this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
173 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
16031 readers
1 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
anti-natalism is inevitable in the long run, there is only a finite amount of land for a potentially infinite amount of people
It doesn't matter now because 1) we're nowhere near global carrying capacity and 2) capitalism needs its slaves, so talking about this seriously is something only for dwarf brained chuds
But if we lived under the best possible utopian global communist government imaginable, you'd still need population control policies from the start, your only other option is to let it get bad enough that people's diets start getting affected (just like now, except now it's because of inequality rather than malthusian)
Population control is not needed. Right now the working theory is the global population will naturally level off around 10 billion. Or more generally, population naturally corresponds with food supply, so when we've hit the limit for food supply, we'll naturally stop growing. Population control at 10 or 15 billion people would have all the same problems as population control at 1 or 8 billion people. To think otherwise is to believe in Malthusianism, just not yet.
I'm not coming from a perspective of population control or global capacity, I'm talking about the morality of forcing someone into a world that's already fucked up. It's not that having children is bad for the world, it's that the world is bad for children.
10 billion is fine, but in general, a more populated world (let's say 20 billion) would have way more problems, such as
Earth has a limit, our current population is perfect under a global socialist system, and even a bit bigger could be fine, but the margin between the human population and the carrying capacity is a good "buffer zone" should any catastrophes occur. You have to draw the line somewhere and I'd rather have a bigger buffer zone, people aren't gonna suffer because they can only have 2 kids instead of 3 kids
You could also hypothetically have systems that reward childlessness, etc. Not everyone has to have the same exact lifestyle, it's just that the global population should be stable.
also your argument has a problem:
This is mostly because the proles in the west (and even other regions) are being pushed out of upward economic mobility. People are having less kids because they can't afford to, not because they don't want to. Under a socialist system, everyone would have everything they need, so birthrates would increase. There's always going to be a few people who want to have tons of kids or whatever, this still happens in the US among Mormons/Amish/ElonMusk, and that needs to be penalized somehow, otherwise it's not really fair for the people who just have the maintenance level of 2 children--and if you let that problem fester it could get really bad in several generations time (hyperfertile parents tend to pass on their hyperfertile culture to their kids, etc).
I'm realizing now that I think I responded to the wrong comment since I had no issue with this position lol. It is kind of an "unfalsifiable" type of position though since you can't consent to your enjoyment of life without first being alive.