this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
366 points (97.4% liked)

News

22852 readers
3910 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think you should get more votes if you DONT have children. And the government should give out free sterilizations, and if you can prove you’re sterilized you get to take paternity leave twice.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not sure if you're trying for eugenics, but it certainly sounds like you are.

Incentivizing sterilization probably means that marginalized groups will preferentially take advantage of it (well-off people can already take long vacations, etc.). So now we have a disproportionately sterile lower class, while the upper class can have kids as they see fit.

Don't get me wrong, overpopulation is a real thing. But e.g. Japan's declining birth rate doesn't seem particularly happy, and I'm not sure government sponsored sterilization bribery is great either...

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

By that argument, the lower rate of reproduction is western countries is eugenics, since it’s a consequence of policy (education).

Actually one of the best things that poor folks can do to escape generational poverty, is to have fewer kids. That way, kids inherit a larger share of their grandparents assets, and more can be passed down. Generational land ownership, for example, is extremely powerful. Fewer children per family also lowers the financial burden of education, enabling better education for comparatively fewer people. That’s not eugenics, it’s smart family planning.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Education is not analogous to eugenics.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Incentivising sterilisation is literally eugenics.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Any policy can disproportionately affect the birth rate of one group vs another. Is improving abortion access eugenics? Is incentivizing having children via the tax code eugenics because those incentives are stronger for some groups compared to others? Is for-profit healthcare eugenics because it makes it more difficult for poor folks to safely have children? Are fossil fuels eugenics because they lead to higher infant mortality in poorer industrial areas?

No, none of those things are eugenics

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago

If you can't see the difference between these things then I can't help you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Antinatalism is the way :)