3 ms·

Invasive species, need to introduce a natural predator into the ecosystem. Rats-Snakes Rats/Snakes-Mongoose Birds-House Cats Human-? ...

bugglebeetle 3y ago
…CEOs
- crooked-v 3y ago
  More generally: late stage capitalism.
  - revscat 3y ago
    And it’s total capture of every political system on Earth.
    - avgcorrection 3y ago
      It just is the political system of every impactful society on Earth. With perhaps a few exceptional holdouts with either a lot of grit or nuclear weapons.
    - mistermann 3y ago
      Which is where the real problem lies, not capitalism as everyone believes. Capitalism is supposed to be, and is claimed to be, subordinate to the democratic will of the people.
codetrotter 3y ago
We have heard your concerns. Rest assured, a pack of wild crocodiles will be available for delivery if you wish. Although I must say it is weird to wish for natural predators to be released in one's own home. Oh what’s that? Ah, you don’t want the natural predators in your home? You are just wishing that other people be eaten? It’s funny how everyone is always willing to sacrifice humans. As long as the humans being sacrificed are not they themselves.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  Ironically, this attitude is also why we have the climate change issue in the first place. And why mitigation is hard to get anyone to actually move forwards on in meaningful amounts.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  I think you make a mistake if you assume that misanthropy is necessarily about all other humans except oneself. Of course no one wants to be “dealt with” personally. And it in any case is a completely hypothetical position to take, except for those kooks that either believe in the coming AI Takeover or extraterrestrial invaders.
- hughw 3y ago
  It's possible for there to be far fewer humans without needing to kill anyone. So depopulation can be an ethical strategy, except that you'd need to influence human reproduction.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  We can take a larger view: competition is usually good and helps balance environments. There doesn't need to be a bloodbath, only a reasonable threat that requires humans to behave in a way they wouldn't otherwise (another comment points out that greed is an awfully powerful motive, I'd argue fear would be a good control mechanism). Earth becoming inhabitable doesn't seem to do it. God figures won't do it. Godzilla won't do it. Hope we lend on something that doesn't need human sacrifices first.
user_7832 3y ago
Well, I'd say covid did a commendable job, but honestly humans (and organisms in general) keep falling sick and dying. It takes a lot of things to go right for a nominal life, and one wrong thing to make it all wrong.
avgcorrection 3y ago
Some people celebrate that humans were able to “overcome nature” (modulo destroying it as a habitable place for ourselves), i.e. could live basically anywhere with the help of technology.[1] I think though that it might have been better for us (again, modulo The Earth) if we had become constrained by natural forces outside of ourselves (predators, other forces of nature) so that we couldn't do that. Because we are now—and have been for all the thousands of years of advanced human organization—the biggest threats to ourselves (wars, class society, subjugation). And although what we might call lower forms of life can be cruel—like a school(?) of orcas playing with their prey—nothing in nature can be as cruel to a human being with knowing intent as other human beings. [1] And I reject those that claim that we “cheat” nature by using tools and technology (referring to e.g. people who claim that hunters “cheat” by using advanced weapons and tools); those things are a vital extension of us. Humans without technology would be like polar bears without ice sheets.
Kranar 3y ago
Human-Human

bugglebeetle 3y ago

…CEOs

crooked-v 3y ago
More generally: late stage capitalism.
- revscat 3y ago
  And it’s total capture of every political system on Earth.
  - avgcorrection 3y ago
    It just is the political system of every impactful society on Earth. With perhaps a few exceptional holdouts with either a lot of grit or nuclear weapons.
  - mistermann 3y ago
    Which is where the real problem lies, not capitalism as everyone believes. Capitalism is supposed to be, and is claimed to be, subordinate to the democratic will of the people.

codetrotter 3y ago

We have heard your concerns. Rest assured, a pack of wild crocodiles will be available for delivery if you wish. Although I must say it is weird to wish for natural predators to be released in one's own home. Oh what’s that? Ah, you don’t want the natural predators in your home? You are just wishing that other people be eaten? It’s funny how everyone is always willing to sacrifice humans. As long as the humans being sacrificed are not they themselves.

ceejayoz 3y ago
Ironically, this attitude is also why we have the climate change issue in the first place. And why mitigation is hard to get anyone to actually move forwards on in meaningful amounts.
avgcorrection 3y ago
I think you make a mistake if you assume that misanthropy is necessarily about all other humans except oneself. Of course no one wants to be “dealt with” personally. And it in any case is a completely hypothetical position to take, except for those kooks that either believe in the coming AI Takeover or extraterrestrial invaders.
hughw 3y ago
It's possible for there to be far fewer humans without needing to kill anyone. So depopulation can be an ethical strategy, except that you'd need to influence human reproduction.
makeitdouble 3y ago
We can take a larger view: competition is usually good and helps balance environments. There doesn't need to be a bloodbath, only a reasonable threat that requires humans to behave in a way they wouldn't otherwise (another comment points out that greed is an awfully powerful motive, I'd argue fear would be a good control mechanism). Earth becoming inhabitable doesn't seem to do it. God figures won't do it. Godzilla won't do it. Hope we lend on something that doesn't need human sacrifices first.

user_7832 3y ago

Well, I'd say covid did a commendable job, but honestly humans (and organisms in general) keep falling sick and dying. It takes a lot of things to go right for a nominal life, and one wrong thing to make it all wrong.

avgcorrection 3y ago

Some people celebrate that humans were able to “overcome nature” (modulo destroying it as a habitable place for ourselves), i.e. could live basically anywhere with the help of technology.[1] I think though that it might have been better for us (again, modulo The Earth) if we had become constrained by natural forces outside of ourselves (predators, other forces of nature) so that we couldn't do that. Because we are now—and have been for all the thousands of years of advanced human organization—the biggest threats to ourselves (wars, class society, subjugation). And although what we might call lower forms of life can be cruel—like a school(?) of orcas playing with their prey—nothing in nature can be as cruel to a human being with knowing intent as other human beings. [1] And I reject those that claim that we “cheat” nature by using tools and technology (referring to e.g. people who claim that hunters “cheat” by using advanced weapons and tools); those things are a vital extension of us. Humans without technology would be like polar bears without ice sheets.

Kranar 3y ago

Human-Human