• angrystego@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Says Thanos who did nothing wrong. Really though, it’s not rocket science to understand eternal growth is not a viable strategy. It’s also obvious that the number of people on the Earth now is too much if we want them all to live a comfortable life and not to destroy the planet at the same time. How big should the population be to make things ok longterm? That is open to discussion and depends on many factors, so there’s not just one correct answer.

      • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m not advocating for eternal growth. But the malthusians claim the population should be smaller without telling you how smaller or how to reach the objective. It’s candid ideology that’s not very different from eugenics if brought to its logical conclusion. They tell you some will suffer, but they don’t tell you who and how. The answer is of course: some poor schmuck that’s not them.

        And they fail to realize that, even after the population’s been reduced, we’d still suffer from the same issues we’re facing now because population reduction didn’t address the real issue, which is capitalism.