3 ms·
I don't have nor intend to have kids. That will be far more beneficial than any of the measures that you propose.
by collyw 7y ago
I don't have nor intend to have kids. That will be far more beneficial than any of the measures that you propose.
- adrianN 7y agoIn the long term yes, reducing population is a very effective way of reducing environmental impact. Unfortunately climate change is by now such a pressing problem that we don't have time for that.
- jodrellblank 7y agoAt what point do you see the transition where genocide becomes preferable to uninhabitable earth? Ever, or never? At what point does "the enemy" strike first, not because they want "our" resources, but because they need us to stop using resources so they can survive at all? Ever, or never?
- adrianN 7y agoI think that there will always be better options than genocide. Killing people only buys some time until you have to switch to a sustainable way of life, eventually you still have to do it. I think an all out war for extermination will always be more expensive than just killing the leaders who prevent change.
- jodrellblank 7y agoIf everyone is pulling in the same direction, wants the same outcome, and traditional warfare is all, maybe. What if you wakeup one day and $continent is hit by biological weapons and $country is looking suspiciously healthy, and just bought themselves another hundred years. There's better options for us than killing other people; where's the cutoff where other people think it's better to genocide us? Ever or never?
- adrianN 7y agoProbably never. If times are desperate enough that you'd seriously consider eradicating significant parts of the population, the ecosystems are already fucked beyond repair.
- piva00 7y agoYeah, me neither, so I'm also adding that to the list. Happy?