3 ms·

Yes, it's sinister and really unhealthy. People, on balance, are a blessing, and love of humanity is a prerequisite to having a civil society. These misanthrop

by rsj_hn 5y ago

Yes, it's sinister and really unhealthy. People, on balance, are a blessing, and love of humanity is a prerequisite to having a civil society. These misanthropic beliefs are primarily limited to elites, who have become so decadent as to hate mankind. You have Prince Phillip, the Duke of Edinburough saying "If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." Also some of the more fanatical environmental groups are less about loving the environment than hating people. You also see similar sentiments expressed in modern architecture -- the idea that architecture shouldn't be beautiful or comfortable because people should be uncomfortable, etc, as in the famous debate between Christopher Alexander and Peter Eisenman. This idea of hating your own group or even hating all mankind is basically the extreme end of modern decadence, a luxury primarily afforded to a subset of people in the wealthiest western nations. Fortunately, it is not shared by the bulk of humanity, or even by ordinary blue collar people in wealthy nations.

fleddr 5y ago
In just a 100 years time, we have completely wrecked this planet. Decimated wildlife, emptied the oceans, spread our pollution everywhere. Humanity as a whole very much behaves like a cancer, and that makes it hard to love ourselves. The goal isn't necessarily self-hate, it's damage control. Furthermore, consider the option that a lower population long term can be a positive to humanity itself.
- xyzelement 5y ago
  > Humanity as a whole very much behaves like a cancer, and that makes it hard to love ourselves. I guess I see that kind of attitude as the primary thing and then arguments like climate change etc as post-fact justification. Humanity has been and always will be a mix of beautiful and terrible. In the same time window you're talking about, we made huge strides in equality, science, reached for the starts, explored the depth, etc. Go back decades, centuries and millennia and you will find something to be depressed about. Crusades? Slavery? Pandemics? Wars? Those things have existed for ever, and yet humanity has always found a way to move forward, trending towards better/safer/more equal. If you believe that "humans are as cancer", you are as justified today as you had ever been, but as a human, forgive me for not being interested when someone who loathes my species suggests it'd be better if we died out.
  - fleddr 5y ago
    The difference in our thinking is that I look outside the scope of our singular species and also take into account what it does to this amazing planet, its habitats, and the millions of other species it houses. We're raping and wrecking this place. All of the accomplishments you list are for our own species, whilst you dismiss anything else. I think humans are an amazing species, as well as a catastrophe. Or maybe it's technically not that humans are awful, rather our "systems" are, our endless growth machine of short term optimization. I didn't advocate for dying out. There's quite a lot of wiggle room between the predicted 10 billion peak and zero. I would welcome a population decline if it is voluntary and think it's better both for people and for the planet.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    > If you believe that "humans are as cancer", you are as justified today as you had ever been, but as a human, forgive me for not being interested when someone who loathes my species suggests it'd be better if we died out. Scale makes a difference. Going back centuries and millennia is not comparable when talking about problems caused simply by the numbers in existence today. I do not think anyone is suggesting humans die out in this thread. But it is a mathematical fact that it is possible for the number of humans (or total consumption of humans) to exceed boundary conditions that would allow humans to exist in a stable environment.
  - johnofthesea 5y ago
    > Those things have existed for ever, and yet humanity has always found a way to move forward This is different.
  - Jenk 5y ago
    > guess I see that kind of attitude as the primary thing and then arguments like climate change etc as post-fact justification. That reads like you're saying "I see accusing them of murder as the primary thing, and then arguments like the fact they stabbed someone 37 times as post-fact justification."

by rsj_hn 5y ago

fleddr 5y ago

In just a 100 years time, we have completely wrecked this planet. Decimated wildlife, emptied the oceans, spread our pollution everywhere. Humanity as a whole very much behaves like a cancer, and that makes it hard to love ourselves. The goal isn't necessarily self-hate, it's damage control. Furthermore, consider the option that a lower population long term can be a positive to humanity itself.

xyzelement 5y ago
> Humanity as a whole very much behaves like a cancer, and that makes it hard to love ourselves. I guess I see that kind of attitude as the primary thing and then arguments like climate change etc as post-fact justification. Humanity has been and always will be a mix of beautiful and terrible. In the same time window you're talking about, we made huge strides in equality, science, reached for the starts, explored the depth, etc. Go back decades, centuries and millennia and you will find something to be depressed about. Crusades? Slavery? Pandemics? Wars? Those things have existed for ever, and yet humanity has always found a way to move forward, trending towards better/safer/more equal. If you believe that "humans are as cancer", you are as justified today as you had ever been, but as a human, forgive me for not being interested when someone who loathes my species suggests it'd be better if we died out.
- fleddr 5y ago
  The difference in our thinking is that I look outside the scope of our singular species and also take into account what it does to this amazing planet, its habitats, and the millions of other species it houses. We're raping and wrecking this place. All of the accomplishments you list are for our own species, whilst you dismiss anything else. I think humans are an amazing species, as well as a catastrophe. Or maybe it's technically not that humans are awful, rather our "systems" are, our endless growth machine of short term optimization. I didn't advocate for dying out. There's quite a lot of wiggle room between the predicted 10 billion peak and zero. I would welcome a population decline if it is voluntary and think it's better both for people and for the planet.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  > If you believe that "humans are as cancer", you are as justified today as you had ever been, but as a human, forgive me for not being interested when someone who loathes my species suggests it'd be better if we died out. Scale makes a difference. Going back centuries and millennia is not comparable when talking about problems caused simply by the numbers in existence today. I do not think anyone is suggesting humans die out in this thread. But it is a mathematical fact that it is possible for the number of humans (or total consumption of humans) to exceed boundary conditions that would allow humans to exist in a stable environment.
- johnofthesea 5y ago
  > Those things have existed for ever, and yet humanity has always found a way to move forward This is different.
- Jenk 5y ago
  > guess I see that kind of attitude as the primary thing and then arguments like climate change etc as post-fact justification. That reads like you're saying "I see accusing them of murder as the primary thing, and then arguments like the fact they stabbed someone 37 times as post-fact justification."