Elon Musk (father of 11) supports their cause. Thousands follow their ideology. Malcolm and Simone Collins are on a mission to make it easier for everyone to have multiple children. But are they really model parents?
The highlight for me is coming up with some weird pseudoscience justification for why it’s okay to hit your kids.
@fuckingkangaroos@sneerclub Not because the planet cannot carry 8 billion humans, but because no known humane socioeconomic system can provably do so. That problem is exacerbated by the fact that all evidence suggests that the best first step towards a solution would be to lose the richest billion, not the poorest, and absolutely not the folks actually doing the hard work involved in directly feeding and caring for their fellow humans.
@fuckingkangaroos@sneerclub The TESCREAL (I prefer “STREACLE” but that ship has sailed) worldview implies a future with far fewer actual humans on Earth, something also foreseen as necessary for a widespread sustainable high standard of living by people who don’t share their essentially fascist views. We should not get there by having any set of “elites” self-select their own survival. The inevitability of an outcome does not justify any arbitrary path to that end.
@fuckingkangaroos@sneerclub I’m just glad that I’m old enough that I likely won’t have to watch the process by which we get to a smaller and more sustainable human population. I fear that what we’ll actually get is the first movers towards a smaller (and on average better-off) human species are those who salivate at the prospect of slaughtering “undesirables” for the good of the race. Those of us who just want to tax the rich to build better lives for all will lose.
@fuckingkangaroos Guillotines, confiscatory taxation, whatever it takes to deconcentrate wealth and force investment in technology, education, and infrastructure (incl. regulation) that has some hope of getting us smoothly past the climate, ecological, and social crises we have brought upon ourselves.
I’m on board with anything that works but I don’t expect that the relatively rich will allow any solution that ultimately requires them take out their own trash or cook their own meals.
This is largely because the relatively rich are a lot more of “our” people than we want to admit in the West. In a hypothetically egalitarian world where everyone lives at the same economic level, a solid quarter or so of Americans would need to accept less affluence. All of the greedhead strivers we’ve cultivated for decades would need to accept aiming lower.
I don’t buy it. Never happening. We’re going to get a worse fate, chaotically.
@fuckingkangaroos @sneerclub Not because the planet cannot carry 8 billion humans, but because no known humane socioeconomic system can provably do so. That problem is exacerbated by the fact that all evidence suggests that the best first step towards a solution would be to lose the richest billion, not the poorest, and absolutely not the folks actually doing the hard work involved in directly feeding and caring for their fellow humans.
@fuckingkangaroos @sneerclub The TESCREAL (I prefer “STREACLE” but that ship has sailed) worldview implies a future with far fewer actual humans on Earth, something also foreseen as necessary for a widespread sustainable high standard of living by people who don’t share their essentially fascist views. We should not get there by having any set of “elites” self-select their own survival. The inevitability of an outcome does not justify any arbitrary path to that end.
@fuckingkangaroos @sneerclub I’m just glad that I’m old enough that I likely won’t have to watch the process by which we get to a smaller and more sustainable human population. I fear that what we’ll actually get is the first movers towards a smaller (and on average better-off) human species are those who salivate at the prospect of slaughtering “undesirables” for the good of the race. Those of us who just want to tax the rich to build better lives for all will lose.
Yeah. Who knows, maybe guillotines would be more effective than most environmental regulations.
@fuckingkangaroos Guillotines, confiscatory taxation, whatever it takes to deconcentrate wealth and force investment in technology, education, and infrastructure (incl. regulation) that has some hope of getting us smoothly past the climate, ecological, and social crises we have brought upon ourselves.
I’m on board with anything that works but I don’t expect that the relatively rich will allow any solution that ultimately requires them take out their own trash or cook their own meals.
This is largely because the relatively rich are a lot more of “our” people than we want to admit in the West. In a hypothetically egalitarian world where everyone lives at the same economic level, a solid quarter or so of Americans would need to accept less affluence. All of the greedhead strivers we’ve cultivated for decades would need to accept aiming lower.
I don’t buy it. Never happening. We’re going to get a worse fate, chaotically.