Comment on Humans are part of the ecosystem.
Krauerking@lemy.lol 2 days agoOk, I’m not gonna ask how you force a world to stop having children and rapidly reduce the population.
Its not an ice cream flavor and you are appeasing your ideology with something harmless to make it sound better than it is.
I actually do consider critically what kind of people would rise to a society that pushes this on others. I disagree with it and I’m gonna stop responding cause you are just fighting out an argument to defend your honor and your perceived morality rather than think critically yourself.
Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
Force? Take a moment to step out of your body and listen to the nonsense you are saying. Lol! Have you seen birthrates around most of the world? I have to do exactly … nothing! It’s already happening.
Some public relations and education around the purpose and benefits of degrowth would be helpful, but it is entirely voluntary. If someone wants to have 10 children, that’s their choice, but they should have no illusions to the world their children will be raised in. That is part of the education.
All children born have equal rights and are taken care of by the state, community and families, even the family with 10 kids. Support for family planning and abortion services should be frictionless, but that’s the norm already in civilized countries. It’s the shithole countries you have to worry about. Trade blocs of degrowth countries can encourage them with trade rules, aid and sanctions.
Most state subsidies would have to go to redirecting the economy to brace for an aging population then a smaller steady state economy. We have to build the world of the future for the smaller civilization to endure. We need leaders who have a clear vision of what sustainability actually looks like.
This means efficient quality housing (passivehouse) built in walkable cities with extensive public transit. Everything powered by renewables. With less mouths to feed, marginal agricultural lands can be rewilded. There is a principle in ecology that you can save 80% of species by protecting 50% of the land. This is almost easy with a small population. With a large and growing population hoping for a technical miracle breakthrough hail mary, it’s a death sentence.
Also, agricultural techniques can adapt to environmentally sustainable models like permaculture and silvopasture and alleycropping thus rebuilding soils, retaining moisture and soil carbon amd biological activity. This is not currently possible because our population exploded based on monoculture dependent on pumped groundwater from rapidly depleting aquifers, pesticides that are poisoning humans and wildlife and the plastic packaging meant to maximize short term yields. A world where climate change is a major factor, the loss of major breadbaskets when aquifers run dry at the same time as a drought will guarentee millions and millions of deaths by poverty and famine and conflict over remaining resources.
Degrowth says that when these inevitable things happen, do you want a large population to discover there is no room for them on a dying planet, or do you want a small population who can life full healthy meaningful lives restoring the biosphere we broke.
Manufacturing is already being automated, and so is defense. The economy doesn’t want youth for this type of work and with drones and ai it’s only accelerating. Automation and social services will be big employers, as will the infrastructure projects that will bring a sustainable population to light.
Do you want your kids and your nations youth building a sustainable future for mankind, or do you want them dying from pollution, famine and war?