Rachel Carson was somebody who got her vindictive hour in the sun - and probably killed millions of people in Africa and other tropical locations while getting her glory.
She was never a particularly nice person, from what one reads, and never a great scientist, but she had cancer and wanted to blame someone or something for it. She was both ideologically motivated, being a leftist, and personally motivated, being a non-religious liberal confronting mortality. So what better than the eeevil chemical companies?
And if DDT was the best target, ok, who cares about those millions of Africans, Indians, etc. Margaret Sanger didn’t like them either.
Supposedly there were discussions at high levels on how to deal with the exploding Third World population due to advances in/availability of Western medicine (at a time when libs honestly believed we would fill the earth). I wouldn’t be surprised if the war on DDT was to balance out the lower infant mortality and longer lifespans that resulted from that Western medicine. Our overlords today make no secret of reducing the Third World birthrates; why would this be shocking?
I was surprised to recently read (I believe it was in the WSJ) about the problems caused by low birthrates throughout the world today; Japan’s collapse is heading elsewhere now (and in the West we try to head it off by importing scads of Third Worlders). I’ve posted ad nauseum that our open borders were to keep whole areas populated (including my own state of NJ); without these imports whole towns would be devoid of people.