• qevlarr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    It will always be some kind of “them” who should do that, never the “us”. And what about rich people? Are they bound by the same rules or only in theory?

    • daannii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Well I don’t have kids so I’m already part of the solution. I’m already committed to being child free

      People already don’t want kids. Cause of capitalism and sexism.

      But it doesn’t hurt for people to have better access to contraceptives.

      Safe abortions.

      And to make adoption easier and more socially promoted.

      • qevlarr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        You probably don’t want children. For people who do, this is an enormous sacrifice I wouldn’t ask of anyone. Just because of the comfort and luxury of developed nations, other people are somehow the problem. And not to mention it opens the door to fascists with specific ideas to cull the population

        • daannii@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          When did I say we should restrict people from having kids. ?

          I offered other solutions to the problem.

          All of those solutions would be voluntary.

            • daannii@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              I think you don’t understand how social services work.

              Making contraceptives more accessible does in fact reduce pregnancy . There is a ton of research on this.

              Secondly, making adoption more socially acceptable and easier would encourage people to adopt.

              Cultural ideas and misconceptions about children often make people discount this adoption both as an option for persons giving up baby and potential parents who could adopt.

              • qevlarr@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                Those are not solutions to overconsumption. There has to be some kind of limit. People have to learn they can’t exploit the planet and other people indefinitely.

                It’s like adding more lanes to a congested highway. It provides temporary relief but none of the needed changes. Fewer people is not a solution for climate inaction at all. And it opens the door for fascists with other motives

                • daannii@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  16 hours ago

                  Okay I don’t think you understand that big problems are complex and involve many aspects of human behavior.

                  Will a lower population magically fix everything? No.

                  But in combination with other changes it will.

                  It doesn’t matter how efficient we get at reusing materials , or creating less waste. Ultimately, more humans will cancel out those gains.

                  Both are needed.

                  Less humans and more sustainable actions.

                  The only reason to increase our population is to create more people for capitalism to use and discard.

                  More young men fed to wars. Their lives worthless and short.

                  The only people saying we need more bodies are the people wanting to use those bodies for their own gain.

                  Capitalism oligarchs. Exploitation. And fueling the war machine.

                  The earth is finite.

                  It’s about time we acknowledge this.

                  We can’t grow indefinitely.

                  The ecosystem cannot support nor absorb our waste production.

                  It’s illogical and naive to assume in the near future someone will just figure out how to make it so humans create zero pollution and waste… so no point in doing anything about it now.

                  • qevlarr@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    12 hours ago

                    Those are all great arguments for limiting consumption. I think not having children is of a different order, though. I think pressure to not have children is morally different from pressure to reduce consumption. Not having children will cause certain groups to disappear and that prospect will be exploited.

                    Like I said, it’s always “them” who will be asked to stop having children, never “us”. And the rich and/or powerful will keep having children anyway without any accountability. But mostly it’s fascism In worried about. Once we say fewer children is the solution, they will hear they don’t have to reduce consumption as long as those pesky minorities don’t create more rivals in their Mad Max world of all against all