this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
737 points (95.6% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
3 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Having fewer kids is extremely environmentally friendly

this is some malthusian eugenicist bullshit.

[–] player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Humans cause pollution so fewer humans = less pollution. It's not that complicated.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fuck ecofascism. The problem is not how many we are. We are well within the planet's carrying capacity. The problem is how the richest among us live.

[–] player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Almost every modern human uses non-renewable resources and produces greenhouse gases either directly or indirectly. At the current rates it is unsustainable. It is the exponential growth of industry, technology, and human population that has caused the dramatic shift in climate change.

The top 10% earning Americans (>$178,000/year) created 40% of the nation's pollution according to a recent study. And that factored in the industries they worked in. That still means that the majority of climate change is caused by the activity of normal people.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

doubling down on this is fucking gross

[–] player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Advocating for overpopulation is fucking gross. The planet is already experiencing another mass extinction event.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

no one is advocating for overpopulation. I'm advocating for the silencing of malthusian and xenophobes by any means necessary.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Malthusian yes, eugenicist no.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you can't implement any malthusian policy that isn't necessarily eugenicist.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

People may make it eugenicist but the policy can not be. For exemple if the country gives money for the first child but not the second, you reduce the intentions to have more than one. Then maybe people will kill their baby because they want a blond girl but this is their fault.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] oce@jlai.lu 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm giving money to my country by paying taxes?

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] oce@jlai.lu 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In social countries, parents receive money for parental leaves and to pay for childcare for example.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

eugenics, selecting against socialized countries.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

you can't do any malthusian advocacy that isn't necessarily eugenicist

[–] JasSmith@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We can acknowledge reality without being histrionic. I’m not calling for an end to humanity. I’m simply explaining that human life is wasteful and inefficient. I think we should accept that, rather than pretending otherwise. Tinkering around the edges isn’t going to change the trend.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

this is just ecofascism

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago

misogyny is another classic hallmark of fascism.