To think the human race should respectfully die out?

[RomeoLikedCapuletGirls]

I’m not being goady as I’ve genuinely thought about this over the past few years as the following issues have come to the fore:

Climate change
Industrial meat industry
Pandemics

I’ve tried being vegan but always revert to eating meat for health. I’ve come to the conclusion that it was a much needed part of our evolution. The problem is of course the intensive whole scale nature of it, and the suffering it causes. Even the plant industry causes a lot of damage to the environment and ecosystems. The sheer numbers of humans needing feeding is the problem.

Again, with climate change. It’s a question of over-population. The more of us there are the more we deplete our earth’s resources we deplete. Limiting consumption is simply not working so we need something else.

And although we might crack Coronavirus, there’ll be another virus along soon to challenge us. And it’ll spread quickly because there are so many of us.

I’m not advocating mass suicide of course!

Just that we encourage our offspring to not have children until we have either died out or at the very least reduced our numbers to such a point that we are just one species amongst many, living on this planet and not causing the disproportionate amount of harm to the environment and other animals.

There’s nothing to argue that the human race should continue forever.

One of the reasons the population is growing is people living longer and advances in medicine that can treat conditions that would previously meant a death sentence. I'm pretty sure birth rates arent going up.
...but if you successfully persuaded an entire generation not to have children, what would that mean....? Eventually no new drs , scientists, shop workers, farmers, food production etc. I guess you wouldnt need care homes as people would have died before needing them... and there would be no younger, able people to staff them...
The first lockdown illustrated just how many people are key to keep soceity operating at a very basic level (as well as visible people such as supermarket workers, emergency services, nhs, teachers, postmen etc, there is all the stuff like food production, power station workers, utilities, keeping broadband up and running, online banking etc to name but a few)

If it's one consolation we are basically screwed as a species. It's for the best but in the mean time no point being all miserable about it. Accept our species for what it is , do what you can if that is recycling or being vegan but don't beat yourselves up for being an overly successful, war mongering primate!

All those people saying bigger families in developing countries aren’t an issue because they consume less? You do realise that the middle class is growing at a huge rate in many countries. Also, many from poorer counties and large families will end up migrating to the western world in any way they can. Once in the West they will likely
consume just as much as those that already live here do.

There is predicted to be 4 billion people in Africa by the end of the century. With climate change already a big problem there this will be a disaster.

On the subject of smaller and no child families, I do think it’s more acceptable to be child free than it once was. Still, I do at times feel like a bit of a social misfit for choosing not to reproduce. On the other hand I silently judge anyone with three children or more so I guess we’re even.

And of course women will be blamed for their reproductive choices no matter what!

I'd be happy with female leadership, I think having men in positions of power is responsible for a lot. They think it looks weak to care about nature.

Beef is meant to be the biggest cause of deforestation now.

Cattle I mean

Yes...burgers are very bad for the planet...noone jquits Macdonalds though.

Quits even

@Disquieted1 Genuine question, but why do you feel my opinion is wacky?

Over population of the planet is a serious problem. Reducing the number of humans will inevitably have to result in deaths, lack of births or both. What fairer way is there to accomplish this goal?

The ideal needs to be airborne, fast-acting (to reduce suffering), and affect all ages/races/genders etc equally.

And yes I do include myself and my loved ones in that too.

@BestestBrownies

I did feel slightly guilty when this pandemic hit because an indiscriminate deadly disease that wipes out at least 50% of the population is something I have actively wished for for YEARS.

In theory, I imagined this to be the fairest form of population control, so it has been very disheartening to observe that it hasn’t affected all socio-economic groups equally, and hasn’t been anywhere near as deadly as is necessary.

You've actually been wishing for a disease to kill 5,000,000,000 people.

One death can be tragic. To wish for the death of half the world's population is unthinkable.

@allDisquieted1 why is it a "wacky" post? I know quite a few people who share that view.

When the very first news about the virus came out both me and DH said that with a bit of luck it would wipe all or most of the population out.

I would love some of the posters who want humans to die out to tell me what they think the 'point' of the Earth is?

Is it to support primitive human beings in low numbers? Is it to support life but not humans, in a natural history museum which is not curated? Or is it just to be a rock orbiting a star?

Or is there no point? In which case why should we not just party on until the drinks run out?

You first, OP.

[quote BestestBrownies]@Disquieted1 Genuine question, but why do you feel my opinion is wacky?

Over population of the planet is a serious problem. Reducing the number of humans will inevitably have to result in deaths, lack of births or both. What fairer way is there to accomplish this goal?

The ideal needs to be airborne, fast-acting (to reduce suffering), and affect all ages/races/genders etc equally.

And yes I do include myself and my loved ones in that too.[/quote]
Well then, you know what to do, right?

Bestest I’m finding it hard to understand how you get to wishing half the world dead, including wishing it for your children.

Do you feel that way about tragic events that have already happened? Higher number better?

If the virus knew which people welcomed it for their demise it could target a bit better.

YANBU. But, unfortunately this conclusion did lead to a relative taking their life three years ago. There are plenty of overly encouraging would be eco warriors encouraging teens with these thoughts rather than directing them to seek support.

Bestest

I’m guessing you don’t have children ?

Nobody actually wishes themselves or their children dead for the good of the climate. There are various reasons for taking one's own life, all of them tragic, but I'm not aware of anyone who actually did remove themselves or their children from the earth for that reason, however bullishly they talk about it on the internet. All things considered, it is a very....poor taste thing to claim to wish for.

Overpopulation only comes from certain countries. Go and speak to the Chinese and the Indians about curbing their wish to reproduce. Leave the rest of us alone.

@D4rwin

YANBU. But, unfortunately this conclusion did lead to a relative taking their life three years ago. There are plenty of overly encouraging would be eco warriors encouraging teens with these thoughts rather than directing them to seek support.

I am truly sorry to hear about that tragedy but I suspect the story behind it was more complex than saving the planet. All the more reason to be appalled by people who exploit the climate crisis to encourage such actions.

Ok. Thanks for the suggestion that I don't know why my cousin took his life. He really was in touch with a group online. Did discuss his thoughts. Was told it was 'noble'. Yes he should have had better support. Yes it's tragic. Sorry you don't choose to believe it.

*Over population of the planet is a serious problem. Reducing the number of humans will inevitably have to result in deaths, lack of births or both. What fairer way is there to accomplish this goal?

The ideal needs to be airborne, fast-acting (to reduce suffering), and affect all ages/races/genders etc equally*

Why wait for a 'perfect' disease, why not just have a lottery.? Draw numbers. Anyone with an even number is executed? Just as fair as wanting a disease to wipe out half the population and much more efficient and probably less disuptive than an illness

And yes I do include myself and my loved ones in that too
Don't be so disingenuous. Are you really telling me you would really gladly wave off your child in the above lottery scenario for the 'good of the planet?' If so then I take my hat off to you but I most certainly would not and I wouldn't expect anyone else to either

For posters who genuinely believe that human beings should die out, does that extend to thinking murder is OK? If human life has no value at the population level, why the hell should it have value at the individual level?

I am flabbergasted at these views.

Darwin that is really sad. It’s one thing to espouse wild views about being fine about life ending in this thread, often posters saying it for their own children. Not ok to actually influence someone to do it, how tragic.