you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Eco-fascist outcomes come from Eco-fascist methods. How do you propose to accomplish this degrowth without subjecting the world's population to genocide and privation?

Human nature is to strive, to fight for a better life for themselves and their communities. The preservation of agrarian lifestyles and "harmony with the planet" a bunch of backwards romantics push is not more important than the betterment of the species, no matter how much people cry about it.

If people need to live in dense cities, then they will live in dense cities.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    genocide and privation

    It's opposite of degrowth. It is capitalism with its wide beastly grin.

    The preservation of agrarian lifestyles and "harmony with the planet"

    I like how you mix it togerher under pro-nuclear thread about combating climate change. Also it says you didn't research what degrowth is and possibly doesn't have even common sense.

    is not more important than the betterment of the species, no matter how much people cry about it

    And it is you who calls someone fascist?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Okay let’s break it down.

    De- means the opposite of. Growth is when things get bigger. De-growth means shrinking human resource usage.

    How can we shrink human resource usage? Two ways:

    1. Shrink the human population. ie genocide.
    2. Shrink the resource usage per person. ie privation.

    Address the question. How is “degrowth” not a dog whistle for either killing hundreds of millions of people, or forcing hundreds of millions of people to live in poverty?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Not OP but:

    • population control (is hard but) can be done in a way that in 20-30 years starts having effect. Genocide is not the only way to reduce population?
    • reducing the consumption of individuals does not amount necessarily to starvation and poverty either. Right now we produce too much and too poorly. Reducing consumption might mean less conspicuous consumption from the top 50% of the population but also less "things" that last more.

    In both these examples unfortunately the main obstacle is economic.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    8 billion plus humans are not sustainable on Earth regardless of how efficient our electrical production is, how cool Tesla's cars are, or how many people go vegan. Nature will bring our numbers to sustainable levels if we don't do it. Nature will not be so kind.

    How do you propose to accomplish this degrowth without subjecting the world’s population to genocide and privation?

    • Education
    • Opportunity
    • Help those who don't want to give birth not to give birth
    • Reduce the influence of religion that promotes childbirth and irresponsible family planning
    • Reduce the influence of pressure to grow in every way that is likely exacerbated by capitalism

    I find it funny that those who immediately go to genocide are the ones implying I have the sick mind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    8 billion people is absolutely sustainable, we could support significantly more at a modern standard of living with just the resources we use today. The problem is the way we organise how and where we live, and a parasitic owner class using and abusing vastly more resources than they could ever need.

    • Education
    • Opportunity
    • Help those who don't want to give birth not to give birth
    • Reduce the influence of religion that promotes childbirth and irresponsible family planning
    • Reduce the influence of pressure to grow in every way that is likely exacerbated by capitalism

    And if after all that people still want to have children?

    Nature will bring our numbers to sustainable levels if we don't do it. Nature will not be so kind.

    Let it try, we'll see who wins.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Nature will bring our numbers to sustainable levels if we don’t do it.

    Are you proposing that we do it? How exactly does reducing the number of humans work, if we do it? Is there any word for this that isn’t “genocide”?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    who do you educate? those people will be genocided.

    who do you give birth control to? those people will be genocided.

    there is no policy you can create and implement that will not disproportionately effect one group over another.

    it's all genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)