>> To feed a growing population on earth, we do need industrial farming. > Do we? That's a massively contested debate. See: (Neo)Malthusianism. On the one hand

>> To feed a growing population on earth, we do need industrial farming. > Do we? That's a massively contested debate. See: (Neo)Malthusianism. On the one hand, you dismiss my population growth argument as "Malthusianism" (which I don't consider a counter-argument at all, it is just naming things). But on the other hand you acknowledge that we cannot just feed ever more people: > What's the point of being able to feed 8 or 9 billion people on the planet, if quality of life for the majority of those individuals is rather low? So on one hand you are dismissing my argument as Malthusian, on the other hand you are making a very Malthusian argument yourself. My argument would be: I agree with you that mankind needs to shrink and right-size so the then-sustainable population can have some level of comfort for everyone.