this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
249 points (100.0% liked)

World News

45319 readers
3933 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 76 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Yeah but we need this long term. I get it, current economies are fueled by endless growth, raise your hand if you think that’ll keep working for the next 100, 300, 500 years!

The reality is that we probably need to reduce the global population by a few billion and then sustain that number and scrap our entire economic system in favor of one that prioritizes sustainability. Better now than in 100 years when there’s no food or water left.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)

100 years? The way things are going I doubt we have more then 10-15 before mass starvation begins due to crop failures and water shortages.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago

Indeed but even without climate change, the current system is doomed to collapse because it's simply not sustainable.

Climate change is going to accelerate that 10X.

I for one see it as a good thing because fuck this arrangement.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah we'll just do what we are doing until it's too late cuz conservatives don't want change

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

It's right there in the name, baby. Conserve the status quo. Even better, reverse it to an older, even worse status quo if possible

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Human population should probably reduce to about 10% of what it currently is. Basically, as a species, people need to get over the arrogance of needing to propagate THEIR genetic lines, as if that's somehow important. It's unsustainable.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Human population should probably reduce to about 10% of what it currently is.

So you're saying 90% of the human race should die? And here I thought the IDF was genocidal!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, it's about reducing replicating to avoid a 90% die off

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Reducing to 10% (like he's proposing) would be a 90% die-off.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Everyone is going to die at some point. They're not suggesting hastening that, but rather not replacing yourself.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I agree that we should replace the economic system, but overpopulation is a myth and depopulating is not actually necessary in our journey for sustainability.

https://www.cato.org/policy-report/november/december-2022/valuable-people-debunking-myth-overpopulation#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20most%20popular,human%20action%20and%20economic%20progress.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

First of all, it’s Brigham young university. Secondly, higher population doesn’t magically make more helium on the planet, or lithium, or the sand used in concrete, or petroleum, or other rare earths. All these things are finite. Some of these things are already in short supply now. How is adding 20 billlion more people gonna make finite and scare essential resources more abundant? Your link talks about availability of resources within a system where there is essentially limitless production- you can’t make batteries and solar cells and plastic and food and gas out of magic Mormon underpants, these are real exhaustible resources which are already being taxed. Maybe “god will provide” huh.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If we can reach asteroid mining that will solve a lot of scarcity issues.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who's upvoting this? You're not wrong, but that's a completely different conversation and moving the goalpost.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

"...depopulating is not actually necessary in our journey for sustainability." Illustrating this point in the comment you replied to.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

good god i hope not