138
The Fatal Flaws of the Futureless Left | The rise in antinatalist sentiments signals a collective loss of faith in the future (jacobin.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/solarpunk@slrpnk.net
66 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The rise of doomers, preppers, and antinatalists on the Left reveals something deeper than the hollow posture of rebellion: a collapse of belief in tomorrow. A Left that chants “No future” isn’t just demoralized — it’s unserious, misanthropic, and bound to lose.

Tldr: How do you inspire people to work for a better tomorrow if you don't believe tomorrow can be better? Trump and the American right have a vision of a future America that they claim will be great and glorious. The American left - and the global left - have lost sight of the future entirely. Instead of promising a bright future, they merely seek to endure the crises of the present - and some on the left have given up even that.

The article speaks to the desperate need for hope - for a clear, compelling, leftist vision of the future to serve as a guiding light for left-wing activists and politicians.

And hey, what political slash environmental slash aesthetic movement focused on a hopeful future just got its instance back up?

(Welcome back, everybody!)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

First point, I have read a bit and I'm unconvinced. People who want kids are having them, if they weren't, it'd be all over the mainstream news. Childless people would be suing Dupont or something.

Second point, again, I agree, but there is an environmental carrying capacity and we keep degrading the environment.

Your third point is true, but I was referring to the increasingly uncertain climate future. There may come a year where there just isn't enough due to an unlucky series of crop failures.

I can't argue against the fourth point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Bro you have way too much trust in mainstream news outlets. Things happen all the time that the media is silent on. Just because something is happening does not mean it would be in the mainstream news cycle, in fact more things happen every day that will never be reported on. That doesn't mean they aren't happening. Literally, scientific research proves as fact that there is a rising issue with infertility rates. That number has gone up, and prevailing research points to it being caused, in part, by the buildup of microplastics.

    Second point, yes that's true but that is not what was being discussed. Just because that is true does not justify a body of authority to dictate the reproductive choices of individuals. Also, just because those two points are true does not make the tertiary point that "we have reached peak population capacity" true. That claim is entirely false.

    Third, also true, but again that wasn't the topic and is only tangentially related to it. That's a separate discussion on climate change and its causes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'm curious why you feel so strongly about this, and I'm inclined to agree with you, no authority should decide if and how many children a person can have, but if everyone had eight kids it'd probably be a problem. What would you think if a democracy decided no more than two? How would that sit with you? I believe individuals should have freedom but there should be limits that are collectively agreed on.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    but if everyone had eight kids it'd probably be a problem.

    Yea no shit, but that's a stupid hypothetical that is most likely not going to ever happen, so it isn't even worth considering.

    What would you think if a democracy decided no more than two? How would that sit with you?

    I'd tell those people to go fuck themselves and if they force my partner to have an abortion against their will just because we went over their arbitrary limit, that I did not agree to, then there's gonna be a fucking fight for our right to have a child if we so wish.

    What part of "no one should have authority over the reproductive rights of others" is unclear?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Why are you so abrasive? I'm mostly agreeing with you and you're still a dick, simply dismissing or ignoring my points. Read into carrying capacity, go offline, and have however many children you and your partner want so you won't have time to be online.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago*

    I'm dismissing your points because they are irrelevant points when you actually consider them critically.

    I'm a dick because I'm tired of entertaining bullshit arguments and rhetoric throughout this thread.

    You say you agree that "no authority should decide if and how many children a person can have", then provide a bullshit hypothetical, and then use it as justification for proposing exactly the thing I said I am against with another hypothetical. You absolutely do not agree with me if you think your hypothetical is okay. It absolutely is not and is a direct violation of autonomy when you think about how that decision to limit the number of children someone can give birth to would have to be enforced. Forced population control is literally eugenics in disguise.

    And that's after repeatedly denying the science behind microplastics causing an increase in infertility rates from the earlier argumens. I cannot stand science denial. It pisses me off.

    If you're still wondering why I'm abrasive, you're never gonna get it.

    And, nah, I won't go offline, you can cope.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent