fantoozie

I’d argue we’re already in overshoot as far as carrying capacity, if we’re using current standards of living in the West as the baseline. In that sense, population decline is inevitable.

Its impossible for me to answer the question you’re asking, but I posit this: at this point, what is the alternative? Can we keep affording to slow-walk actionable solutions to climate change? What are the wealthy nations of the world willing to sacrifice to sustain Earth’s future as our home? How will we decide who and what to preserve, and who and what is worth losing?

I also agree with you that it’s unraveling. But that’s why’d I’d rather try to adapt now and face the reality than pretend I can have Amazon Prime and not participate in killing life on Earth.

I think your argument is sound if the goal is to sustain current living standards in developed nations

But perhaps we should be evaluating whether, if those living standards require such an oppressive system, it may be better for us in these wealthy nations to learn how to do without

Not easy, not even likely, but necessary if we want to have a planet for future generations

Propping up an unsustainable system through resource extraction and technological innovation without contextual relativism doesn’t just magically make it sustainable.

It comes down to climate resilience, deglobalization of produce markets, and creating the political will to build localized, worker-owned food production and distribution systems. Yes that will mean paying out the ass for bananas, but it’s better than watching children choke on smoke while they ask you why it has to be like this.

Lot of assumptions there.

Whine whine whine. This person will hold their tablet against their chest and bemoan the loss of porn-on-demand while we get to work building sustainable food capacity.

That’s a complete mischaracterization. Intensive mono cropping is time and labor intensive because you have to factor in inevitable losses in crop yield (due to blight, pests, etc.) plus the labor costs of harvesting a single crop that all matures at once. The costs of soil nutrition are also exacerbated because monocropping extracts nutrients from the soil with very little return (there’s a lot of hubbub about rotational cropping with clover and things like that, but it’s not a long-term solution, especially when you’re bleeding money for having a field go fallow)

Building up soil diversity is 100% about working with nature to build crop and soil diversity, and letting natural processes accumulate to produce optimal growing conditions. The issue is it’s not very scaleable, and so grumpy Westerners and urbanites toss it aside because they don’t want to actually grow the food, they just want to feel good about buying it

This is a big one for me. Decoupling social activities from consumerism so people can access human connection without implicit or explicit paywalls.

I think that’s a very sanitary answer. My opinion? It’s not some mysterious sociological quandary to unravel why men are sexually frustrated and lonely. These young men have few prospects, a bleak future, and have been raised with exploitative social media that’s slowly eroded their critical thinking skills and empathy towards others. Their failure to achieve a life they’ve been told they’re entitled to all their lives breeds resentment and is being manipulated against women and minorities as a function of social engineering through social media algorithms.

I’m actually impressed at how ridiculous this is. But I’ll bite:

What’s the plight of men?

Is it sexual frustration?

Is the solution ensuring that young men have access to sex, regardless of the means or impact on women?

If that isn’t feasible, are we simply supposed to engage in war to cull off these sex-starved, victimized men who seemingly are incapable of contributing to society in any other way then impregnating women and waging violence?

If so, what is the benefit of living in such a world?

Classic authoritarian tactics:

Target a marginalized group with an issue that you’ve framed as ridiculous or politically suicidal to disagree with, get public opinion riled up by manipulating their grievances through exploiting their internal prejudices, and make everything an extension of preserving national security. Once you’ve manipulated enough people into giving you extralegal power, simply expand the circle of ‘national security threats’.

In just a few months we’ve watched Trump:

steal the power of the purse and the power to enact tariffs from Congress,

create a precedent for the unconstitutional arrest, detainment, and removal of legal residents and dissenting citizens,

iterate his intentions to restart American expansionism into Canada and Greenland,

Successfully twist the arm of media companies, law firms, and universities into doing his bidding,

And his other executive order directs Dept. Of Homeland Security, DoJ, and DoD to create a plan for implementation of military and national security assets to “prevent crime and protect public safety”.

Welcome to the ‘find out’ stage.

Yeah because everyone deciding on their own code of morals and ethics will surely contribute to social cohesion… :/

I don’t necessarily disagree, but this game is just sooo short-sighted.

Plant-basee alternatives are such a joke to me.Plant based meats and alternative milks are built upon an infrastructure that demands massive resource extraction from third world countries, buttressed by an impoverished underclass that suffers generational trauma to feed the transactional corporate machine. Just don’t eat meat; veggies, fruit, and legumes are all you need.

Full agree. People on here are spouting thinly coded eugenicist ideals and saying bodily autonomy ends when you die and makes you just another vector for resource extraction, but somehow enabling children to be who they want is an uncrossable line.

Your perspective is entirely based on Western views of autonomy and social utility. Diminishing other cultural perspectives on the sanctity of the human body doesn’t make you enlightened, you’re legit just ignorant.

How eugenics of you