44
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Dean Spears does not want to alarm you. The co-author of After the Spike: Population, Progress, and the Case for People argues that alarmist words such as crisis or urgent will just detract from the cold, hard numbers, which show that in roughly 60 years, the world population could plummet to a size not seen for centuries. Alarmism might also make people tune out, which means they won’t engage with the culturally fraught project of asking people—that is, women—to have more babies.

Recently, in the United States and other Western countries, having or not having children is sometimes framed as a political affiliation: You’re either in league with conservative pronatalists, or you’re making the ultimate personal sacrifice to reduce your carbon footprint. In this episode of Radio Atlantic, Spears makes the case for more people. He discusses the population spike over human history and the coming decline, and how to gingerly move the population discussion beyond politics.

When republicans are using the same exact language along with christian fascism to justify banning abortion your damn right it's political. People also aren't not having children as some sort of noble self sacrifice you dipshit we can't afford to have kids if we want to. If the population does plummet that much in 60 years it would be because you ghouls are killing us, starving us, and destroying the planet.

I fucking hate Dean Spears so much. Someone should throw him in a swamp in the everglades and film him getting ripped apart by alligators.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] -1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

I said "one of", not "the."

Your comment does not refute my assessment.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 19 hours ago

It is very far down the list of most impactful things one can do and tying one's intelligence to whether they do or do not have children does not sit well with me for a number of reasons.

I beg you to actually try to have a grasp on material conditions and societal coercion before you talk about things you clearly do not understand.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

tying one’s intelligence

Smart and intelligent are not synonyms. Replace "smart" with "wise" if you prefer, which would also reduce ambiguity.

you talk about things you clearly do not understand.

Frankly I find this insulting. I could just as easily say that you are the one who doesn't not understand. But I won't because I'd rather not be inflammatory. I'll just say that we'll have to agree to disagree on this and leave it there. I'm not going to engage on this any further.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 18 hours ago

leave it there.

No I think you should engage with the other posts in this threads that already explained why your thinking is flawed. You instead chose to avoid them and just regurgitate one of the points already critiqued in the comments here.

this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
44 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13929 readers
765 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS