Opinions on anti-natalism

[DontplayGod]

Wondering where people stand on this philosophy here. Antinatilism is basically the thought process that bringing life into this world is bad for those who didn't know

 

[domedune]

I'm an antinatalist, as I am anti-suffering. It's pretty obvious.

 

[SpaceCadet]

In the past i was hardcore about it, but now i'm more towards thinking that only a selective number of people should have children, those who have a really good financial situation and no major genetic diseases, they should pass a strict evaluation process too.

 

[summers]

I got a vasectomy very young because I knew I didn't want kids. It was completely selfish - didn't want to give up my money or freedom. Haven't regretted my decision for a second.

I don't really care if people have kids. They want to ruin their lives, go ahead.

 

[Crazy4u]

In the past i was hardcore about it, but now i'm more towards thinking that only a selective number of people should have children, those who have a really good financial situation and no major genetic diseases, they should pass a strict evaluation process too.

I have the same opinion. Unfortunately, poor people like to have may kids :(

 

[Oblivion Access]

There is no reason to have kids that doesn't boil down to 'I want (or others want me) to'. Seems like a very petty justification for taking the greatest risk possible on someone's behalf and expecting them to be happy with or at least cope with it. That's assuming they don't make an 'oopsie' baby which is fucking beyond words recklessness, especially with all the information we have now.

 

[Tortured_empath]

Disagree

 

[Forever Dead]

I have never had children myself because I did not want to pass down the genes of my faulty brain chemistry that I inherited from my Father, because mental illness is often passed down in families. I also did not want to have children because I did not want to inflict this dreadful world onto an innocent human being. And from what Ive seen, only a very small minority of people have got what it takes to give a child a healthy and loving upbringing. The vast majority of us are " accidents " who often end up screwed up and screwed over by our so-called parents.

 

[Sherri]

I'm an anti natalist, but as a woman with a partner I'm always afraid a "mistake" can happen. I would be devastated and abortion prob on the list.

 

[fox_wannabe]

I'm an antinatalist, as I am anti-suffering. It's pretty obvious.

Omg I love your profile picture so much <3

Antinatalism is valid not only because it stops cycle of suffering, but also It is valid for ecology and sustainability reasons. We just have too many people consuming too much of resources. Normies will deny It but we cannot go on like this while having rising population.

 

[Squalo]

this planet is too small for 8 billion people, I would make laws to prevent people from having children because we have become a virus, this planet is sick and needs to breathe.

 

[whatevs]

this planet is too small for 8 billion people, I would make laws to prevent people from having children because we have become a virus, this planet is sick and needs to breathe.

The only thing you would need would be to require them to show they know/understand something about literature, philosophy, science, history and then pass an empathy and care test. This examination would cull the breeding candidates considerably.

Disagree

But can you explain why?

 

[deathLiberation]

The Elite loves this narrative.

Take a look at China, the best 2 tier society.
Rich people, less kids, better conditions.
Poor people, more kids, worse conditions.

Guess who is living off who.

Humans killed so many species of animals that are now extinct, that i think it´s only fair, humans kill themselves to extinction. Not having kids will help.

 

[.............]

I used to not mind if other wish to bring life into the world but now I'm not into the thought. The earth is dying at an increasingly rapid rate, and there are already so many children around the world stuck in orphanages and the like. I wish some people would stop trying to have kids and just adopt at this point. Like, seriously.

 

[fox_wannabe]

Humans killed so many species of animals that are now extinct, that i think it´s only fair, humans kill themselves to extinction. Not having kids will help.

I think not having kids will actually avert collapse. If we rapidly or slowly lower population in non violent means we might achieve some level of sustainability. On the other hand creating vast population bubble with less and less resources would cause massive unrest and possible systemic failure with huge die off as a result. Besides the consumption rate is so huge we might not be able to asses when did we run out and how of possible critical resource. It might be oil, uranium, rare earth metals, or maybe fresh water or soil nutrients. With rising population the collapse will be sharper and more violent.

 

[Foresight]

100% onboard

 

[FuneralCry]

I believe that it is never a good thing to bring someone into this world, life is completely unnecessary and if you never exist you never suffer. We were all perfectly fine not existing until we were forced to live. Life is just a pointless experience that we go through for the sake of it. The amount of pain and suffering in this world is horrifying to think about.

 

[milly]

Definitely on board, however as a suicidal person am obviously jaundiced. Life is so sour so how could I ever think different?
Ironically before I became suicidal I still never embraced the idea of reproduction. I loved kids so I naturally planned to adopt one. But not anymore - not enough energy to care for one now.

 

[Blondi]

Personally , I will never have children because I am a poor person with a health problems and a weak moral character.
I also believe that an unfortunates like me
Shouldn't have children as well.
However , if some rich , healthy , good looking
and of the strongest moral
character Ubermensch wanted to have kids , I would have no problem with that.

 

[WonderingSoul]

I am an antinatalist for a few reasons. I don't think people should keep having children in a world like this where inflation is rising and things begin to become even more pricey. People don't realize that the elites, the hidden people in power, are using people giving birth to their advantage. They want everyone they see lower as them to do all the dirty work for them, while they stay rich. People also shouldn't have children because there are so many idiots that have no idea how to take care of their children. They just have them for the sake of having them and then complain about how awful life is with their child even though they know it is their responsibility. Some people have children because they want mini slaves to do their work for them, and have someone to abuse and project their unhealthy shit, most likely because its been done to them. I believe most parents do it on purpose, while there are some who aren't aware of their actions. The act of not having children can end the cycle of trauma and abuse that seems never-ending in todays world and I'd think it be best if the amount of child births is reduced.

 

[Red Scare]

but now i'm more towards thinking that only a selective number of people should have children, those who have a really good financial situation and no major genetic diseases, they should pass a strict evaluation process too.

So you're basically like a nazi or something?

The only thing you would need would be to require them to show they know/understand something about literature, philosophy, science, history and then pass an empathy and care test. This examination would cull the breeding candidates considerably.

Yeah, kind of like what the nazis wanted.

Personally , I will never have children because I am a poor person with a health problems and a weak moral character.
I also believe that an unfortunates like me
Shouldn't have children as well.
However , if some rich , healthy , good looking
and of the strongest moral
character Ubermensch wanted to have kids , I would have no problem with that.

Oof, this guy actually said it.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

On the one hand, it seems like a really good thing on paper but the reality is not enough people are going to accept antinatalism for it to properly take effect and even if they do, it could potentially just lead to all of the people smart enough to realize they shouldn't be having children to get outnumbered by the people who aren't fit to be raising children and already making the world a worse place which could probably just make the cycle worse and worse.

When it comes to antinatalism I also think a lot about that movie Children of Men where the premise was children had literally no longer been born for over 18 years and the world was somehow even more of a shithole as a result. Why? How is this even possible under the glorious tenets of antinatalism? I think maybe it's because some people with their tiny lizard brains will always feel the need to breed. I'm not condoning it even though I'd probably fall prey to the urge myself, but I think nobody should ever be forced to have or not to have children.

 

[SpaceCadet]

so you're basically like a nazi or something?

So kind of like what the nazis wanted.

Weren't you the one who had a communist symble profile picture? A regime who killed millions?

 

[Red Scare]

this planet is too small for 8 billion people, I would make laws to prevent people from having children because we have become a virus, this planet is sick and needs to breathe.

That's not true at all, the problem is not over population it is a gross mismanagement of resources and a massive inequality gap.

There are enough resources on this planet and in the solar system that every single human being could enjoy a high quality of life, we could be living in the kind of technological wonder world of Star Trek next generation with automation and food growing basically everywhere, even cultured meat in labs, but that would require massive change and the whole human race to come together and work for common goals, and that's just not going to happen so yeah probably best not to have kids and just let us die in our eventual nuclear oblivion because people are too stupid to stop fighting one another.

Everyone here saying life is shitty so we should kill ourselves and stop having kids to just end the existence of humanity, because of a few bad people who have to ruin this world, and everything good for everyone else, and they don't even think they are doing it; the Bezos' and the musks' of the world. Not to mention the Epstein's, and Weinstein's, the Trump's and pelosi's, the various monarchies which refuse to die, cartels who exploit the weak and vulnerable...

What we need is universal healthcare, and housing, and etc... but no let's just all kill ourselves. That's what capitalists want. Because as automation takes over, they won't need a surplus population of poor workers anymore.

Weren't you the one who had a communist symble profile picture? A regime who killed millions?

What is your source that they killed millions, and how did they die?

They provided healthcare to all their citizens, and housing, and college was free, people did not have to pay for telephone, and electricity, and other utilities, they were all publicly owned... if you can't see the difference between that and endorsing eugenics, and social Darwinism, I don't know what to say

 

[SpaceCadet]

What is your source that they killed millions, and how did they die?

They provided healthcare to all their citizens, and housing, and college was free, people did not have to pay for telephone, and electricity, and other utilities, they were all publicly owned... if you can't see the difference between that and endorsing eugenics, and social Darwinism, I don't know what to say

Dictators like Stalin and Lenin killed many innocent people just because they were political opponents.

Mass killings under communist regimes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And please, don't call me a nazi, especially when you support this kind of regime, you're very rude.

 

[WrongPlaceWrongTime]

The absence of pain is a net positive, the absence of pleasure is neither good or bad.

 

[fox_wannabe]

So you're basically like a nazi or something?

Nah, those kids will be just much better off. You suffer less with better genes and status.

 

[Red Scare]

Dictators like Stalin and Lenin killed many innocent people just because they were political opponents.

How many? The Wikipedia article doesn't say, it contains wildly different and at times contradicting claims of an exact death toll, and contains no actual evidence which allows one to reasonably conclude just how many people died, or how. This is what it has to say regarding sources:

According to professor of history Klas-Göran Karlsson, discussion of the number of victims of communist regimes has been "extremely extensive and ideologically biased [...] Scholars have criticized the estimates for relying on émigre sources, hearsay, and rumor as evidence, and cautioned that historians should instead utilize archive material. Such scholars distinguish between historians who base their research on archive materials, and those whose estimates are based on witnesses evidence and other data that is unreliable. The press has continued to include serious errors that should not be cited, or relied on, in academia.

The article then goes on to use several estimates, but none of them has any evidence to back them up. The article itself clears this up:

the estimates are based on sparse and incomplete data when significant errors are inevitable, the figures are skewed to higher possible values, and victims of civil wars, famines, and wars involving communist governments should not be counted. Criticism of these estimates has focused on choice of data sources and his statistical approach. Historical based on these figures can rarely serve as sources of reliable estimates.

It goes on to conclude:

our understanding of the scale and the nature of Soviet repression has been extremely poor" and that some scholars who wish to maintain pre-1991 high estimates are "finding it difficult to adapt to the new circumstances when the archives are open and when there are plenty of irrefutable data", and instead "hang on to their old unreliable methods with round-about calculations based on odd statements from emigres and supposed eye witnesses.

So how many people died? The article doesn't contain a reliable figure, backed up with evidence. It contains a number of unreliable estimates from biased and anti-communist writers who include things like famine, and war, but contain no evidence of any program of genocide or mass murder carried out by Stalin or the ussr.

And please, don't call me a nazi, especially when you support this kind of regime, you're very rude.

I did not say I support any "regime". Go through my post history and point out where I said I support any kind of regime. You can't, because I didn't. But you right here in this thread did endorse eugenics, and social Darwinism.

I think you are a hypocrite. If you were to go about tallying up the number of deaths attributable to capitalism, and include every famine, ever war, every political dissident killed, or enemy combatant, the number would more than dwarf the higher estimates of deaths ascribed to communism every couple of decades. If you consider the amount of people starving to death inc capitalist countries, just every few years, despite a surplus of food that just gets thrown away, or the number of deaths caused by easily preventable or curable illness because people can not afford medical care, the number would easily reach the hundreds of millions. And that is not by lying and twisting the numbers as anti-communists do, but in fact the data actually supports this. 8 million people die from starvation ever year alone. That means the number of dead people who die because of capitalism easily approaches 100 million every ten years or so.

Nah, those kids will be just much better off. You suffer less with better genes and status.

That's what the nazis thought. Even though there has never been any scientific data to support social darwinism.

You know what would make them suffer less, regardless of genes? Universal healthcare, and universal education, free public housing, etc....

 

[DontplayGod]

That's not true at all, the problem is not over population it is a gross mismanagement of resources and a massive inequality gap.

There are enough resources on this planet and in the solar system that every single human being could enjoy a high quality of life, we could be living in the kind of technological wonder world of Star Trek next generation with automation and food growing basically everywhere, even cultured meat in labs, but that would require massive change and the whole human race to come together and work for common goals, and that's just not going to happen so yeah probably best not to have kids and just let us die in our eventual nuclear oblivion because people are too stupid to stop fighting one another.

Everyone here saying life is shitty so we should kill ourselves and stop having kids to just end the existence of humanity, because of a few bad people who have to ruin this world, and everything good for everyone else, and they don't even think they are doing it; the Bezos' and the musks' of the world. Not to mention the Epstein's, and Weinstein's, the Trump's and pelosi's, the various monarchies which refuse to die, cartels who exploit the weak and vulnerable...

What we need is universal healthcare, and housing, and etc... but no let's just all kill ourselves. That's what capitalists want. Because as automation takes over, they won't need a surplus population of poor workers anymore.

What is your source that they killed millions, and how did they die?

They provided healthcare to all their citizens, and housing, and college was free, people did not have to pay for telephone, and electricity, and other utilities, they were all publicly owned... if you can't see the difference between that and endorsing eugenics, and social Darwinism, I don't know what to say

A few bad people? I'd say about 90% of people do evil things that hurts this world when put into power, if there's a few of anything it would be decent human beings.

 

[Arrow]

Used to be antinatalist. I still have no interest in having children myself (just because it'd be too much work for not enough reward), but I thought about the position a bit and it just doesn't really make sense when you take a step back and look at it.

Antinatalists tend to say things like "children can't consent to being born", but societally we don't believe they can consent to much of anything, and we allow parents to make decisions for their kids if the parents think it's in the child's interest, so saying parents shouldn't make the choice for their child to exist seems kind of arbitrary.

The rebuttal to might be, "well, life is full of suffering, and if parents didn't have kids the kids wouldn't ever have to suffer." and thats true, but most people value the parts of life that are not suffering OVER the suffering parts. i mean, most people get through their lives and are motivated daily to do things that further their existence/happiness. if the suffering were more valuable than the enjoyment wouldn't most people be killing themselves?

and to add onto that, i have trouble agreeing with the idea that since life is full of suffering or MOSTLY suffering, that life on the whole becomes something to avoid creating/propagating. why is it necessarily better that living and dealing with suffering in order to find something enjoyable is worse than avoiding all pain and not existing entirely?

i understand and empathize with the antinatalist position but when i look closely at it it just seems like a hard buy. generally it seems like living things are interested in continuing to live when created so i have trouble accepting that it's better for life (human ones specifically) to not be continued to be created.