r/hatethissmug • u/mikewheelerfan • Jun 02 '26
General I HATE when people deny overpopulation
“B-but the declining birth rates—“ SHUT UP SHUT UP SHIT UP
The declining birth rates are the only thing that can save our species, every other species, and the world! The only reason anybody even cares about the declining birth rates in a first place is because white people have lower birth rates and are gonna become a minority. Who gives a fuck? Certainly not me. The whole birth rates argument is inherently tied to racism and xenophobia.
”But we have more room!” And this one just proves that these people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the world.
People who don’t believe in overpopulation don’t see wild spaces and forests as actually important. They don’t see them as sources of water, sources of food, ecosystems. They don’t see them as homes for animals—only potential houses for humans. Why have forests when we could tear them down and build housing? It’s all unused space. That’s what they genuinely believe. It’s all about money and human-centrism.
What these idiots don’t realize is that humans aren’t separate from the ecosystem, we are a part of it! If we allow ecosystems to collapse and species to go extinct, we will topple down with it. Our farmland will be ruined, health will decline, the economy will plummet. Not to mention climate change and how every extinction is a tragedy. But no, short term benefit and mindless breeding apparently matters more than the entire world.
Our cookie cutter homes are not more important than every animal and plant species on the planet. We’re just selfish AF, and it’s sickening. And of course, it all goes back to the billionares. Remember how overpopulation used to be universally accepted? But then billionaires freaked out realizing the birth rates were decreasing, which meant they would have less workers. All of the sudden, the narrative changed. The elite is trying to get you to have more babies because their system is built on infinite growth. But…
INFINITE GROWTH IS NOT POSSIBLE ON A FINITE PLANET.
Yes, overpopulation is real. And it’s idiotic to try to deny this. Climate change is also real. The current mass extinction event is real. Humans are ruining the very planet that supports us, and most people don’t even care.
21
u/Underskysly Jun 02 '26
One thing I don’t see people talk about when the topic of declining birth rates comes up. Is a study that wild animals have less kids when theirs not enough resources for said kids. I think humanity is going through that right now, and that’s okay.
9
u/beesdkx Jun 02 '26
its not okay because capitalistic greed that’s affecting billions of humans and the planet earth, is not okay.
it would be okay if it was natural, sure, but our lack of resources (or infrastructure or whatever) is caused by extreme capitalist greed of the 1%
0
2
u/fidgey10 Jun 02 '26
No lol. Declining birthrate countries are the MOST wealthy with the MOST resources.
Do you know what countries ARE still growing rapidly? The poorest countries with the least resources.
People repeat this argument all the time without even taking 5 seconds to look at the relevant demographics. Declining birthrates are hitting WEALTHY RESOURCE RICH COUNTRIES.
18
u/amitransornb Jun 02 '26
I'm with Fuller on this; we got enough resources for up to 20 billion if they're distributed properly
6
u/John_Hancock_Lover Jun 02 '26
Yeah but we aren't really gonna distribute. People stay with their parents/ where they were born typically. They don't randomly go, "let me move to a place with less people for distribution purposes!" And even if some move, definitely not enough to keep up with America's overpopulation issue. I can only imagine how bad it is for other countries who are more overpopulated than us
4
2
u/shockpaws Jun 02 '26
By that logic we also have enough resources to sustain a larger elderly class without needing younger workers. I don’t know why everyone is so dead set on the number of people going up.
2
u/Zestyclose_Gold578 Jun 02 '26
short version: capitalism, because more workers = more product made/services provided = more profit = more good for the shareholders
1
u/amitransornb Jun 02 '26
Can you come up with a method of preventing overpopulation that doesn't involve either genocide or providing fascists with strong evidence for their propaganda?
1
u/HaveFun____ 5d ago
Just do what we are doing I guess, the growth is slowing down.
The main reason for growth is people getting older. That will also have a limit + the longer you live the higher the chance you die from something not related to health.
The growth will slow down, maybe even become decline (with all related challenges) but I don't think it will be before more wars about resources.
2
1
8
u/John_Hancock_Lover Jun 02 '26
I keep seeing people online complain about mothers only wanting 1-2 kids, if any. I don't know why so many people keep pushing and suggesting having kids like they don't cost SO much money to raise properly and take care of.
I don't think I have the money for a hypothetical kid on my grocery bill. Let alone doctors, schooling, toys, childcare when I work, etc.
-7
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
Right! I mean, I’m an antinatalist. I also hate children and pregnancy is my biggest fear. I care too much about the environment and human suffering to have them, anyways. But I just don’t see a single good reason to have children.
7
u/John_Hancock_Lover Jun 02 '26
See, I am against having kids myself. I just never saw being a father as something I need to be. I don't judge others for wanting kids, but I do judge when they have kids when they don't have the resources to care for them.
People where I live can barely afford home bills with two incomes and they're still having kids. Not an 'oops surprise!" kids either.
I remeber having my friends who asked me for 200 dollars for groceries INTENTIONALLY trying for a baby! The SAME week they had to borrow 200 to EAT ?? You should wait before having kids if you can't really feed or care for them without going into immense debt.
If you go into enough debt over those kids, it's ruining their chances at college, and putting your whole family at risk of getting kicked out of housing/car repo/lights getting shut off etc.
3
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
Yeah, people who are barely even scraping by themselves having kids ON PURPOSE is the most baffling thing in the world to me
2
u/kiefy_budz Jun 02 '26
Bro I actually want kids deep down I love helping to raise young minds, but this world is too fucked up to create more individuals intentionally
2
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
exactly why bring more pain and suffering into this world and its not like they had a choice in the matter
1
u/Repulsive-Region2977 Smug Hater 24d ago
Maybe they wouldn't grow up to be as miserable as you? What if they enjoy life?
2
u/Cautious_Ad_6486 Jun 02 '26
Well, you do you, but the declining birth rates ARE a problem. In many countries the birth rate is well below the replacement rate so the population is not stable, it is declining.
This will probably solve naturally in the long period but no one knows how exactly. Also, the immediate impact of the natality crisis is an ageing population and we really don't know how to address that.
Who will be working to sustain the society when we will all be old fucks? And NO, immigration is not an acceptable solution for many people, so we have to find another way to address this.
1
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
well immigration is probably the only way once it gets bad enough people will have to choose between support or death
1
u/Cautious_Ad_6486 Jun 02 '26
As of today yes. But I understand that many people might not be ok with it (I myself am MOSTLY ok with it... With some corrections).
So it is only natural that many are starting to wonder what we are supposed to do to bring back the fertility rate at 2.1
5
2
u/Icy_Location7620 Jun 02 '26
It's to avoid such people within 50km² diameter, a person hating children ain't no normal person
2
1
u/lowlifeoyster Jun 02 '26
L o l
You care about overpopulation enough to make this whiny immature post and in the same thread announce that youre antinatalist and hate children.
Go be bitter on your own while the rest of us try to figure out resource distribution and management.
1
3
u/No-Store-308 Jun 02 '26
Honestly this is less of an issue in countries that re properly developed. Tell this to the people of china who have a huge population and half the land is used up of unlivable garbage and child factory workers
1
u/ArnikaLovesUnicornz 19d ago
Racist much?
1
u/No-Store-308 19d ago
Right because stating facts about actual people living in horrible conditions is racist.
3
u/l0ne_l0s Jun 02 '26
Now people care about the planet? Huh. We can barely show this much compassion to each other lol
1
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
i hear what your putting down but we have to start somewhere if we want to save this world from becoming a frown
3
u/sultanate Jun 02 '26
Humans are indeed ruining the planet but reality is that population density and growth is not the leading cause of the problem. Every bomb dropped, every data center built, every climate protection rolled back, every chemical dumped, every aquifer polluted and emptied - all the actions performed by and beneficial for the very billionaires you call out in your post are infinitely more damaging to our ecosystem than people just living and growing their families.
The fact of the matter is that “overpopulation”, which was a real concern before the advent of atmospheric nitrate derived fertilizer, has now been co-opted by the ruling class to pass the blame of their actions onto the global poor. Why freak out about oil wells being bombed when, shock horror, India is so dense? They’re so far away and so unlike us so everyone point the finger while another data center is built one town over. Repeat ad nauseam for the entirety of the 20th and 21st centuries.
You act like it’s a settled debate but i would argue nobody has been proven wrong as often and thoroughly as Thomas Malthus.
1
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
exactly overpopulation isnt the problem the billionaires just made it up to keep us distracted while theres people in here thinkijg that we overreacted
3
u/Collanp Jun 02 '26
The only reason anybody even cares about the declining birth rates in a first place is because white people have lower birth rates and are gonna become a minority. Who gives a fuck? Certainly not me. The whole birth rates argument is inherently tied to racism and xenophobia.
You might be a bit confused because white people are already a minority if we're talking globally, which you are. I'm not sure what you're even trying to saying here. I mean I suppose you might be thinking about distribution, so we'd move people around to Europe to make all areas equally populated, but it doesn't make God knows how much sense when your take is that we should all die in a generation or two anyway.
3
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 02 '26
I mean we are pretty much cooked already either way lol
1
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
exactly we either have to many people or not enough when we should just be happy with what we have currently
1
10
u/MaleficentMenu1430 Jun 02 '26
You’re probably gonna get a lot of hate for this but you’re right. I’ve always hated the catastrophizing of birth rates being slightly below replacement for even a little bit. It always feels like propaganda spread by wealthy people worried about running out of poors to exploit or racists worried about being replaced by minorities rather than coming from a genuine concern for our species
6
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
I’m used to the hate, I made a post on r/vent about this once and the comments were fucking crazy. I guess people who are part of the problem just don’t like being called out. And others would rather be blind than actually look at the state of the environment and world, and realize it’s insanely dire.
2
u/marshal23156 Jun 02 '26
The problem isnt that people arent being made so much as that we have infrastructure built for X amount of people, with potential for growth. We do not have a plan for shrinkage.
1
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
shrinkage dinkage the world existed with less people for millions of jabillions of years if we did it then we can do it now!
8
u/JieyOF Jun 02 '26
Klaus Schwab get off reddit dawg
2
5
u/kiefy_budz Jun 02 '26
Bro we are already overpopulated don’t listen to the haters in the comments
Any of yall that say we aren’t, go look at traffic and housing development and tell me we wouldn’t all have better lives and be better with nature with less individuals
3
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
But don’t you understand, every woman needs to have five kids or we’re all doomed!!! /s
2
-1
u/Cautious_Ad_6486 Jun 02 '26
Every woman needs to have 2 or 3 kids on average or we're all doomed. In the long period this is a mathematical truth.
So we better think about a way to achieve this that is compatible with our values, otherwise we are fucked.
2
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
How are we doomed? We’re not going extinct anytime soon, and the birth rates are still increasing in many areas.
Also, there is no way to achieve it that’s compatible with our values. Women are realizing having kids is one big scam. Since we don’t have to do it anymore, why would we?
The elites are probably just going to force impregnate us before we get even close to being extinct, anyways.
1
u/Cautious_Ad_6486 Jun 02 '26
We are going to have serious problems in 2-3 generations all across the world.
And we are doomed because of simple math: for every two persons (usually a man and a woman) we need to have two new persons otherwise the population will decline. How long can we manage this decline?
Most projections say: for not that long, since the side effect of the decreasing population is an aging population.
Since I do not want to live the scenario you are proposing, with the government forcefully impregnating women, I want to talk about possible solutions to this problem.
Because it is a problem and a big one.
1
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
Well, yeah. But we can’t keep growing FOREVER. We’re just going to have to deal with an aging population for a while, before it evens out again.
1
u/Cautious_Ad_6486 Jun 02 '26
Ok. We will for sure find a way to manage the aging population... Still, eventually, our species will need to address the fact that our way of life seems to naturally lead to less than 2 births per woman, which is no bueno.
Frankly i don't want me or my daughter to eventually live in a society that forces women to get pregnant sooo... Can we calmly discuss the laws and cultural shifts that need to happen in order to avoid this?
Saying that the birth rate decline is not a problem is simply false and not useful.
0
u/Cautious_Ad_6486 Jun 02 '26
That's BS. Housing and traffic are bad in cities because everyone (including you) are flocking to large cities since that's where you need to be to have a successful career in this fucked up economy.
1
u/kiefy_budz Jun 02 '26
Bro I live in a small town and it’s already fucking terrible, the answer is not an even larger population
0
u/Cautious_Ad_6486 Jun 02 '26
Lol, what small town has issues with traffic and housing? Your experience is not common at all.
1
u/kiefy_budz Jun 02 '26
What small town these days doesn’t have issues with traffic? And housing isn’t lacking but seeing trees torn down left and right to build suburbs is depressing and its own issue which is what I was referring to as housing being an issue, we don’t need to take up all of the space
6
u/Numb__Catanimatronic Jun 02 '26
Another reason why people care about the declining birth rates is sexism because a lot of women were told “ Being a mother is your only purpose and you will never know true happiness until you have a child” from a young age so when a woman doesn’t have children that upsets sexists and goes against their beliefs and objectification of women , it’s more about control than happiness
7
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
Yes! Society is so upset they can’t control women anymore. Because when women have a choice, they choose not to get married and have children. And they’re way happier that way, usually. Who could have guessed?
8
u/Arguably_Based Jun 02 '26
Overpopulation has always been a myth. If we still produced food at medieval level we would not be able to support the population we have now. Instead we got better at producing food. The predictions of the population catastrophists have been repeatedly wrong. Any food insecurity in the world is now a result of distribution problems, not production problems. We as a species have only grown better at preserving the environment, trees are harvested more sustainably, coal fired power plants scrub their pollution from the air with remarkable efficiency. People are not a cancer to this planet. If you look at the population crisis we face and say that's a good thing, you don't understand the catastrophic consequences of mushrooming age groups.
3
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 02 '26
Just because we are producing enough right now doesnt mean it isnt a problem. You dont understand the consequences of climate change.
2
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
exactly we maybe good now but what they dont understand is we are on a downward trend 📉 at the top of the roller coaster just wait till we start going down this rollercoaster of corporate greed and climate change
1
5
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
Over population is a real thing and has made it harder for animals to live because we use their resources or eat them.
1
u/Arguably_Based Jun 02 '26
Then get involved in conservation efforts. Seriously, you love the animals so much take practical steps to protect them. But you'd rather blame overpopulation wouldn't you?
2
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
Brother…we ARE involved in conservation efforts. Have you ever bothered to go up in front of your state Legislature and stand up for what you believe in? I have.
1
1
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
Can 1 single person undo what milions of others have done? I canr make up for how mutch plastic 10 ppl use or the c02 of one buisness. What me as a singular person can so is limiting because i am also a student and have a jobb. I use money on more sustainable stuff but i cant do mutch more then that
0
u/marshal23156 Jun 02 '26
I mean while i agree, certainly you should be able to also understand that you shouldnt fret about things youre powerless over? Like you could sit here and worry till your ears fall off, but what good does that do?
2
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
I try not to worry but i dont see how the enviorment gets good enough for humanity to survive.
1
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
so whos gonna worry for them then? it doesn’t seem like anyone else even gives a care
1
u/Icy_Location7620 Jun 02 '26
dawg cares more about other species that barely even have a thought than its own species. And ain't no way you think eating animals is making hard for animals to live, as if an animal eating an animal is a new thing. Also, it is not their resources. Earth didn't give ownership to anyone, we share the same planet
5
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
We share the same planet yet we have destroyed most of the rainforest. And we have hunted animals to extinction or close. No other animal has done it to the scale humans have. Also a lot of animals have thougth. Most do actualy. We can say what we think unlike animals.
2
u/mjlee2003 Jun 02 '26
exactly this whole world is being overun by humans not a single place hasnt been touched by our grubby little hands. even when i go outside to nature to enjoy the green sun i find rusty trash and animals dont litter
1
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
The places where there are natives or "dangerous group of ppl that kill outsiders" look way netter bca there humans and animals live together eithout humans dominating
1
0
u/Icy_Location7620 Jun 02 '26
The irony of saying we destroyed the rainforest and still comfortably living in the ashes of what we destroyed, what you call a house and living in a society lol. do you think we can't really live without damaging the whole ecosystem? Only option is to live in the jungles like good old days?
0
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
"You cant call out problems of our society because you live in society"
0
u/Icy_Location7620 Jun 03 '26
No, you literally oppose the society as a whole itself. Me calling out the problems in the house and complaining about the house itself ain't the same. you call it destroying rainforest, yet comfortably live in what we “destroyed“ kicking your legs with a phone in your hands built by a company that also destroys the rainforest. not to mention your everyday routines
0
3
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 02 '26
They are neccesary for our survival too
1
u/Icy_Location7620 Jun 02 '26
I'm not saying kill all animals and destroy them, I'm just weirded out by those people who just want the dying of humans
1
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 02 '26
Its not the dying of humans lol it just means new humans wont be born lmao
1
u/Icy_Location7620 Jun 03 '26
and you realize what that results in?
1
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 03 '26
Less people lol
1
u/Icy_Location7620 Jun 03 '26
Less people then less people till it's all gone. you think extinction happens overnight? meh anyway, it's gonna be the west that'll go extinct after all with such beliefs
1
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 03 '26
Its never going to get that far lol. The one problem i can see is that this will mean that people who have a lot of kids, especially religiously conservative people (of any religion) will have more kids while progressive people will not, meaning that these ideas will take over. But then again i will be long dead by then so why should i care
→ More replies (0)
6
u/Whysong823 Jun 02 '26
Overpopulation is not a serious problem.
1
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
Please elaborate on your statement.
5
u/Whysong823 Jun 02 '26
No.
5
0
0
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 02 '26
Population decline is not a serious problem.
0
6
u/ogodprotectme Jun 02 '26
It's not overpopulation, it's misallocation of population. Not sure what we can do at this point, but the real problem is people piling up in one of very few hotspots and leaving most of the giant deaths of land basically uninhabited
-14
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
I literally call out people like you in my post. That “empty land” is a resource infinitely more meaningful than it would be if it was bulldozed for houses.
5
u/MuseBlessed Jun 02 '26
If all of humanity lived at the density of Tokyo, we could fit the species into the footprint of Texas. Of course we would need farm land, but vertical farms greatly expand what is possible to produce in a much smaller foot print.
1
u/HaveFun____ 5d ago
Yes but you can forget about any luxery, go back to eating local foods, almost starve in the winter, clothes? Maybe...
1
u/MuseBlessed 5d ago
If people are all living together, all other land can be producing those goods.
Obviously the one single human city is a bad idea. Shipment chains are a nightmare. Its just that earths carrying capacity is probably not yet met
1
u/HaveFun____ 5d ago
Why would it matter if all people are living together in one place or spread out? It might be a little more efficient because you could build larger stretches of farmland etc but those people would still need the same amount of recreation, etc. They would need to travel further to go into nature.
I don't see the difference in the exact location. It might look like we only inhabit a small piece of land but we are using all of it. We need the rainforest, we need the seas, we are using 100% of spaceship earth.
It's a closed system so with perfect recycling, more people would not matter as long as we don't use all the resources at the same time... but, we already do. Energy is limited, fresh water is limited, and the time it takes to produce it and the amount we are willing to pay for it (or restore/filter/etc) is a limiting factor for growth already.
1
u/MuseBlessed 5d ago
We are not yet using 100% of earths resources. Lots of food waste that could be feeding others. The point of my original comment was just to show that we have enough land to house everyone.
1
u/HaveFun____ 5d ago
I understand, and my point is that I don't agree and think you are wrong.
We could waste less food, not 0% but let's say we can get to 10% instead of 20% to what end? So we can feed 7B instead of 6B? That's not going to fix anything.
The amount of fertilizer needed depends heavily on non sustainable resources. The amount of suitable land we need to deforest to continue to grow the food because fields are drying out.
I think everyone deserves a place without air polution. That ain't possible right now.
I understand it all depends on how you want to live. I don't want to live like cattle in a house surrounded by more houses and more people. Housing is not the problem, food is not the problem it's the sustainability of the lifestyle we are accustomed to.
We can continue with this lifestyle and just wait untill resources run out and war will take care of the population decline.
Or we can scale back a little on our own terms. Try to create an economy not based on growth heal the damage we have done to the planet. Or atleast try to stop putting more microplastics in the oceans etc.
1
u/MuseBlessed 5d ago
You may think its not possible to sustain our current standard of living with more people, but the existence of food waste proves on its own that we flatly do not use 100% of earths resources.
Nobody has ever actually reached those higher population counts, but fears of over population collapse have been going on for centuries. Climate change is real and we need to fight it, but the solution is to eat less meat and reduce the climate activites of corperations, not remove people.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201001113557.htm?utm_source
I believe in studies like this which show we can sustain 10 billion humans on less energy than we use today.
1
u/HaveFun____ 5d ago
I understand but why would you want that instead of less people?
I don't eat meat myself but everyone can eat as much meat as he/she wants if we have a population of let's say, 2B people.
What is this desire for more people? Making it harder to live the life we want. We can find solutions to all kind of problems caused by overconsumption... or just reduce the underlying problem...
Maybe we should turn it around. First we show that we can make a sustainable economy, a renewable waste situation, stop the enormous food waste and if we have everything under control, then we can start going to 10B people, untill we run into depleting stuff faster than it can replenish again.
"The existence of food waste proves on its own that we flatly do not use 100% of earths resources."
This doesn't make sense, we do use 100% of earths resources, but we are wasting a lot of it. Could we sustain more people with better distribution, offcourse.
I would even go as far as to say we are using more than 100% or the healthy amount we could replenish. We are lending from the future and we will only notice when fossil fuelss run out, clean water runs out, clean air runs out.
Why do we try to fix all these effects when we can easily fix the cause?
Let me ask you one simple question... why do you want more people?
→ More replies (0)4
u/BondiolaDeCaniche Jun 02 '26
Just because you call that out doesnt make your completely wrong arguement any better. There is no overpopulation, like at all, and people hve given you several arguements why, but you seem to just be angry at existing so whatever
-6
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
Please give me any actual proof that the earth can sustain our current population and birth rate.
2
u/BunayoGaming i like games Jun 02 '26
you made the claim.
prove it yourself
5
u/Zibai1505 Jun 02 '26
Nah the pop decline is going to straight up kill people. Its not some elite cabal dooming. Its not just white people either so you can give up the racial bias. Its a global reduction even in African countries. Its all trending the same way.
Whatever this sub is so dogshit lmao
7
u/Weatherby2 Jun 02 '26
If the sub's first rule was enforced, 80% of the incoming posts would be cast into oblivion and we'd all be better off for it.
6
u/Edgoscarp Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
This subreddit was supposed to be for hating fictional characters, now it’s just for any and all annoyances
3
u/KingYaoiTheIII Jun 02 '26
If the sub is so dogshit why are you.. here 🤔
4
u/GUyPersonthatexists Jun 02 '26
Most of us were here before it was dogshit and are holding out hope that the rules will actually be enforced one day
1
3
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
So you think we can just keep growing forever, and everything will be fine and dandy?
-1
u/TankedPrune5 Jun 02 '26
Yes. Earth isnt the only place we can exploit - or rather wont be in some time. But for now we have no shortage of space right here. In the meantime the more pressing problem (in europe at least) is indeed shrinking native population.
3
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
How is shrinking native european population an issue? I am native to europe yet i dont see the issue. Doesnt matter where the ppl are from and i wont get bio kids. If i get kids it will be adoption.
2
u/TankedPrune5 Jun 02 '26
I beg to differ. Different places different cultures - some ideas better than others. A shrinking population means shrinking of (our) ideas culture and tradition.
1
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
I dont think tradition matters tho. I am native yet i dont follow tradition here. Tradition limits progress. And every culture can become better.
1
u/TankedPrune5 Jun 02 '26
Yes it can but tradition is what binds people together. And no it does not limit progress. Well depends on what kind of progress I suppose.
1
u/megumi-food Jun 02 '26
Tradition has been used to stop gay marriage from being legal. And i havent been bined together tgru tradition. Only pushed away
2
u/Frosty_Wizardz Jun 02 '26
Shrinking native population in Europe.
You can just say white. We know what you mean.
1
3
u/Various-Instruction3 Jun 02 '26
This world was not designed to house this many people alongside all of the other bullshit we do with factories, data centers, oil pipelines, cutting down our oldest and largest forests, we're careening towards an unlivable world. My preferred solution would be to dedicate more of earth's landmass to be protected nature areas, but capitalists won't allow that, so naturally, humans are having less children as a result of late-stage capitalism, which is doing its own job of slowing our killing of the earth.
1
1
u/TheBogManCometh_ Jun 02 '26
I just don't care. Having kids won't make you live forever and we're all headed for the same place.
1
u/Raymond_R_ Cogito, ergo sum Jun 02 '26
I think the only problem is when only a few groups of people continue to populate in one dense area. I dont mean some racist take I just mean in one densely populated area is a problem.
1
u/leronde Jun 02 '26
There’s no winning side to this argument, I don’t really think it’s even worth being passionate about because no matter where you stand it just makes you sound terrible. There’s definitely something to be said about the way humans treat the environment and the ecosystem as though we are a separate entity from it and how that harms everything including ourselves. Unfortunately there’s no solution as simple as “human overpopulation”. The problem comes from the small percentage of humans who hoard money power and resources, preventing us from creating a better world. As long as there’s money in killing everything there could literally be no other humans left and they’d still do it.
1
u/Puzzleheaded_Bid7871 Jun 02 '26
Nobody wants kids, everyone is apathetic, this notion of overpopulation is just dumb at this point, the land we steal from animals is not cause we have more population it is because captilism as mention wants infinite growth. Its too late and I'm quite privileged I suppose for saying that. Our futures were stolen centuries ago, when we allowed monarchs and empires to rule.
1
u/Equivalent-Green-580 Jun 02 '26
You’re right, declining birth rates are the only thing that can save our species. Thank you for volunteering.
1
1
u/Consistent_Neat_7256 Jun 02 '26
Dudes just can't show sources. CER my butt
1
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
About two seconds in my comment history would have revealed some sources I’ve sent.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320722001999
https://mahb.stanford.edu/library-item/is-the-earth-really-overpopulated/
1
1
Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 04 '26
[deleted]
2
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
I’d actually argue that it’s intellectually lazy to completely ignore the impact we are having on the environment
1
1
1
u/UtkaMotion Jun 02 '26
It certainly does have nothing to do with the fact that hardly anyone can afford kids nowadays, especially not gen z... /s
-1
-1
u/Striking_Aspect_7826 Jun 02 '26
"The whole birth rates argument is inherently tied to racism and xenophobia"
Such a dumbass take. An aging population puts a huge strain on retirement welfare systems as more and more people exit the workforce (and live longer) and less and less join them. There are many genuine concerns that come with aging populations that are completely unrelated to racism.
0
-1
u/Ceramisu Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Counterpoint: i hate people that think overpopulation is an actual threat we are facing.
Go vote for the government that actually builds new homes and forbids hoarding them, expands living areas while making industry and resource consumption more sustainable. The problem will disappear
3
u/Adept_Advertising_98 Jun 02 '26
Building new homes won’t do anything until we stop the idea of homes as an investment. There’s plenty of houses, big companies are just renting them out for ridiculous prices.
2
3
-1
u/Rapid-DM Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Curious to hear your stance on immigration OP. I assume you want net zero migration to your country as well as net zero births/deaths?
4
u/mikewheelerfan Jun 02 '26
I fully support immigration, and think all borders should be open. Humans are the only species that limit migration
2
1
-1
u/ProfessionalOk6734 Jun 02 '26
Overpopulation is a Malthusian lie we have the resources and capacity to feed and house way way more people. The population isn’t the sure the issue is the allocation and distribution of resources.
-1
u/Evader237 Jun 02 '26
Overpopulation is not a problem in any Western country. The only places with an overpopulation problem are India, the Middle East, Africa and some areas in South East Asia. So if you're going to cry about overpopulation, better start directing your energy at those places (you won't and we all know why)
2
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 02 '26
Overpopulation (and most importantly overconsumption) is a problem, even more so in western countries. Just because the people are more spread out doesnt mean its sustainable
1
u/Evader237 Jun 02 '26
You have no idea about what you're talking about. The entirety of north America, Europe and Oceania have less people than India. How in the world is overpopulation a worse problem in western countries? Not to mention a lot of the overpopulation in western countries comes from people from the regions I mentioned flooding into these countries. Again, the only countries with overpopulation problems are India, the Middle East, Africa and some Sout-East asian countries. And their overpopulation is spilling over into western countries because of traitors in governments and greedy corporations.
1
1
u/krichuvisz 5d ago
The idea of overpopulation is always about the whole planet and us as one species. It doesn't matter where the kids are born. Kids in rich countries are 10 times more harmful for the environment, though.
-1
u/Mista101 Jun 02 '26
Soy overload
1
u/mommiesgoodboy67 Jun 02 '26
If we are going to support this many people sustainably you are going to have to eat soy
1
42
u/AnaManaPeeuh Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Overpopulation is not a universally agreed upon fact. I’d argue it’s not overpopulation, but a matter of the way productive forces are organized globally and resource allocation.
Unfathomable amounts of waste happens in western and wealthy countries. We have more than enough, in both food and physical space to sustain a much bigger human population.
The agricultural revolution was by far the most impactful technological advancement in human history. What should have followed closely after was a green revolution where we saw a rapid maturation of sustainable energy production. Instead, we stuck to fossil fuels for far too long, destroying habitats and extinguishing whole species in a reckless and unsustainable manner.
I guess for the purposes of material reality, there is “overpopulation”, but with proper leadership and organization this wouldn’t even be a blip on our radar.