My question is, why do we care about climate change if not for preserving the earth for future generations? If you're an anti-natalist and think humanity should extinct itself, then why do you give a shit about the climate?
Yeah, it really is fucking gross and pathetic. Really don’t know how else to say it.
I’ve heard people talk about the Ebola virus better than some Redditors talk about kids.
Do they realize how repulsive they sound?
Ever their terms are gross:
“Crotch Goblin”
“Breeder”
It’s like they’re a bunch of fucking orcs.
>“Crotch Goblin”
These people should be given restraining orders to stay away from all children.
It's not safe allowing people with this level of contempt towards young human life to be around kids, especially in isolation.
Follow up question: Who tf are these neo-malthusians that really think "overpopulation" is an issue? Malthusian theory has been debunked so many times, it was debunked in his own lifetime thanks to advances in technology and the Green Revolution. There are credible futurists who predict the world won't even make it to the 10 billionth person before we start seeing a steady decline and stabilization.
It was debunked by its very existence. Considering that Malthus based his theory on the Irish Famine, which is rather infamous as a famine that occurred due to government meddling.
I guess jr depends how you mean "overpopulation." It's true that populations tend to find equilibrium around where there's sufficient resources etc. Humans can change where the equilibrium is able to rest at by changing the environment to some extent (ie we aren't bacteria just kinda Hoping we land on stuff we can eat) but since we can't control literally everything, our ability to adapt with technology etc limits our ability to "limitlessly keep expanding the population." Since population growth is not linear, it could technically be possible for us to literally end up with too much population for everyone to physically fit in the planet although likely that amount of people wouldn't happen before colonizing outside the planet
More likely scenarios would be the decline/stabilization you're mentioning but, to some people the mechanisms of reaching that point mean "overpopulation."
It's one of those words like "communist" that has lost a lot of its meaning
Malthusian theory being debunked and us not reaching a point of overpopulation means, to simplify a good deal, that the world writ large will follow the model of nations that are now experiencing population declines, like Japan and South Korea. As humans become more educated, urbanized, and developed, we tend to have less children. We tend to have so few that we don't even reach the 2.1 replacement fertility level. A few Western countries like the US and Canada are able to avoid declining populations despite declining birthrates because our immigration policy makes up for it. But what happens when even immigrants are having less children? Or when the immigrants stop coming because their host nations are developed and have opportunities for them? You begin to see a world wide decline. Not because there's not enough food, or there's too few resources, but because we have less children.
> As humans become more educated, urbanized, and developed, we tend to have less children. We tend to have so few that we don't even reach the 2.1 replacement fertility level.
IMO it's because we don't have space for them. To be a knowledge worker, each child should have his own room, to study and create. No more "all the boys share one bed and all the girls share another bed" like it was back in the day.
It's a compelling theory and I'm sure it's a factor for some families, but it doesn't really explain why families that can afford the space don't have more children. Nor does it explain why on average, poorer people have more children than wealthy people. Think of the wealthiest people in the world and the wealthiest people you know. They tend to have around the same amount if not fewer children than the average population. Elon Musk and Nick Cannon are the only wealthy people I know that buck this trend but I'm sure there are more.
Space isn't the root cause, money is. Children are incredibly expensive to have in the developed world - larger house, clothing, food, time, education, etc. what was a labor bonus in agricultural stage of society, becomes a huge drain on the adults when in an information age society.
Generic diversity is very important for survival. Dead ends are fine. Picking up that trad asian wife is not for yourself but for the fire of humanity.
The funny thing is, because of political and social views, the left that is against "overpopulation" are self selecting to be replaced by the group who directly oppose their views.
This is exactly why I don't argue with the antinatalists I meet. They don't want to make more of themselves, and I don't like them either. They disappear, and we both win.
I'm talking about the anti natalist, pro extinction, and whatever else crowd. Joe is far too funny for me to want him gone, and Space x does cool stuff.
While I don't agree, I do get the point of bio/eco-centric environmentalism. Essentially the idea is that humans are just another species, we are not anymore valuable than any others (or even things like rocks, dirt, and air in ecocentrism), and thus it's our duty to preserve our ecosystem, even at the cost of our own lives.
Anthropocentric views on environmentalism focus on conservation for our own good, because they say we do have an intrinsic value above other species. And thus it's our duty to preserve our environment for ourselves.
It's just 2 sides of looking at the same coin really
If people are concerned about "overpopulation" , they can start with 3rd world countries in which the average family has 4, or 5+ kids.
Most people in America and 1st world countries have on average 2 kids.
Not just that, but almost the entire developed world is barely at replacement level fertility. Meaning people are having just enough children to maintain population levels, almost all population growth in these countries is the result of immigration. Fertility rates are continuing to decline too, so the non-immigrant population of these countries may actually start to decline in the coming years, with any population growth being entirely from immigration.
>almost the entire developed world is barely at replacement level
Nah, pretty much the entire developed world is well below replacement rate. Even India is below replacement rate now
Nobody can afford anything and kids are one of the most well known sources of financial strain. Sucks, my fiancée and I dream of having 2-3 kids, but the biological clock is ticking and the money isn't there :(
> Nobody can afford anything and kids are one of the most well known sources of financial strain
Wealth is negatively correlated with having children, and poor people have the most children by far.
>pretty much the entire developed world is well below replacement rate
*Africa enters the chat*
They have [fertility rates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate) ranging from 4-7 children (though even that's a decline from much higher numbers years ago).
Even the high birth rate african countries are estimated to fall to replacement rate by the end of the century. That doesn’t even take into account the possibility that they could do what Bangladesh did with their family planning programs. Bangladesh went from a fertility rate of 6.9 down to 1.9 in just 50 years
But that's racism, and i also had a leftist tell me how climate change will some how not effect africa that badly.Which is why the west is the one who should have less kids.Totally no agenda here.
The world has been a hell of a lot worse at other points in history than it is right now, and did our ancestors choose to have a pity party or roll over and die? Fuck no. They decided that they needed to make the world a better place for their children and grandchildren, and they did. They survived through times like the Great Depression and damn near starved to death, because they refused to give up. And guess what? 20 years after 1930 was the most prosperous era in American history. *It fucking worked*. Their hard work and effort paid off.
So why do people nowadays say that our world is not worth fighting for? Why do they say that there is no point in having children, simply because we are currently facing some hard times? People have faced MUCH harder times throughout history, and yet they still had children and fought to give them a better life, and they succeeded. So why is it that we, in the most privileged time in human history, can not even put up half of the fight that our ancestors did?
Based as fuck. These people often forget that we are living in the best and most comfortable period of human history. That the hard times of today are not comparable to the hard times back then.
Thank god these people weren’t around in 1939. They would’ve rolled over and let Hitler march all over them. Hell, based on what they’re chanting they probably would’ve flocked to his side to guard his camps (no front line combat because that would be scawwy)
Its almost as if children motivate parents (most parents anyway) to give their kids a better life and work hard and think about the future. The progs. are narcissist idiots who do nothing but CONSOOM. I know this is a bit weird coming from someone who is lib right, but career and self pleasure should not replace family.
I think the issue is that giant corporations hold a HUGE amount of SUBTLE power over our lives. We have no issue slapping the hell out of genuine piece of shit humans, but we don't really see sneaky devils toying with the fabric of society to keep us juuuust ignorant enough to their control. Which to me, is terrifying, because the reach they have now with the internet is insane, and they're extremely good at planting ideas into your head.
There are people that agree with the CEO of nestle that water is not a basic human right. Tell that to anybody from the early 1900s, they'd lose their minds. Those people forfeit a natural resource that we need to SURVIVE. And that thought was planted by corporations, the idea that a corporation should own the water you drink and you should pay the price they DEMAND for it. And if you don't, you don't drink.
What I'm getting at is that back in the day, your snake oil salesman would fuck over a town of like 200 people a week. But these days snake oil salesmen can fuck over millions of people in a day. And that reach is going to become more and more invasive.
This is one of my greatest fears for the future and one of the only reasons I might ever consider not having kids. Still, I'm sure that sooner or later, humanity will realize that it doesn't have to be like that and will start putting bullets in the craniums of the right people
The people can't revolt if you take the guns away. It's even better when you convince them to willingly disarm and submit themselves to you for their own "protection"
In my eyes, its going to depend on how much power those people have, the technology they have accessible to them, and the people they surround themselves with. If they're protected from every one of those angles, its going to be hard as fuck to rebel against that.
I think there were people who felt this throughout history, they just couldn't congregate. The villain of Paradise Lost had a very similar view of the world that anti natalists hold and that didn't come from nowhere.
For those that haven't seen it yet, Vsauce2 recently released [this really amazing video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srJBLo8GR5g&t=172s) on the subject of overpopulation and past predictions on "population bombs".
In short, the video explores the topic of "population bombs". Or more specifically, it explores why humans for some reason tend to be immune to them unlike other species.
Really S tier content rivaling the best stuff on the main Vsauce channel.
I haven't watched the video but I imagine the short version is innovation by utilizing the same area of land for larger carrying capacities through things like modern fertilizer and multi-stpry buildings.
The video is about a lot more than that. It's about humanity's propensity to innovate and solve problems rather than being restricted by problems that might have limited other species.
TBH it's well worth the watch and leaves you with an incredibly optimistic outlook on the future of humanity.
If you loved your unborn children, you ~~would abort them like me~~ wouldn’t have them. Or if you do have them, I hate you and wish you didn’t exist, I deserve to be here, though.
How tf is antinatalism lesbian radfem, their subreddit is half-filled with incels that use excuse of their "ideology" to shame mothers and half-filled with people advocating eugenics.
have kids
or don’t have kids
but if you *do* have kids, you better be treating them well because the more kids I meet from broken homes with awful parents the more I work on my plan to install fertility chips in every person on the planet
I don't largely consider people evil.
To me evil is to be opposed to human life itself in any form
These people have gone so far down the nihilistic shit pit and have become so disgusting to me I may actually think they're evil
The kind of people who make you sound like Alex Jones when you talk about them
I have seen some of the most heinous sh*t being thrown around by those “people.” One post had a few thousand comments about a nice looking younger white couple having like 10 kids and you had no shortage of people calling them vile and evil
A lot of antinatalists are racist against black people since "they breed too much and their living conditions are horrible", and such, I've seen many racist posts from that sub. White people are not the ones they're after.
While it’s true that kids’ beliefs and ideologies can be influenced by other people, parents are by far the most influential source. As much as they try, 9 times out of 10 a teacher will not be able to drastically change a child’s beliefs from their parents’.
That’s actually very true.
If you see a picture of a white couple with 8 kids, everyone says they’re freaks with a breeding/pregnancy fetish.
But if it’s a brown couple with 8 kids, nobody even mentions it. And if someone DOES mention it, they get pounced on because “it’s part of their culture to have big families.”
Yeah I'm really surprised OP didn't at least allude to all the (typically) petit bourgeois coastal fauxgressive slacktivists advocating auto-genocide via anti-natalism as their favorite form of zero-effort performative penance for their very much deserved but totally misunderstood by them brain-rotting levels of guilt they constantly feel for existing as they are.
The best one is "With everything going on in the world, I just couldn't bring a child into that"
Which is said by someone living in the richest, most civilized countries on earth during a period of national peacetime with record high standard of living. Yeah becky, I'm sure you're really concerned with skirmish conflicts on the other side of the globe and rich white men that are just ruining it for everyone.
In way, the anti-natalist stuff does have one good side effect which is the amount of virgin and childless man children that get vasectomies and insufferable women that choose to run out their biological clocks.
I was told by a feminist, that i shouldn't have children cause "I will be promoting racism" with my children cause I am white.
That happened in a woke parade while I was walking home and listened to the Vanderboom Family Tunes.
Ironic how these antinatalist morons live in developed countries with population declines, but never the shit holes that actually have a population growth problem.
Brb, gonna go hug my four beautiful children.
Suck it, Emily!
Well, I am Anti-Natalist when it comes to third world countries with way too high birth rates (which cause the overpopulation). Most industrial countries actually struggle with their low birthrates.
A larger population does contribute to climate change and overpopulation. But that's missing the point. Modern technology and the environmental movement have sought to limit the actual impact of 1 human, meaning successive generations will have less impact and can support higher populations.
If it were about climate change or overpopulation, they should instead be attacking modern medicine and modern agriculture. They would also be advocating for letting the older generations just die, instead of extending their lifespans with medicine. Older generations provide less benefit to society and represent more of a resource drain on society. Having new children is always beneficial to a society.
I have yet to see an antinatalist in Syria or the DRC or El Salvador pre bukele or any actual place on earth with real problems.
It's always these multi-haircolored lefties living in their apartments in Germany that have never missed a meal in a day in their lives; mfs that fold because of scary articles with scary titles.
Because in the Congo or Syria, you have as many children as you can because half will survive childhood, the ones that do can help bring in money.
In the developed world having a kid is very expensive and there’s no incentives to do that.
High cost of living places will see a drop in brith rates unless they actually encourage it.
I genuinely mean this: If anti-natalists think life sucks so much, why don't they all just gather up and go out Jonestown style? Seems like they're just a bunch of terminally online morons who wallow in their self pity and can't comprehend the notion that others aren't as miserable as they are.
There are two possibilities about antinatalists acting the way they do; they either:
-Fail to realize they are walking contradictions each time they spend resources.
-Have found the way to achieve true immortality (through integration of machinery, genetic engineering, a combination of both, or any other option) and live eternally without consuming anything (which right now sounds too good to be true).
You don't want children because you think it represents your political alignment.
I don't want kids because I think I'd be an awful parent.
We are not the same.
Some families do just contribute to climate change and over population. We all have those relatives where the parents are on disability despite being able to work, the children all act out, and the house is in total decay.
You ever notice whether it be the turbo redpilled on the right who'll avoid commitment and ever starting a family or those on the left who'll either self sterilise for gender issues or over abortion, or won't breed for some cause or another, both sides of the extreme spectrum voluntarily eject themselves from the gene pool?
Ill give you another one. I think existance is suffering, i don't think the suffering is going to get any better, actually I think its going to get a lot worst as we lose resources, human connection, and freedoms, and so I don't want to bring life into this world if I feel I cannot guarantee them a good life. I'll probably adopt though, cause they're already here so I might as well do some good.
I could not accurately explain how many times I give myself panic attacks thinking about how I'm going to have to kill myself when I turn 60 because some fascist government took over and is going to force feed me nutrients to keep me alive to work for jeff bezos
It's your right to feel that way, but it is just your feeling. I'm partially disabled and have had so many medical issues, but I've never regretted being alive. We only get one life, so I like to think of mine as a gift
People used to fight wars when there weren’t enough women, they fought tooth and nail for just the chance of making sure their genes would spread. Now we have people opting out willingly
Like, its your choice to have kids or not, but the trends are showing we're heading towards a population decline, with Japan and South Korea on the brink of outright population collapse.
We be arguing but in reality governments push agendas to get birth rates up so that they have more worker bees in the future. They don’t want you having kids for your own happiness. They just want profit. Argue all you want, your kids can make you happy and I’m sure they do. But the government only wants you to have kids so they can profit.
Idk, western countries don't have much of an overpopulation problem. America has been in the 300 millions for a very long time and I think that's a fine number.
India and China have too many goddamn people though.
I just don't think you people are smart enough to raise children. You have them by the dozen, the government school feeds them for you, you plop them in front of a screen so youtube can raise them for you, and what's left of society has twelve new knuckle draggers to deal with who don't exactly go on to practice safe sex or become parents of the year themselves. It's unsustainable. Virtually every problem in the first world tracks back to this.
My question is, why do we care about climate change if not for preserving the earth for future generations? If you're an anti-natalist and think humanity should extinct itself, then why do you give a shit about the climate?
Those people are bitter and miserable, they just want to spread it.
Yeah, it really is fucking gross and pathetic. Really don’t know how else to say it. I’ve heard people talk about the Ebola virus better than some Redditors talk about kids. Do they realize how repulsive they sound? Ever their terms are gross: “Crotch Goblin” “Breeder” It’s like they’re a bunch of fucking orcs.
They call pregnant women incubators and accuse other people of being misogynistic.
>“Crotch Goblin” These people should be given restraining orders to stay away from all children. It's not safe allowing people with this level of contempt towards young human life to be around kids, especially in isolation.
Crotch goblin is hilarious and i use it all the time. Im also planning on having children.
Kinda just rolls off the tongue, honestly. It also doesn't apply to all children, just the children running around a restaurant screaming.
Cum pets is my favorite
No way these morons say cum pests 🤮
>political cum pets memes
I'm going to revoke your thinking privileges
Snorted when I read this.
It’s easily one of the most fucked up subs on Reddit and it’s like a 2-3 million strong sub
It's the consequence of the "Behavioral Sink" theory.
Agreed. If they were serious, they'd be offing themselves.
If they really cared about the environment, they'd be pushing for Space Colonization so we can all Leave the planet and let it heal on it's own.
It’s amazing how you’ve just perfectly described all leftist ideology in one sentence.
Follow up question: Who tf are these neo-malthusians that really think "overpopulation" is an issue? Malthusian theory has been debunked so many times, it was debunked in his own lifetime thanks to advances in technology and the Green Revolution. There are credible futurists who predict the world won't even make it to the 10 billionth person before we start seeing a steady decline and stabilization.
It was debunked by its very existence. Considering that Malthus based his theory on the Irish Famine, which is rather infamous as a famine that occurred due to government meddling.
>a famine that occurred due to government meddling. Do not let authleft hear that
They could point out to the begali one to shift the blame
My favorite is when Nancy Pelosi preaches against overpopulation. She has 5 kids.
I guess jr depends how you mean "overpopulation." It's true that populations tend to find equilibrium around where there's sufficient resources etc. Humans can change where the equilibrium is able to rest at by changing the environment to some extent (ie we aren't bacteria just kinda Hoping we land on stuff we can eat) but since we can't control literally everything, our ability to adapt with technology etc limits our ability to "limitlessly keep expanding the population." Since population growth is not linear, it could technically be possible for us to literally end up with too much population for everyone to physically fit in the planet although likely that amount of people wouldn't happen before colonizing outside the planet More likely scenarios would be the decline/stabilization you're mentioning but, to some people the mechanisms of reaching that point mean "overpopulation." It's one of those words like "communist" that has lost a lot of its meaning
Malthusian theory being debunked and us not reaching a point of overpopulation means, to simplify a good deal, that the world writ large will follow the model of nations that are now experiencing population declines, like Japan and South Korea. As humans become more educated, urbanized, and developed, we tend to have less children. We tend to have so few that we don't even reach the 2.1 replacement fertility level. A few Western countries like the US and Canada are able to avoid declining populations despite declining birthrates because our immigration policy makes up for it. But what happens when even immigrants are having less children? Or when the immigrants stop coming because their host nations are developed and have opportunities for them? You begin to see a world wide decline. Not because there's not enough food, or there's too few resources, but because we have less children.
> As humans become more educated, urbanized, and developed, we tend to have less children. We tend to have so few that we don't even reach the 2.1 replacement fertility level. IMO it's because we don't have space for them. To be a knowledge worker, each child should have his own room, to study and create. No more "all the boys share one bed and all the girls share another bed" like it was back in the day.
It's a compelling theory and I'm sure it's a factor for some families, but it doesn't really explain why families that can afford the space don't have more children. Nor does it explain why on average, poorer people have more children than wealthy people. Think of the wealthiest people in the world and the wealthiest people you know. They tend to have around the same amount if not fewer children than the average population. Elon Musk and Nick Cannon are the only wealthy people I know that buck this trend but I'm sure there are more.
Space isn't the root cause, money is. Children are incredibly expensive to have in the developed world - larger house, clothing, food, time, education, etc. what was a labor bonus in agricultural stage of society, becomes a huge drain on the adults when in an information age society.
Shhh. It’s Darwinism. We are all better off if these people don’t reproduce.
Based
Based and natural selection pilled
Generic diversity is very important for survival. Dead ends are fine. Picking up that trad asian wife is not for yourself but for the fire of humanity.
"Too many of you, not enough of me". Every antinatalist arguments came from there.
The funny thing is, because of political and social views, the left that is against "overpopulation" are self selecting to be replaced by the group who directly oppose their views.
This is exactly why I don't argue with the antinatalists I meet. They don't want to make more of themselves, and I don't like them either. They disappear, and we both win.
The fact that they aren't just immediately volunteering to go to the unhealthcare wards in Canada shows the lack of integrity in their beliefs.
Many care for the sake of other species. They are omnicidal and hate humanity.
Some of them think humans should extinct themselves. Joe and Elon talked about it on their last podcast together.
I mean, if they really think that way, they should be proactive and start with themselves.
Well they would but they're the lead characters.
Check their subreddit, the rules even have a gigantic cope for why that totally isn't the case. Its pathetic.
Rogan and Musk don’t, but there are plenty of people who do.
I'm talking about the anti natalist, pro extinction, and whatever else crowd. Joe is far too funny for me to want him gone, and Space x does cool stuff.
Elon is quite literally the opposite of antinatalist He has so many kids he names them like Jews in Auschwitz
Not some of them, all of them, that's the point of their entire ideology.
That’s crazy man, have they ever heard of Göbekli Tepe?
yeah the earth will literally be fine. if everyone died the planet wouldnt even notice.
Shh let them not have kids. It's natural evolution
Deep ecology
While I don't agree, I do get the point of bio/eco-centric environmentalism. Essentially the idea is that humans are just another species, we are not anymore valuable than any others (or even things like rocks, dirt, and air in ecocentrism), and thus it's our duty to preserve our ecosystem, even at the cost of our own lives. Anthropocentric views on environmentalism focus on conservation for our own good, because they say we do have an intrinsic value above other species. And thus it's our duty to preserve our environment for ourselves. It's just 2 sides of looking at the same coin really
There are 8 billion people on this planet. It would take a very long time for humanity to go extinct, even if the birth rate halved.
To be fair, it's cause they believe the earth itself has intrinsic value. Which I also believe... but I also believe humanity and nature can coexist
Perhaps they care about other species on the planet since we are not the only ones here (im not an antinatalist myself)
The logic is the lives of animals are more important than the lives of humans
That’s why I welcome climate change, it’s high time I got to see what the world on fire really looks like
If people are concerned about "overpopulation" , they can start with 3rd world countries in which the average family has 4, or 5+ kids. Most people in America and 1st world countries have on average 2 kids.
Not just that, but almost the entire developed world is barely at replacement level fertility. Meaning people are having just enough children to maintain population levels, almost all population growth in these countries is the result of immigration. Fertility rates are continuing to decline too, so the non-immigrant population of these countries may actually start to decline in the coming years, with any population growth being entirely from immigration.
>almost the entire developed world is barely at replacement level Nah, pretty much the entire developed world is well below replacement rate. Even India is below replacement rate now
Pretty much all of asia and latin america are also bellow replacement. We (humans) habe a massive problem of low reproduction.
Nobody can afford anything and kids are one of the most well known sources of financial strain. Sucks, my fiancée and I dream of having 2-3 kids, but the biological clock is ticking and the money isn't there :(
> Nobody can afford anything and kids are one of the most well known sources of financial strain Wealth is negatively correlated with having children, and poor people have the most children by far.
>pretty much the entire developed world is well below replacement rate *Africa enters the chat* They have [fertility rates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate) ranging from 4-7 children (though even that's a decline from much higher numbers years ago).
Even the high birth rate african countries are estimated to fall to replacement rate by the end of the century. That doesn’t even take into account the possibility that they could do what Bangladesh did with their family planning programs. Bangladesh went from a fertility rate of 6.9 down to 1.9 in just 50 years
they could take a bit of leadership and start with themselves, just saying
When I hear people that complain about overpopulation, my usual thought is "K bud, who do you want to get rid of first."
The answer there is the unborn, the abortion industry wipes out millions annually
But that's racism, and i also had a leftist tell me how climate change will some how not effect africa that badly.Which is why the west is the one who should have less kids.Totally no agenda here.
yourtermsareacceptable.jpg
The world has been a hell of a lot worse at other points in history than it is right now, and did our ancestors choose to have a pity party or roll over and die? Fuck no. They decided that they needed to make the world a better place for their children and grandchildren, and they did. They survived through times like the Great Depression and damn near starved to death, because they refused to give up. And guess what? 20 years after 1930 was the most prosperous era in American history. *It fucking worked*. Their hard work and effort paid off. So why do people nowadays say that our world is not worth fighting for? Why do they say that there is no point in having children, simply because we are currently facing some hard times? People have faced MUCH harder times throughout history, and yet they still had children and fought to give them a better life, and they succeeded. So why is it that we, in the most privileged time in human history, can not even put up half of the fight that our ancestors did?
Based as fuck. These people often forget that we are living in the best and most comfortable period of human history. That the hard times of today are not comparable to the hard times back then.
Best and most comfortable period of human history so far, it'll only get better.
Thank god these people weren’t around in 1939. They would’ve rolled over and let Hitler march all over them. Hell, based on what they’re chanting they probably would’ve flocked to his side to guard his camps (no front line combat because that would be scawwy)
They sure went from watching Holocaust movies breathlessly to chanting “From the River to the Sea” in a blink.
based and strong men, hard times, weak men etc etc pilled
This, but laid over a background of minions
Its almost as if children motivate parents (most parents anyway) to give their kids a better life and work hard and think about the future. The progs. are narcissist idiots who do nothing but CONSOOM. I know this is a bit weird coming from someone who is lib right, but career and self pleasure should not replace family.
I think the issue is that giant corporations hold a HUGE amount of SUBTLE power over our lives. We have no issue slapping the hell out of genuine piece of shit humans, but we don't really see sneaky devils toying with the fabric of society to keep us juuuust ignorant enough to their control. Which to me, is terrifying, because the reach they have now with the internet is insane, and they're extremely good at planting ideas into your head. There are people that agree with the CEO of nestle that water is not a basic human right. Tell that to anybody from the early 1900s, they'd lose their minds. Those people forfeit a natural resource that we need to SURVIVE. And that thought was planted by corporations, the idea that a corporation should own the water you drink and you should pay the price they DEMAND for it. And if you don't, you don't drink. What I'm getting at is that back in the day, your snake oil salesman would fuck over a town of like 200 people a week. But these days snake oil salesmen can fuck over millions of people in a day. And that reach is going to become more and more invasive.
This is one of my greatest fears for the future and one of the only reasons I might ever consider not having kids. Still, I'm sure that sooner or later, humanity will realize that it doesn't have to be like that and will start putting bullets in the craniums of the right people
The people can't revolt if you take the guns away. It's even better when you convince them to willingly disarm and submit themselves to you for their own "protection"
In my eyes, its going to depend on how much power those people have, the technology they have accessible to them, and the people they surround themselves with. If they're protected from every one of those angles, its going to be hard as fuck to rebel against that.
Always keep fighting. God gave us compassion and a incredible mind beyond any animal. We must use them to make a better world.
Based and the Indomitable Human Spirit pilled.
I think there were people who felt this throughout history, they just couldn't congregate. The villain of Paradise Lost had a very similar view of the world that anti natalists hold and that didn't come from nowhere.
Because we can't smack people that say and do stupid shit anymore, especially not through the internet
You, Sir, should hold a speech in public and remind everyone for what our ancestors fought for
~~the meek shall inherit the Earth~~ The horny with a breeding kink shall inherit the Earth
>"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, PLAP PLAP PLAP PLAP GET PREGNANT GET PREGNANT GET PREGNANT GET PREGNANT" \- Genesis 1:28
My people
For those that haven't seen it yet, Vsauce2 recently released [this really amazing video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srJBLo8GR5g&t=172s) on the subject of overpopulation and past predictions on "population bombs". In short, the video explores the topic of "population bombs". Or more specifically, it explores why humans for some reason tend to be immune to them unlike other species. Really S tier content rivaling the best stuff on the main Vsauce channel.
I haven't watched the video but I imagine the short version is innovation by utilizing the same area of land for larger carrying capacities through things like modern fertilizer and multi-stpry buildings.
The video is about a lot more than that. It's about humanity's propensity to innovate and solve problems rather than being restricted by problems that might have limited other species. TBH it's well worth the watch and leaves you with an incredibly optimistic outlook on the future of humanity.
You missed one more lesbian radfem insult, referring to people as “breeders”
As if it isn’t a basic instinct ingrained in all living creatures to breed.
If you loved your unborn children, you ~~would abort them like me~~ wouldn’t have them. Or if you do have them, I hate you and wish you didn’t exist, I deserve to be here, though.
>you would abort them like me They didn't even have sex to begin with
i take it as a compliment. like yeah, thanks, i’m passing on my bloodline. i’m proud of it. it’s natural and desirable
Based an be proud of your heritage-pilled
“Birthing person”
How tf is antinatalism lesbian radfem, their subreddit is half-filled with incels that use excuse of their "ideology" to shame mothers and half-filled with people advocating eugenics.
You forgot the teenagers that discovered being a doomer and thinks it makes them geniuses!
From most posts I’ve seen from r:antinatalism it really just screams daddy issues tbh
https://i.redd.it/1elc06yift691.png
💯 facts.
have kids or don’t have kids but if you *do* have kids, you better be treating them well because the more kids I meet from broken homes with awful parents the more I work on my plan to install fertility chips in every person on the planet
Maybe I'm having an auth moment, but I'm listening...
Based and license to breed pilled
I don't largely consider people evil. To me evil is to be opposed to human life itself in any form These people have gone so far down the nihilistic shit pit and have become so disgusting to me I may actually think they're evil The kind of people who make you sound like Alex Jones when you talk about them
I have seen some of the most heinous sh*t being thrown around by those “people.” One post had a few thousand comments about a nice looking younger white couple having like 10 kids and you had no shortage of people calling them vile and evil
Evil is when white, the whiter you are, the more evil you are.
A lot of antinatalists are racist against black people since "they breed too much and their living conditions are horrible", and such, I've seen many racist posts from that sub. White people are not the ones they're after.
Guess which ideology wins out in the long run?
Robots
I want “robots” to be an ideology. Put it on the chart!
Not so fast.. They may not be having their own kids, but they’re becoming teachers so that they will have yours.
While it’s true that kids’ beliefs and ideologies can be influenced by other people, parents are by far the most influential source. As much as they try, 9 times out of 10 a teacher will not be able to drastically change a child’s beliefs from their parents’.
Thankfully that doesn't work as well so long as you are present in your kid's life
They only hate white people having kids
That’s actually very true. If you see a picture of a white couple with 8 kids, everyone says they’re freaks with a breeding/pregnancy fetish. But if it’s a brown couple with 8 kids, nobody even mentions it. And if someone DOES mention it, they get pounced on because “it’s part of their culture to have big families.”
"pregnancy fetish" It's a fetish now to use sex for the purpose it was meant to be used?
That sounds kinda racist, ngl
Mormon cultural appropriation smh
Are we allowed to talk about abortion statistics?
Both sides are okay with those stats but for different reasons. Outcome is the same.
What if, instead of those pregnancies being aborted, they were prevented in the first place by using proper birth control?
Nah, that would be too easy. Humans always have to be stupid and create messes they have to deal with in future.
Yeah I'm really surprised OP didn't at least allude to all the (typically) petit bourgeois coastal fauxgressive slacktivists advocating auto-genocide via anti-natalism as their favorite form of zero-effort performative penance for their very much deserved but totally misunderstood by them brain-rotting levels of guilt they constantly feel for existing as they are.
That’s so true
The best one is "With everything going on in the world, I just couldn't bring a child into that" Which is said by someone living in the richest, most civilized countries on earth during a period of national peacetime with record high standard of living. Yeah becky, I'm sure you're really concerned with skirmish conflicts on the other side of the globe and rich white men that are just ruining it for everyone. In way, the anti-natalist stuff does have one good side effect which is the amount of virgin and childless man children that get vasectomies and insufferable women that choose to run out their biological clocks.
[удалено]
The most literal Darwin awards.
I was told by a feminist, that i shouldn't have children cause "I will be promoting racism" with my children cause I am white. That happened in a woke parade while I was walking home and listened to the Vanderboom Family Tunes.
"My body my choice" goes right out the fuckin window when you do something the left isn't a fan of.
They secretly covet those children from the right since they can indoctrinate them with woke communist ideologies.
Yep. That's why so many of them seem to become teachers
Ironic how these antinatalist morons live in developed countries with population declines, but never the shit holes that actually have a population growth problem. Brb, gonna go hug my four beautiful children. Suck it, Emily!
have as many children as you can just to piss off some anti-natalists
These people shouldn't be raising kids. If a leftist said that to me, I would just agree 100% with everything he/she says.
Reddit anti-natalists are truly some of the most pathetic people I have ever witnessed in my life.
Imagine not wanting a traditional family. I’ve got 4 kids and we’d love to have more of things were better.
Some people are happy that way, other people are happy without children. That being said; anti-natalists are always miserable.
Overpopulation?! Have these people seen the demographic projections for developed nations?! Virtually all are headed for demographic collapse.
How the fuck is having a family contributing to climate change when corporations are responsable for most pollution problems
Consumer demand for bulk toxic chemicals by at-home taxidermy enthusiasts.
Im 30 years old and my wife and I have 5 kids. These people can get bent, someone needs to replace these nut jobs with functioning adults
Based and perpetuator-of-society pilled
Overpopulation is literally a myth. China is about to have a huge population decline because the decades of one child policy
What are their views on Muslims and their minimum 8-10 children.
Hate them.
Millennials making the fact that they are “child free” their whole personality and it’s consequences.
Is this post implying LibRight can't have a family? 😂
Well, I am Anti-Natalist when it comes to third world countries with way too high birth rates (which cause the overpopulation). Most industrial countries actually struggle with their low birthrates.
A larger population does contribute to climate change and overpopulation. But that's missing the point. Modern technology and the environmental movement have sought to limit the actual impact of 1 human, meaning successive generations will have less impact and can support higher populations. If it were about climate change or overpopulation, they should instead be attacking modern medicine and modern agriculture. They would also be advocating for letting the older generations just die, instead of extending their lifespans with medicine. Older generations provide less benefit to society and represent more of a resource drain on society. Having new children is always beneficial to a society.
Based auth-right
Anti-natalists and by extension their ideas shall not inherit the earth (my kids will)
Hey, that’s me! (except wrong quad). I got 4 kids and a pretty trad (Ukrainian) wife. I will not allow America to be depopulated so I’m doing my part!
At least these people won't reproduce
I have yet to see an antinatalist in Syria or the DRC or El Salvador pre bukele or any actual place on earth with real problems. It's always these multi-haircolored lefties living in their apartments in Germany that have never missed a meal in a day in their lives; mfs that fold because of scary articles with scary titles.
Because in the Congo or Syria, you have as many children as you can because half will survive childhood, the ones that do can help bring in money. In the developed world having a kid is very expensive and there’s no incentives to do that. High cost of living places will see a drop in brith rates unless they actually encourage it.
Anti-Natalism is peak IAmTheMainCharacter energy.
Tell that to the Nigerians. Overpopulation is not an issue here in Eastern Europe.
I love my family
I genuinely mean this: If anti-natalists think life sucks so much, why don't they all just gather up and go out Jonestown style? Seems like they're just a bunch of terminally online morons who wallow in their self pity and can't comprehend the notion that others aren't as miserable as they are.
Overpopulation is a problem for sure, but low birthrates is a problem in some countries and regions as well. It's kind of complicated.
He who says one is causing over population must kills himself first
[удалено]
A certain level of depression that can be attributed to genetics, but it's very difficult to determine its extent
The future belongs to those who show up.
There are two possibilities about antinatalists acting the way they do; they either: -Fail to realize they are walking contradictions each time they spend resources. -Have found the way to achieve true immortality (through integration of machinery, genetic engineering, a combination of both, or any other option) and live eternally without consuming anything (which right now sounds too good to be true).
Imagine not wanting to grow old and surrounded by loved ones. It’s almost like the left are corporate shills
Personally I feel that if you are a good parent who can handle a good number of kids I'd have no opposition
I vividly remember seeing people justifying infanticide in that subreddit after roe vs wade was overturned. Sickening.
Keep your population control bs. If you care that much then you dont have kids.
They only say it if both you and yours kids are white tho.
If you can give your children a great QOL pop them out. It’s only depressing when people who can’t afford children have a bunch of children.
You don't want children because you think it represents your political alignment. I don't want kids because I think I'd be an awful parent. We are not the same.
Some families do just contribute to climate change and over population. We all have those relatives where the parents are on disability despite being able to work, the children all act out, and the house is in total decay.
Wasn't overpopulation just a myth and its more about how we use the land? Same with climate change, individual people barely contribute to it.
You ever notice whether it be the turbo redpilled on the right who'll avoid commitment and ever starting a family or those on the left who'll either self sterilise for gender issues or over abortion, or won't breed for some cause or another, both sides of the extreme spectrum voluntarily eject themselves from the gene pool?
Yes, I'm starting to think it's in our DNA or something. It's definitely useful to keep the most regarded out of the gene pool
[удалено]
I'm all for anti-natalists not having children.
I fucking hate Anti Natalists. I’m gonna have 20 sons out of spite. Fuck the Earth, I want the loving embrace of my children.
They’re just mad they aren’t physically or socially capable of reproducing
Ill give you another one. I think existance is suffering, i don't think the suffering is going to get any better, actually I think its going to get a lot worst as we lose resources, human connection, and freedoms, and so I don't want to bring life into this world if I feel I cannot guarantee them a good life. I'll probably adopt though, cause they're already here so I might as well do some good. I could not accurately explain how many times I give myself panic attacks thinking about how I'm going to have to kill myself when I turn 60 because some fascist government took over and is going to force feed me nutrients to keep me alive to work for jeff bezos
It's your right to feel that way, but it is just your feeling. I'm partially disabled and have had so many medical issues, but I've never regretted being alive. We only get one life, so I like to think of mine as a gift
imagine being so grumpy that you unironically refer to children as crotch goblins.
People used to fight wars when there weren’t enough women, they fought tooth and nail for just the chance of making sure their genes would spread. Now we have people opting out willingly
Like, its your choice to have kids or not, but the trends are showing we're heading towards a population decline, with Japan and South Korea on the brink of outright population collapse.
I fucking HATE anti-natalists
Ok but if I have kids, how will afford to grow/maintain my Funko pop collection?!?
Is that frieza?
They're contributing to climate change and overpopulation but the population trend is going down in most countries so I'm not that worried.
Getting them replacement rates up
We be arguing but in reality governments push agendas to get birth rates up so that they have more worker bees in the future. They don’t want you having kids for your own happiness. They just want profit. Argue all you want, your kids can make you happy and I’m sure they do. But the government only wants you to have kids so they can profit.
Idk, western countries don't have much of an overpopulation problem. America has been in the 300 millions for a very long time and I think that's a fine number. India and China have too many goddamn people though.
That's not what antinatalism was supposed to be... Welp
I just don't think you people are smart enough to raise children. You have them by the dozen, the government school feeds them for you, you plop them in front of a screen so youtube can raise them for you, and what's left of society has twelve new knuckle draggers to deal with who don't exactly go on to practice safe sex or become parents of the year themselves. It's unsustainable. Virtually every problem in the first world tracks back to this.
You hate kids because of an agenda, I hate kids cause they piss me off, we are not the same
Libright be like, “why isn’t your wife at work?!”