Thank you for this thoughtful and nuanced take on the subject. It’s sad that constructive discussion around population is often shut down due to the link between eugenics and population control. It’s often assumed that anyone advocating for lowered population is in support of similarly dystopian/authoritarian policies, when increasing access to birth control and education has the same effect while increasing personal agency.
I would also note that the theory of evolution has been used to justify all kinds of absurd ideologies, yet we don’t have a problem accepting its basic tenets.
If we accept the fact that humanity is in a state of ecological overshoot, and that overshoot is a function of population x consumption, then it’s entirely reasonable to want to address both sides of the equation.
We don’t need a dozen different plastic tchotchkes delivered to our doorstep the day after we order them. We don’t need 64 GB of RAM for 10,000 steam games we’ll never play in 4k at 60fps. We don’t need to be able to order greasy piles of fast food whenever we want.
To me, blaming overpopulation for the world’s problems always comes across as saying “I don’t want to change my lifestyle, and if there’s 6 billion fewer people, I won’t have to”
Agreed, if we all cut out meat from our diet, land the size of both of the America’s and China are returned to us while still providing the same amount of food. 20% of the entire planets GHG emissions are instantly removed. Humans aren’t a virus, people who refuse to change their lifestyles are.
deleted by creator
Thank you for this thoughtful and nuanced take on the subject. It’s sad that constructive discussion around population is often shut down due to the link between eugenics and population control. It’s often assumed that anyone advocating for lowered population is in support of similarly dystopian/authoritarian policies, when increasing access to birth control and education has the same effect while increasing personal agency.
I would also note that the theory of evolution has been used to justify all kinds of absurd ideologies, yet we don’t have a problem accepting its basic tenets.
If we accept the fact that humanity is in a state of ecological overshoot, and that overshoot is a function of population x consumption, then it’s entirely reasonable to want to address both sides of the equation.
The issue isn’t population, it’s consumption.
We don’t need a dozen different plastic tchotchkes delivered to our doorstep the day after we order them. We don’t need 64 GB of RAM for 10,000 steam games we’ll never play in 4k at 60fps. We don’t need to be able to order greasy piles of fast food whenever we want.
To me, blaming overpopulation for the world’s problems always comes across as saying “I don’t want to change my lifestyle, and if there’s 6 billion fewer people, I won’t have to”
Agreed, if we all cut out meat from our diet, land the size of both of the America’s and China are returned to us while still providing the same amount of food. 20% of the entire planets GHG emissions are instantly removed. Humans aren’t a virus, people who refuse to change their lifestyles are.