But there's about enough housing for everyone too... Just that it's of houses are sitting empty across Europe, North America, and China.

And lots of the food wasted in those places (minus China) is imported from places with less food security, such as Brazil, India, and Morocco.
So it's almost like the energy use and infrastructure is already part of the problem and solving it would take less.

My point is that Malthusian was never correct, and the problems are ones of distribution. Not number of humans. (And Malthusian worries tend towards genocide naturally, that they've been shown consistently to be wrong should make them doubly suspect.)

It's been much the same for every big technology that's come along.

TV, radio, electricity, boats, all led to people using the technology of the age to interpret the world.

It's not though, seeing that a very large proportion of the world's population get by, and that about 1/3rd of all food produced for human consumption is wasted each year. (Checked the UN source it's 19% of food that makes it to people, and 13% of food pre-end point in the supply chain).

And this is without starting to consider the energy inefficiency of feeding livestock to feed to humans.

Also an awful lot of the world gets by with much less than US or much of Western Europe does. There's a long way between our surplus of food and food insecurity.

Do you think this info graphic is more or less worrying if it is numbers of living beings rather than biomass?

Tell me you're an American who has never left North America without telling me.

I like that your argument against Anarchism is that people are selfish and greedy, so having a system where individuals have huge amounts of power and wealth and can get what they want is better.

Because (many) Anarchists would say that humans being selfish and wanting more for their own benefit is (one of) the most important reason(s) for stopping humans having power and control over others.

Quick search doesn't give me a source.

What's this from, and how long ago was it published?

Or maybe in a post-modern world we use (mostly empty) signifiers to give ourselves meaning and show allegiance to a subculture.

Its why we pepper our speech with allusions and cultural in-jokes - but where in the past they were tied to more concrete ideology, now they are simply signs that one has consumed the same media as someone. And the existing signifiers have more cultural clout than new ones, except to signify an interest in non-mainstream cultural products.
For the self has become simply a vessel for consumption. There is nothing beyond the consumption of product.
Especially as public allegiance to a non-neoliberal ideology is seen as uncivil. Unsurprisingly more peaceful Left-wing ideologies less civil and more incorrect that violent far Right ones, because the Left will always be more critical of consumption as the purpose of life.

Despite being wrong, Fukuyama's inflammatory title has polluted the mind of the Anglophone and European cultural zone.

Thants.

Pretty sure that "dead by 50 thing" includes all the infant mortality.

I bet he's also using the stats from peak mortality of European late middle ages with urbanisation but no good sewers.

Interesting if you read about it, while many were found guilty I think only a woman is being sentences to death while many men are just getting a decade in prison for their involvement in it.

If she was the ringleader, sure... I guess (not that it makes the state's murdering of folks alright). But odd that she gets death while all the men don't even get 20 in jail.

Ah, the rare lesser spotted SFW Oglaf.