the means of controlling fertility. they, they tend to lower the number of births over a lifetime. and that brings down brings, you know, continues to change this demographic transition that we're talking about. are we more concerned about the situation in the developing countries or in the more developed world? i would say it's a different set of confirms the rapid growth continues. the places where rapid growth continues today are mostly the poorest countries in the world, those that have multiple challenges to their economic and social development. and we believe that the rapid growth that's occurring there is an additional challenge that makes it even more difficult to kind of escape poverty and escape some of the difficult situations that those countries are in. so you know, for example,

if you're trying to improve the education of all of your children, you'd like to focus on the quality, improving the quality of the education that's given to each individual child. but if you constantly have to deal with having 2 or 3 percent growth in the number of small children every year, then you know that there is a tradeoff between these 2 things. expanding the coverage of the education system and expanding the number are students that can be accommodated and can be educated, and then the quality of the education that each child receives. so far we've seen that when society is lower, their fertility when smaller families are the norm, become the norm. there's more money and time available to invest in the younger generation and improving the quality of their education, quality of their health care, and their ability to contribute as adults to the society. so that's one side of concerns with, you know, rapid growth in poorer countries. but then there's another concern about rapid growth globally in terms of the impact that it's having on the global environment,

the release of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the effects of bedtime happening on the climate. and that becomes really a global issue, and you shouldn't just look at population growth at that point. you also have to look at the growth of consumption. and it's in the long term. really, it's the growth of consumption that drives the increased emissions of greenhouse gas is more than the increase of the human population that the population contributes as well. but it's really more of the increase in wealth increase in income per person that has driven the disease, changing global environmental transfer driven more by that then by the increase of the human population. that's the break. we're going to discuss what the future looks like according to current population. ah, news

. i am, my name is frank richardson, philadelphia got in the room in any age, 13 or 14. we were violent towards those people because we believed that were this race were here 1st, and this is our country being part of that movement. i got your sense of power. when i felt powerless, we got attention when i felt invisible and accepted. when i talked to level life after, hey, is an organization that was founded by for a skinhead neo nazi white supremacists in the u. s. in canada. and they found each other and they knew that they wanted to help other guys get out is 2 parts to getting out of a violent extremist group. the 1st part is disengagement, which is where you leave the social group. and then the next part does d, radicalization,

work belief systems. audiology are removed. that was very impactful. when someone finally came along with no fear, no judgement, you heard my story did nothing to challenge it validate and i'm rick sanchez. and i'm here to plead with you, whatever you do, you do not watch my new show. seriously. why watch something that's so different. my little opinions that you won't get anywhere else. look of it please. if you have the state department, the c, i, a weapons makers, multi $1000000000.00 corporations, choose your facts for you. go ahead. i change and whatever you do. don't watch my show, stay main street because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called direct impact, but again, you probably don't want to watch it because it might just change. and dwayne things oh, welcome back. we're rejoined by john wilmot,

who is the you in director population division. what do you say to those who believe advocating for abortion? birth control are moral and physical methods of dealing with over population when those factor in to the equation. well, abortion is a method of birth control is not considered a method of contraception. i mean, it does control the robot births, but it's, i think we have to distinguish between contraceptives and, and abortion because i think the moral issues that are involved are somewhat different for some people. so the un, we talk about ensuring that people have access to modern contraceptives and safe abortion where it is. so i don't really want to get into that issue, that the choice is made by different countries based on their historical context and so forth. where abortion is legal, we want people to have access to safe abortion where we throughout the world. we

think people should have access to the modern contraceptives which make it possible to control these biological processes that people often want to have control over. absolutely, i can understand it, obviously in your darting through a very tricky situation is different countries. obviously religion plays a bigger role in some countries than other, but moving on, you know, many can believe that we can support a much higher level population than we currently have globally if resources were more distributive fairly. do you agree with this? do you think that the role as a whole should help cover those that might not be able to that are limited in their resources? well, i think there's no doubt that the world can support a larger population. it is, it is possible to grow more food. it is possible to find further, you know, additional energy sources. it's not, you know, we've, people have often talked about the limits to growth as though it was just possible

for the human population to reach a certain size. and every time somebody put forward such a limit and said what we cannot go about such a limit. but the global population that exceeded that some years later, you know, it's, it's not clear that there is a limit in terms of the number of people who could be alive on this earth. and any one point in time. the challenge comes not so much from the inputs to our consumption. in other words, you know, the ability to grow or grow filled, the ability to kind of find energy sources that will support that growth. all of that is possible. but it seems that the more serious issues relate to the after effects of human consumption. that's to say the pollution that we produce, including in particular the greenhouse gases there admitted into the atmosphere and which are driving climate change with really, very important consequences that i think all of us should be concerned about. what affected the global pandemic have on your projections and your numbers there at the

us? do you kind of already factor in something like that happening at time? or was this something that made you all have to adjust your prediction to where your numbers were moving forward. across since it wasn't just something that hit one country, almost every country was affected. well, we can't minimize the significance, right. and i make it's, it's the 1st time that global life expectancy has declined for over 50 years. know the panoramic was very, really, very significant in that we estimate the life expectancy at birth locally fell by 1.8 years between 20192021. and that's really quite significant. nothing like that has happened in over 50 years. on the other hand, if you think of it in terms of the long term population trends that we're looking at, you know, the world has been growing by around $80000000.00 people per year, roughly. i mean above and below that number for the last 50 years, roughly it's,

it's been kind of almost constant at that level, adding around $80000000.00 people per year. the w h o 's estimates of the number of people who have died. the excess mortality associated with koby 19 are roughly on the order of 15000000 in 20202021. so, you know, it's not a scale that even though that's a huge number of deaths is no, no, no, no reason to minimize that, but it's not something that really affects the long term trends of the human population. it's a blip in the long term population trends for the world it's, it's probably not. it doesn't fundamentally change what we expect for the future decades. it did have an impact in those 2 years that was quite significant and continues to have an impact in some parts of the world. but it doesn't fundamentally change our understanding or our expectations for the global population trends over the next few decades. well, let's talk about those global population trends. do you think we're in peril?

let's say in the next 100 years, this global population doubles and is there an optimal population to have now and in the future? so the human population has doubled roughly in the last 50 years. we reached 8000000000 last month. we reached 4000000000 in 1974. so that's almost 5 decades. right. over that time period we added in an additional 1000000000 people every 12 years, on average as we move forward, we don't think that will happen again. we don't think the human population will doubled in size again. we don't think we'll ever get anything like 16000000 people . we expect that the next 1000000000 going from 8 to 9 will take a little bit longer, more like 15 years because the growth rate is coming down. the growth is slowing down as i, as i mentioned earlier, growth is slowing down. the next 1000000000 will take at least 15 years to add the next 1000000000 we per project more than 2 decades will take. and then beyond that,

we don't think that the global population will, will reach 11000000000 or close to 11000000, but it probably won't go much beyond that. so we don't expect another doubling of the human population to the extent, but human population growth is a major problem. it's a problem that's in the process of being solved in the sense that birth rates are coming down. the fertility rate is coming down all over the world. wrote the slowing down. we've seen the growth rate back in the 1960 s was just over to percent per year for the world as a whole. last year or i'm sorry, in 2020. the growth rate, it fell below one percent for the 1st time in that time. since since that, since the 1950s really fell below one percent for the 1st time since that. so, and it's continuing to go down and we expect that we'll continue. and by the 2080 sometime in that decade, the growth rate globally may reach 0 and may even go negative so that the park and

global population starts to decrease somewhat. so you know, this is the process that is fairly well mapped out in terms of how it works is demographic transition is something that is fairly well understood and seeing that happening and so many different populations. in fact, we see it happening all across the world. and so, you know, we can be fairly confident that the growth of the human population is slowing down and will come to an end probably before the end of the century. you know, but it's interesting to say that because it's all based on basically people having children, it reminds me of kind of like when you have water going down, sand, if you go on and create the divots, it's going to go into the water, goes with it is that what we're, is that kind of, what we're doing is we're old and is you're looking at your numbers are recreating the passive of it, decreasing or is this just water is going to get to another source of water as it can. it's just naturally happening and basically you kinda have to be along for the ride. can we actually compel civilizations to have children or dis, incentivize them? you know, it's is pass,

go to influence those things to some degree of government. the government sort of tried to do that have, have often found a challenge. people don't necessarily go with what the government wants them to do . big surprise, right? but for example, you know, some countries that have very high levels of fertility have tried to encourage people to have smaller families. they've had various information and educational campaigns. and they provide access to contraceptives. some of them have engaged in coercive measures to discourage birth, and those have some impact, at least for a period of time. but you know, it's not easy for governments to influence how many babies people have. at the other extreme, there have been governments that have been concerned that the birth rate was too low. they wanted to raise the fertility rate. they wanted to encourage the more children and they create various incentives. they provide bonuses for people at the time of the birth of

a baby. they provide subsidized child care. they provide internal and maternal leave obligations for employers. and all of these can have some impacts, but it's not a silver bullet. it doesn't just automatically solve the problem. and the things that matter most in those situations seem to be the ones that are more long term, you know, not just a bonus. you know, not just a $1000.00 because you have a 3rd child, but rather a government subsidized program of child care to really make it possible for people to blend work and family and balance those 2 things in their lives. that's really the issue. i think that we're facing, we're now in a situation where 2 thirds of the world's population lives in a country or area where the number of births per woman over lifetime has fallen below 2.12 point $12.00 births over the lifetime of a woman, that is what we call the replacement level, that's the level of it which each generation replaces itself with children. it's to

2 children to replace the mother and the father, and another additional amount, mostly related to mortality among children and, and women before they finish their reproductive life spent. so but to 3rd, the world's population is now below that threshold of $2.00, birds per woman. and so really, that's the situation that we're in for most of the world's population. and the question becomes, do governments want to incentivize people to have more children? and i'm say, there are, there are ways to do that. there are ways to encourage it, but it all really comes back to me. how do you make, why, how do you make a balanced life that involves work and family bringing children in the world, but also having a life outside the home. not only for men, graphs for women, obviously, and making that possible in creating systems that really kind of allow people to live the life that they want to live and have the number of children we find when

we do surveys. in population very low levels of fertility, we find that people want to have more babies than their, their having. and, you know, how do we, how do we make that possible that that's important. thank you to john wilmot, who is the un director population division. the idea of population growth is potentially exponential, while the growth of food supply or other resources is linear, which eventually reduces the standard to the point of triggering a population and die off. that's called mouth pcns them. now the event could be a natural disaster, a famine war, or even a thickness. regardless, it would have to be catastrophic and effect more than just one country's population . that is, it theory created 1778, but through the years has been held onto by many of the global delete and often discussed a global forms like the annual world economic form. and i find it interesting that

is mainly those of the top tier of society and government who believe in controlling the population. and this idea that we can over populate the world. views of a fear to motivate change should always be a red flag, especially if you are someone who believes in personal responsibility and freedom. rarely do we see these people voluntarily rationing their own or sacrificing their luxuries. rather, it is a you and i, who are supposed to consume your resources. now, at the same time, countries whether by choice or by government, which imposed rules to moderate their growth, having to be responsible for those countries who don't always seem doesn't seem fair. and this is almost create a global welfare state, which would be impossible to have accountability with an endless strain on all resources. it would make the responsible work hard to cover those with less diligence. this would only create animosity and widen the gap between the provider and the provided population growth isn't about the general population of everyday

workers. rather, it's about those who hold the power over the population itself. the larger the population, the harder for a smaller elite group to be able to control the earth's surface covers 196900000 miles. and scientists can only guess how many living beings the earth can hold. it's just an estimate, a guess. the constraints of the earth are not fixed as she continues to develop an adapt waves. scientists were unable to predict in the past and definitely can't do it now. so scientists, politicians, and the people might have all of these theories on what the future might hold. but one thing which is non debatable is it's definitely not a small world. after all, you miss been your 360 view of the news affecting you think to watch the news. mm. ah,

ah . in 1884. the german empire began its colonial invasion into namibia from the very start. berlin encouraged the white colonists to settle in south west africa and take away the best land from the local tribes. the germans were actively draining natural resources and using the local population as a cheap labor source. this was causing major protests and led to a rebellion. in 19 o 4, the hero and nama tribes rebuild against german colonial rule. kaiser wilhelm, the 2nd was fully determined and ordered to suppress the rebellion with the utmost severity against the inhabitants of namibia. germany through is 15000 well equipped

army. all around the country concentration camps were built. in humane medical experiments over citizens were conducted within the period of 4 years. the germans killed up to 60000 people, among which there were 80 percent of the hero tribe, and 50 percent of the nama tribe. the events in south west africa are called the 1st genocide of the 20th century, and not without reason are compared to the holocaust just 2 decades later after the massacre in namibia hitler's assault unit put on the same brown colonial uniform which pushed the world into the chasm of the 2nd world war with, ah,

for this is the ancient lake by called more specifically, the island of awful and also known as the heart of by called, straight away. you can feel something mystical to your place of tradition. that amazing mix of cultures and peoples. but what makes this place so appealing? we're going to speak to some of the most prominent locals of all phone and uncover . some of the teachers

are mm i to rush and go. they reunited with their relatives back home off to an agreement that we can't hold . i with people in uniforms ran into a apartment. the light switch turned off because somebody fell on the switch. they started to twist my dad's arms. so people lane on the floor with their hands behind their heads, with vice president. pamela, how are i suspected? quicker, late this week? and they did washington state that the continent is twisting towards russia. and china, a u. s. turns a blind eye to china's warning not to cross. it's red line pledging further when.