Also “living in traditional ways” is at best misleading. There is already more than enough to go around when we consider actual physical resources. Using market mechanisms to determine how things are distributed works very poorly in terms of meeting everyones needs, and blinds us to actual solutions.
The idea of overshooting earths capacity is firmly rooted in extractive ideology (which is a cornerstone of capitalist economies) and doesn’t even begin to consider how an adjustment in economic output to meet real demand and not whatever is the most profitable, would result in massive changes in the way we do things.
Food production could become more regenerative because we need to feed people not make money.
Clothing industries would cut gigantic amounts of waste simply by ceasing the destruction of clothing to maintain high prices.
And these 2 ideas alone could revolutionize nearly every aspect of our existence.
Indigenous ways of doing is not extractive. It is better described as a collaboration with nature. Managing natural resources to meet our needs, and the needs of (often specifically) the next 7 generations. It means managing forests to make more forests, with all the flora and fauna that entails. Among other things
The fascist part is:
Ohh humans are the problem Okay, which humans? Who decides who gets what? Who lives and who dies? Is there any consideration for the power dynamics in our society (spoiler, no there is not)
In short the quote who ever said it:
Environmentalism without class struggle is just gardening.
relianceschool@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Thank you for this thoughtful and nuanced take on the subject. It’s sad that constructive discussion around population is often shut down due to the link between eugenics and population control. It’s often assumed that anyone advocating for lowered population is in support of similarly dystopian/authoritarian policies, when increasing access to birth control and education has the same effect while increasing personal agency.
I would also note that the theory of evolution has been used to justify all kinds of absurd ideologies, yet we don’t have a problem accepting its basic tenets.
If we accept the fact that humanity is in a state of ecological overshoot, and that overshoot is a function of population x consumption, then it’s entirely reasonable to want to address both sides of the equation.