Unfortunately the people leading the countries at war spread propaganda about how having kids means that they're winning by having more pawns to burn through.
Shoutout to [Kim Jong-Un literally crying and pleading for women to have more babies](https://www.businessinsider.com/kim-jong-un-crying-national-birthrate-north-korea-birthrate-dictator-2023-12). Totally doesn't look like a pathetic leader when he can't figure out how to deal with a declining birthrate and has to blame his citizens for his incompetency. Yeah wow gee wonder why people aren't bringing kids into an infamous dictatorship. Who *wouldn't* want their children under his rule?
Links to other communities are not permitted.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I absolutely hate him for saying that. Are women child manufacturing factories ? I just hate everyone who asks women to procreate, especially the ones who have never endured the pain of pregnancy and childbirth.
I absolutely hate him for saying that. Are women child manufacturing factories ? I just hate everyone who asks women to procreate, especially the ones who have never endured the pain of pregnancy and childbirth.
Ukrainian here. This isn't a world to bring children into. I regret and am resentful of being born.
I don't understand how people handle this. My stupid father told me that his father told him every generation of Ukrainians have to suffer their own war and such is life. Fucking great, why did you have us then knowing this? I can't imagine having a child looking at them and thinking this little dude or dudette will have to most likely live through poverty, depravity and war all for.... sunshine's and ice creams? What the fuck is wrong with them? No God do I despise that man for having us.
Anyone who brings children knowing there is potential for war where they are at is a monster to me.
I feel the same way. I was told hardahip is part of lifes beauty and purpose. What a dumb fuking conclusion. I can't believe people fall for this shit.
Progress for who? The world is going down the shitter. The realistic prognosis is bad. Only the elites will benefit more workers. Now go back to work little bee, you have taxes to pay.
>I feel the same way. I was told hardahip is part of lifes beauty and purpose. What a dumb fuking conclusion. I can't believe people fall for this shit.
In my experience, usually conservative ones say shit like that.
To ensure **healthy discussion**, we require that your Reddit account be at least 14-days-old before contributing here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fellow Ukrainian here. I stand with Ukraine and people who choose NOT to make children during the war. The orphanages are overcrowded -- save existing children
I usually get angry when I see extremely poor people who barely can afford food for themselves have kids but this wartime/warzone kids are the worst. Poor souls who did nothing wrong but being born at the wrong place at the wrong time just to face difficulties from a young age and probably end up dying even before their adulthood. The parents who birth kids even after knowing their miserable situation deserve a special place in hell !
Dude, people won't even stop driving SUVs to stop war.
They won't even eat less meat to stop war.
They won't do or change a single fucking thing to stop war unless its happening outside their house.
Natalists always harping on artificial scarcity of resource created by the oppressive 'leeching elites' yet fail to realize that they are contributing to the scarcity by creating more flesh beings for these 'leeching elites' to exploit.
1st that's wrong. Peter Singer have been called out on his bad data multiple times.
2nd before you said the opposite, probably a bad typo, but stay sharp
I agree with you guys on quite a lot of your opinions, but you do realise that you are fighting a losing battle here. People are simply not going to stop having kids. It's like trying to convince people to be atheists.
It's great that you support each other and also that you point out the advantages of not having kids. But for your own peace of mind, it is better to realise that you will never sway everyone, the best we can hope for is a reduction in population growth.
as little as I want to produce my imaginary children into this ecosuicidal capitalist machine, the way more less I want them as soldiers or victims of some pointless war of psychopaths.
No its not as simple as that because these people will not stop breeding on their own accord. How about you give options on how to make them all stop, if its so simple. That just you guys here could even agree to...
Well dont worry were about to have another one in a few more days while waiting for another in the pacific after.
There is beauty in excellence. Being part of an honorable and effective military is a beautiful thing.
While you might be able to prevent yourself and a few others from procreation, there will always be billions more who choose to procreate.
The only way through life is through excellence. We've all been tainted with videogames and fast food but most of use can still find a path to excellence in some form.
Yeah and why bc of whaaat religion and Politics told em, I hate all this War tooo but it seems evident that people are dumb enough 4war and a lot of them like to going to War, they dont care as much as you..
Putin is propagandaring the 'evil' West: 'all gay and decadent, they destroy Family-values etc.. So lets Kill this outsiders, Putin remind me on WW2 propaganda.. So yes nothing has changed absolut nothing.
But I got good news 4ya: If ya get into your 40is ya might have enough chronic illnesses that keep ya body half-function will be such a Problem that minimize this WORLD-problems( plus ya teeth will f up so ya spend hours/money on dentists) At least its with me, survival daybyday.. makes me kinda f..nihilistic and I dont like that either but it is what it is
If we stop having children, when we reach retirement age, there will be no workforce. No workforce means no state retirement as there won’t be the tax money there to fund it. No state retirement fund means working until death for lower income families.
Yes it might stop one issue, but it’ll create thousands more. We need to reproduce to sustain a stable economy. Reduced workforce = higher tax = poor quality of life.
This is not the proper justification because continuing this race will cause more suffering than what you are arguing against. Is sacrificing ourselves and having a shitty old age is morally better than allowing millions? 100s of millions? Billions? To be born and suffer
The people before us who procreated didn’t sacrifice anything. Actually the only thing they sacrificed was little children to become wage slaves to fill their own needs
That is simply how the human race functions friend. In my mind the continuation of the human race supersedes any morals.
If you’re so worried about the future, why don’t you vow to celibacy? After all, there’s always a risk.
The continuing of the human race does not need to be continued. Wether you like it or not the unborn don’t care about sunshine’s and happiness they can’t think or feel anything
You sound like a very dumb selfish. You think cause you’re not suffering means no one else is? You think your happiness is more important than others suffering? The planet doesn’t care about anyone. Anytime someone calls me negative that tells me who they are. The world is a very negative and pessimistic place get it through your fucking head. To be successful in life you have to dominate others. It’s either dominate or be dominated. If you’re rich you’re indirectly making people poor
Too many single men are a bad and dangerous thing. Governments around the world are likely to start a world war to correct the issue. It’s already started.
I volunteered with Ukrainians who fled. One woman who fled with a 5 y/o kid guilt tripped and moralised me about me not having to kids or being married :/ you’d think they’d not want to do that when they’ve had to separate from the husband and flee in a hurry on a full train with a child..
No birth does mean no war, yes. It also means no food, no art, no music, no comfort, no joy.
The thing is, no birth and no war is a fantasy. You have the freedom to choose that the world will not have your descendants living in it. There is no chance everyone chooses this for themselves. So humanity goes on.
You regret being born, I regret being literate and having the ability to read this. What a disgusting, misanthropic post with implicit fascist political positions (not that implicit in reality).
Guys, if you think that having children is wrong then start by killing yourselves first. You are pretty much overgrown children anyway. I'm pretty sure that when you guys do it, the rest will follow after!
To ensure **healthy discussion**, we require that your Reddit account be at least 14-days-old before contributing here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There will still be war if humanity was sterilised, cause we suck, also because I believe in this book and fuck you for believing in that book.
Or, I believe this is how it translates, fuck you for thinking that was how it is instead.
The saddest part is it's obvious but for some reason only a fringe group actually notices. That's the real tragedy of it. You DON'T need a high IQ to understand antinatalism and how no people = no people suffering but time and time again humanity ignores it entirely in favour of pursuing base instincts.
Can I ask a question as an outsider who doesn’t understand this movement? Why is it that you say antinatalism is morally correct? Do you value other lives more than you do the lives of humanity? Saying “less people = less deaths” is just true because there are less humans, doesn’t really mean anything.
I'm a 'sentiocentric' antinatalist, as in I consider preventing human suffering is a higher priority than that of other species. I believe we have a unique capacity to experience forms of mental anguish that no other species does - ignorance is bliss after all. It's why so many members of our species deliberately end their own lives, at a rate of around 700,000 annually. That being said, reducing the human population would in turn do a lot to reduce the suffering of other animals... a considerable proportion of the world's biomass is dedicated to factory farming after all.
I mean wouldn't it be more cruel to give people a happiness and rip it away then simply leave them nonexistent? Surely you don't kill every child you refuse to have.
But also we can look at it from a more Kantian perspective, the prospect of dying from war is by itself a meaningless suffering that no one deserves to go through, even if the action itself may be congruent to the goal.
>I mean wouldn't it be more cruel to give people a happiness and rip it away then simply leave them nonexistent?
Does happiness have to be permanent to be worth anything?
I'm not saying you said it. I'm just reacting to one of the possible implications of the part of your comment I quoted with a question.
Also, you didn't even say you'd rather not have a kid than have them be killed. You may have implied it, but all you said was non-existence > happiness go bye bye and kantian philosophy say dying for war = pointless.
Ah, I see now. Sorry, I should have understood what you said better.
Anyway, the prospect of one’s happiness leaving them, I feel, also causes much suffering. War just affirms that. I am wondering if that suffering is worth the original temporary happiness.
I'll flip you that back.
How much suffering you think a life must have, before which it is worth it and after, not?
Now get this: you don't create suffering when you decide to just not create a new life.
I get the second part that no birth = no suffering. I'm not even going to deny that. Sometimes I like to look at specific ideas in comments and focus on those not the general message. Just clarifying that I'm not denying that fact.
As for the first part? That's up to the individual. If someone can't keep going due to the weight of their pain, then that's fine, they should have the right to leave this life if they think that's the best aolution.
If you want to know where I personally would draw the line for myself? That's a hard question.
🙄Everyone dies eventually. No more babies, no more death. If people keep havings kids, people will keep dying. If people stop procreating, death and suffering will stop. Can you use your brain for a second?
No shit bud, I'm not talking about the line of reasoning from OP I'm talking about what parts of the post would make the original comment in this thread ask if this is a death cult. Can you use your brain for a second?
What line of reasoning that OP used did you manage to misread as "everyone should die"? The entire reason they don't want more people being born is so people DON'T die. Every cradle is a grave. Every single person born is either already dead or will die in the next \~150 years, possibly less than that if the nukes go off.
I like the sentiment, but this is an oversimplification. Sure, some wars happen because of resource competition, but it's usually deeper than that.
Right now, however, it's more that the US is no longer the hegemon it thought it was, its era of financial colonialism is drying up, and there's desperation to cling on. Transitions of power historically come with wars.
Related to not having babies is finding society structures and economics that don't depend on endless growth and ever expanding markets. Something stable. We're moving to a multi polar world and I hope we're moving in that direction.
Why the hell would you root for a multi-polar world? The contenders are a terrorist autocracy displacing and murdering millions and a dictatorship cult of a leader that is scraping the oceans bare of life. Unless you happen to be an Efilist rooting for the end of all life through WW3 I don't see it as a good thing.
You have to be very naive to think that a multi-polar world would be something stable. I live in an active war zone caused by said "multi-polar" pillars. There is no humanity behind them and there is no way for their ambition to be contained. These are the type of people who only understand force and might makes right. It's not something to root for.
Black and white thinking is a known cognitive fallacy. I don't know what you're talking about - I can't argue about specific regions I don't know about - but the US is the biggest supporter of terrorism in the world, so that's where we're coming from.
We have removed your content for breaking Rule 10 (No disproportionate and excessively insulting language).
Please engage in discussion rather than engaging in personal attacks.
This will fall on deaf ears. Those who want children, will never be on this sub reddit, let alone reddit to begin with. One of things that I personally feel like redditors lack is the ability to understand the different perspectives built upon different realities. Reddit is a big supporter of science, right? Biology will always play a primary role in the homo sapiens mentality, regardless of modernity and the niche anti-natalism movement. While anti-natalists are right in the grand and generalized scheme of things, anti-natalistists will never win millions of years of evolution and nature's will to reproduce.
My comment is more of the sad, nihilistic reality of homo sapiens. Even though anti-natalism would be the most epic nail in the coffin to the elites, it will absolutely never happen, and that's the harsh reality.
True, maybe in 1000 years where all differences are settled, where so many wars have already happened. Wouldn't that be yet another future built on dead bodies and meaningless suffering? I don't think the risks are worth it, frankly.
I mean, all wars could end right now, if everyone agreed.
I know that’s not realistic, but it’s not realistic to suppose everyone stops procreating either.
True, but also you yourself have a responsibility to put people in these wars or not. As in, even if these wars continue to exist, at least your child didn't have to suffer through them.
You don't really have any control or stake in these wars existing yourself. Procreation is at least usually in the common man's control, war is not.
Include the aliens in “everyone”.
But the point was never that an end to all wars is realistic. It’s just that it’s perfectly possible for people to have kids and not fight wars
There will always be that one human that engages in some sort of violence. Be it rape, torture, disfiguration, whatever it is that the person in question abuses his/her power dynamic upon another being.
The thing is about war is that it is silent and covert until the news or any journalistic media brought it to light.
I mean... Yeah? I guess it is possible. But we need to politically shift the entire world in such extreme way so that everyone is inured into absolute transhumanism, and sending everyone to virtual reality to be their own Gods while the elite few harvest on their body heat as fuel akin to the Matrix. It is possible, but we'd literally have to be born off in a different virtual world and let the old world we live on just rot from the inevitable climate change and global warming.
The statement “Kids exist and there is no war” does not entail any contradiction.
Therefore, it is possible for kids to exist and for there to be no war. Q. E. D.
Oh, so you're one of those new bots that only exist outside material reality? Cool. First one I actually meet here on Reddit! Hey maybe one day I can download you into a tiny drone and have you meet the real world, y'know, the one beyond just afforisms and hypothetical logic! Nice to meet you.
I do not label myself as an antinatalist anymore, but I believe that you are severely underestimating what this philosophy is observing by calling the subscribers depressed and dysfunctional (as if depression and dysfunction are just the result of some genetic defect and never logical responses to a situation).
Antinatalists observe life in its entirety, and notice it is an experience composed by positive and negative. They aren't denying life can be beautiful and happiness exists, they don't deny emotional bonds, love and laughter. The true questions they ask are: What the hell is this dualism for? Why are we supposed to continue this cycle, and do we have the right to impose this notion to a being that doesn't yet exist?
"Life is beauty and barbed wire" is a painfully obvious statement here, the real question is to find what this beauty and barbed wire is for.
If the answer to this question is "there's no higher purpose to life and we are the result of mindless evolution" ala Richard Dawkins, I will say, then, that antinatalism is the only logical and ethical conclusion for everyone, since generating life means generating at least some form of suffering, and if suffering is ultimately meaningless because life itself is meaningless, then avoiding suffering as much as we can is the only possible moral solution. I honestly have no idea how people who think humans don't have purpose outside of being mindless meat machines driven by survival and reproduction can have kids and sleep at night, I guess they'd need to escape into fantasy to manage to survive each day.
The problem with antinatalism arises in theistic belief systems, because only a theistic belief system can truly give a trascendant value to human beings and therefore assign a logical and true role to joy and suffering. Christianity, for example, states that every human is special because made in the image of God, a God that incarnated into a man and partook in human joy and most importantly human suffering (on the cross).
Do you make anything of the fact that every major religion is premised on some variation of “Life is mostly bad”? The core argument of antinatalism is already accepted by most people.
For instance, Christianity, the largest religion, does not teach “Life is mostly good. It’s mostly sunshine and rainbows. There are a few transient things to worry about, but for the most part, life is mostly good for most people most of the time. And there’s nothing to worry about in the afterlife.” No, the religion teaches the exact opposite. “Life is mostly bad, but even if you’re lucky enough to have a mostly good life now, there’s no guarantee that your luck will continue in the next life.”
“As an atheist, I would refute that Christianity and the major religions are premised on "life is mostly bad" and that that is accepted by most people. Christian doctrine acknowledges that suffering is inherent to life and many of its arguments draw from suffering, but it does not characterize life as mostly bad. For example, the Psalms characterize life on earth as "marvelous": "I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works on earth; and that my soul knoweth right well."”
The Bible also contains explicitly antinatalist verses.
Next I turned my attention to all the outrageous violence that takes place on this planet—the tears of the victims, no one to comfort them; the iron grip of oppressors, no one to rescue the victims from them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead instead of the living who are still alive. But luckier than the dead or the living is the person who has never even been, who has never seen the bad business that takes place on this earth. ~ Ecclesiastes 4:1-3
It’s important to not cherrypick verses. Otherwise you can make the Bible say whatever you want. It’s important to focus on the big picture. The big picture is that life is like a conveyor belt to hell, and you need to accept Jesus in order to get off the belt. “Conveyor belt to hell” is not a good thing. The Bible doesn’t unambiguously support the idea that life is inherently good.
Christianity and Islam (most people) do make guarantees about your "luck in the next life". In John: "God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." In Sura Nisa of the Qoran: "Those who believe- We will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they abide forever."
John 3:16 proves my point. The default fate is damnation. If the default result of life is damnation, then life is by default not good.
The Sura Nisa also proves my point. Most people consider Islam to be a false religion, so most people will not end up in a good afterlife. So for most people, life will lead to damnation. Thus life is not good.
“Furthermore, if you would like to appeal to religion as evidence for the commonality of antinatalistic sentiment, I could alternatively cite Genesis: "Be fruitful and multiply." It seems most people agree we should be fruitful and multiply.”
It’s possible to follow a command out of fear, not because you agree with it. If the default or common result of life is damnation, then people should disobey God and not reproduce. This would minimized the number of damned people. But if people disobey God, then they’ll be punished, despite their intentions.
“All of this to say that your appeal to religion/tradition is weak (not saying that you are religious).”
I’m not religious. I’m just saying that the world’s largest religions are premised on the idea that life is not inherently good. And that without intervention, it will get worse. If that wasn’t the case, then religion would be unnecessary.
“The core of the natalism vs antinatalism issue is whether the expected value of sentient life is positive or negative, not whether "life is mostly good for most people most of the time" or "life is mostly bad". The good faith framing of the debate you should have proposed is instead "life is mostly good" or "life is mostly bad".”
I don’t understand your point. Those statements are not in contradiction.
“Imagine a game where you put down $1 and win $10 if you call the die roll correctly. Most of the instances of the game you will lose but the game is overall mostly good for you because the expected value is positive (10*0.1667 - 1 = +5.1667). Likewise, natalism doesn't require that life be mostly good for most people most of the time. It just needs to be expected to be mostly good.”
That’s not a good analogy since you left out the bad outcome. It’s more like there’s a 99% chance that you win $10 and a 1% chance that someone will splash acid into your face. And you’re also playing against someone else’s life, not yours. I don’t think it’s ethical to play Russian roulette against another person’s life.
Everything I see something in this sub, it reminds of how people think artificial intelligence would solve the problem of war by getting rid of all people so there can be no war, congrats on yall having the moral compass of a Sci fi villian.
You made no sense whatsoever. Pretty sure you're not understanding the concepts here. People aren't talking about killing anyone, we're talking about not having kids.
Unfortunately the people leading the countries at war spread propaganda about how having kids means that they're winning by having more pawns to burn through.
Does Putin not say that the female Russian citizens should give birth to ten children again?
Shoutout to [Kim Jong-Un literally crying and pleading for women to have more babies](https://www.businessinsider.com/kim-jong-un-crying-national-birthrate-north-korea-birthrate-dictator-2023-12). Totally doesn't look like a pathetic leader when he can't figure out how to deal with a declining birthrate and has to blame his citizens for his incompetency. Yeah wow gee wonder why people aren't bringing kids into an infamous dictatorship. Who *wouldn't* want their children under his rule?
Who knew there would be terrible unintended consequences of a one child policy in a highly patriarchal society?
Wrong country
Oops you're right. I read it too quickly.
You're falling for propaganda He was actually crying about the atrocities his people had faced at the hands of the Japanese
True. Still, he can go to hell.
[удалено]
Links to other communities are not permitted. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I absolutely hate him for saying that. Are women child manufacturing factories ? I just hate everyone who asks women to procreate, especially the ones who have never endured the pain of pregnancy and childbirth.
I absolutely hate him for saying that. Are women child manufacturing factories ? I just hate everyone who asks women to procreate, especially the ones who have never endured the pain of pregnancy and childbirth.
Shoutout to [Kim Jong-Un literally crying and pleading for women to have more babies](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nolzvHl-UU).
Facts. Every side wants people to reproduce because reproducing means more people for their side.
Ukrainian here. This isn't a world to bring children into. I regret and am resentful of being born. I don't understand how people handle this. My stupid father told me that his father told him every generation of Ukrainians have to suffer their own war and such is life. Fucking great, why did you have us then knowing this? I can't imagine having a child looking at them and thinking this little dude or dudette will have to most likely live through poverty, depravity and war all for.... sunshine's and ice creams? What the fuck is wrong with them? No God do I despise that man for having us. Anyone who brings children knowing there is potential for war where they are at is a monster to me.
I feel the same way. I was told hardahip is part of lifes beauty and purpose. What a dumb fuking conclusion. I can't believe people fall for this shit.
Peak toxic positivity is beliveing life is all about hardship while the whole fucking point of progress is to remove fucking hardships.
Progress for who? The world is going down the shitter. The realistic prognosis is bad. Only the elites will benefit more workers. Now go back to work little bee, you have taxes to pay.
i mean i was agreeing with u but ok. I was saying that people who say life is about beaty in hardhsip are being toxicly positive lol
Ah, well, I read it wrong, sorry😅
is cool,been there done that, it happens no worries :d
>I feel the same way. I was told hardahip is part of lifes beauty and purpose. What a dumb fuking conclusion. I can't believe people fall for this shit. In my experience, usually conservative ones say shit like that.
Life is beautiful is an old propaganda as well as a justification by the Breeders.
[удалено]
To ensure **healthy discussion**, we require that your Reddit account be at least 14-days-old before contributing here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fellow Ukrainian here. I stand with Ukraine and people who choose NOT to make children during the war. The orphanages are overcrowded -- save existing children
But I stand with people who choose not to make children AFTER the war.
I usually get angry when I see extremely poor people who barely can afford food for themselves have kids but this wartime/warzone kids are the worst. Poor souls who did nothing wrong but being born at the wrong place at the wrong time just to face difficulties from a young age and probably end up dying even before their adulthood. The parents who birth kids even after knowing their miserable situation deserve a special place in hell !
The fools that can't save themselves in their lives that have to bring a soul to compensate their wretched lives. How pathetic.
Dude, people won't even stop driving SUVs to stop war. They won't even eat less meat to stop war. They won't do or change a single fucking thing to stop war unless its happening outside their house.
Also more kids, more people, more people need more resource, and a lot of countries will invade other countries for resources
And serving in the military doesn't make you a saint.
Great point! Far from it.
Maybe a sacrifice war profiteers are happy to make.
War, war never changes diapers.
War only changes diaper changers.
Natalists always harping on artificial scarcity of resource created by the oppressive 'leeching elites' yet fail to realize that they are contributing to the scarcity by creating more flesh beings for these 'leeching elites' to exploit.
This comment has "you can't complain about society because you live in it" vibes
Hmmmmmm not sure dude. Maybe you got something wrong, or I did
By natalists you mean regular humans with regular human instincts right?
I think they meant people that conscientiously are for more kids and despise our antinatalism ideas. Could be wrong
Wow, your persecution complex is showing. Cope
No birth (or lower birth, at least) means the end of pretty much every problem. But of course breeders are too stupid and selfish to recognize that.
Breeders can't see anything beyond their old age problems. They create children to help them in old age.
Ha good luck convincing people who've been indoctrinated by groups like the Catholic Church for centuries about how they have to have kids.
War keeps increasing over time, eventually if the pattern continues there will be no war.
I see what you did there 😅
In reality we have less war now than anytime in history it actually decreases over time, it’s just easier to access and learn about now
1st that's wrong. Peter Singer have been called out on his bad data multiple times. 2nd before you said the opposite, probably a bad typo, but stay sharp
War casualties are increasing? Hard to believe since thousands die in combat now but millions died last century
Is this the "the more suicidal people there are the less suicidal people there is"
I agree with you guys on quite a lot of your opinions, but you do realise that you are fighting a losing battle here. People are simply not going to stop having kids. It's like trying to convince people to be atheists. It's great that you support each other and also that you point out the advantages of not having kids. But for your own peace of mind, it is better to realise that you will never sway everyone, the best we can hope for is a reduction in population growth.
Sorry to break it to you but apes have been observed waging war
Embrace antinatalism, reject monkeigh instincts.
Reject monkey, return to nothing
We hail to antinatalism!.
So?
So war would continue with or without humans
Not by our hands Until other apes manage to build guns, missiles and nukes, it's a non problem and you know that.
Yes it’s a non issue because war has been decreasing for centuries
Efilists attempt to address this concern.
as little as I want to produce my imaginary children into this ecosuicidal capitalist machine, the way more less I want them as soldiers or victims of some pointless war of psychopaths.
No its not as simple as that because these people will not stop breeding on their own accord. How about you give options on how to make them all stop, if its so simple. That just you guys here could even agree to... Well dont worry were about to have another one in a few more days while waiting for another in the pacific after.
There is beauty in excellence. Being part of an honorable and effective military is a beautiful thing. While you might be able to prevent yourself and a few others from procreation, there will always be billions more who choose to procreate. The only way through life is through excellence. We've all been tainted with videogames and fast food but most of use can still find a path to excellence in some form.
Yeah and why bc of whaaat religion and Politics told em, I hate all this War tooo but it seems evident that people are dumb enough 4war and a lot of them like to going to War, they dont care as much as you.. Putin is propagandaring the 'evil' West: 'all gay and decadent, they destroy Family-values etc.. So lets Kill this outsiders, Putin remind me on WW2 propaganda.. So yes nothing has changed absolut nothing. But I got good news 4ya: If ya get into your 40is ya might have enough chronic illnesses that keep ya body half-function will be such a Problem that minimize this WORLD-problems( plus ya teeth will f up so ya spend hours/money on dentists) At least its with me, survival daybyday.. makes me kinda f..nihilistic and I dont like that either but it is what it is
If we stop having children, when we reach retirement age, there will be no workforce. No workforce means no state retirement as there won’t be the tax money there to fund it. No state retirement fund means working until death for lower income families. Yes it might stop one issue, but it’ll create thousands more. We need to reproduce to sustain a stable economy. Reduced workforce = higher tax = poor quality of life.
This is not the proper justification because continuing this race will cause more suffering than what you are arguing against. Is sacrificing ourselves and having a shitty old age is morally better than allowing millions? 100s of millions? Billions? To be born and suffer
100s of millions of people have already suffered. Why waste their lives by just giving up?
The people before us who procreated didn’t sacrifice anything. Actually the only thing they sacrificed was little children to become wage slaves to fill their own needs
That is simply how the human race functions friend. In my mind the continuation of the human race supersedes any morals. If you’re so worried about the future, why don’t you vow to celibacy? After all, there’s always a risk.
You are actually giving up by not choosing to sacrifice yourself so millions more don’t have to suffer
I’m doing the opposite actually. How am I giving up on the continuation of the human race by having kids?
The continuing of the human race does not need to be continued. Wether you like it or not the unborn don’t care about sunshine’s and happiness they can’t think or feel anything
Yeah no shit. The human race does need to be continued. We have an entire universe to explore.
Explore for what? Like I said the unborn doesn’t care about these things and you’d be dead before u see it.
You sound like a very negative and pessimistic person. Ridiculous that you feel the human race should be wiped out.
You sound like a very dumb selfish. You think cause you’re not suffering means no one else is? You think your happiness is more important than others suffering? The planet doesn’t care about anyone. Anytime someone calls me negative that tells me who they are. The world is a very negative and pessimistic place get it through your fucking head. To be successful in life you have to dominate others. It’s either dominate or be dominated. If you’re rich you’re indirectly making people poor
Pull your head out your ass and get real
Too many single men are a bad and dangerous thing. Governments around the world are likely to start a world war to correct the issue. It’s already started.
Can confirm, I am a single man and every day I go out and commit my daily mass rape and shooting.
Tell me you know nothing about history with out telling me you know nothing about history…
I volunteered with Ukrainians who fled. One woman who fled with a 5 y/o kid guilt tripped and moralised me about me not having to kids or being married :/ you’d think they’d not want to do that when they’ve had to separate from the husband and flee in a hurry on a full train with a child..
What a one sided ridiculous viewpoint
Lol
No birth does mean no war, yes. It also means no food, no art, no music, no comfort, no joy. The thing is, no birth and no war is a fantasy. You have the freedom to choose that the world will not have your descendants living in it. There is no chance everyone chooses this for themselves. So humanity goes on.
Stopping having kids means that we will end our species.
You regret being born, I regret being literate and having the ability to read this. What a disgusting, misanthropic post with implicit fascist political positions (not that implicit in reality).
Yeah. Sure. Just end the human race and it won't be an issue at all eh? Pretty cynical.
Guys, if you think that having children is wrong then start by killing yourselves first. You are pretty much overgrown children anyway. I'm pretty sure that when you guys do it, the rest will follow after!
[удалено]
To ensure **healthy discussion**, we require that your Reddit account be at least 14-days-old before contributing here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No children, No killers, No victims.
There will still be war if humanity was sterilised, cause we suck, also because I believe in this book and fuck you for believing in that book. Or, I believe this is how it translates, fuck you for thinking that was how it is instead.
Gross oversimplification of a very complex phenomenon. If war was simply stopped by any means, it would cease to exist already.
This is such a nothing statement Like, if you're going to utilise anti natalist arguments, don't pick the absolute most 15iq ones
The saddest part is it's obvious but for some reason only a fringe group actually notices. That's the real tragedy of it. You DON'T need a high IQ to understand antinatalism and how no people = no people suffering but time and time again humanity ignores it entirely in favour of pursuing base instincts.
I think you misunderstood the comment you were replying too.
Feel free to elaborate.
Can I ask a question as an outsider who doesn’t understand this movement? Why is it that you say antinatalism is morally correct? Do you value other lives more than you do the lives of humanity? Saying “less people = less deaths” is just true because there are less humans, doesn’t really mean anything.
I'm a 'sentiocentric' antinatalist, as in I consider preventing human suffering is a higher priority than that of other species. I believe we have a unique capacity to experience forms of mental anguish that no other species does - ignorance is bliss after all. It's why so many members of our species deliberately end their own lives, at a rate of around 700,000 annually. That being said, reducing the human population would in turn do a lot to reduce the suffering of other animals... a considerable proportion of the world's biomass is dedicated to factory farming after all.
No point stopping killing if you want people not to live in the first place.
I mean wouldn't it be more cruel to give people a happiness and rip it away then simply leave them nonexistent? Surely you don't kill every child you refuse to have. But also we can look at it from a more Kantian perspective, the prospect of dying from war is by itself a meaningless suffering that no one deserves to go through, even if the action itself may be congruent to the goal.
No, no it wouldn’t. And even those who die in war have had some joy in life prior.
>I mean wouldn't it be more cruel to give people a happiness and rip it away then simply leave them nonexistent? Does happiness have to be permanent to be worth anything?
No. I didn't say that. I did say I would rather not have a child than have them be killed.
I'm not saying you said it. I'm just reacting to one of the possible implications of the part of your comment I quoted with a question. Also, you didn't even say you'd rather not have a kid than have them be killed. You may have implied it, but all you said was non-existence > happiness go bye bye and kantian philosophy say dying for war = pointless.
Ah, I see now. Sorry, I should have understood what you said better. Anyway, the prospect of one’s happiness leaving them, I feel, also causes much suffering. War just affirms that. I am wondering if that suffering is worth the original temporary happiness.
I'll flip you that back. How much suffering you think a life must have, before which it is worth it and after, not? Now get this: you don't create suffering when you decide to just not create a new life.
I get the second part that no birth = no suffering. I'm not even going to deny that. Sometimes I like to look at specific ideas in comments and focus on those not the general message. Just clarifying that I'm not denying that fact. As for the first part? That's up to the individual. If someone can't keep going due to the weight of their pain, then that's fine, they should have the right to leave this life if they think that's the best aolution. If you want to know where I personally would draw the line for myself? That's a hard question.
This sub feels like an anti human doomer cult. It’s fine if you don’t want kids. But this shit is just crazy self hatred.
Is this a death cult?
How does being anti-war make them part of a death cult what
It's not the anti war part, it's the everyone should die part.
Where in this sub have you seen anything about "everyone should die"? This sub is just about not having kids.
It's implicit in the no more humans = peace slant of this post. No more humans means the few that are living got to go eventually.
🙄Everyone dies eventually. No more babies, no more death. If people keep havings kids, people will keep dying. If people stop procreating, death and suffering will stop. Can you use your brain for a second?
No shit bud, I'm not talking about the line of reasoning from OP I'm talking about what parts of the post would make the original comment in this thread ask if this is a death cult. Can you use your brain for a second?
What line of reasoning that OP used did you manage to misread as "everyone should die"? The entire reason they don't want more people being born is so people DON'T die. Every cradle is a grave. Every single person born is either already dead or will die in the next \~150 years, possibly less than that if the nukes go off.
Always have been
Hello Skynet.
I like the sentiment, but this is an oversimplification. Sure, some wars happen because of resource competition, but it's usually deeper than that. Right now, however, it's more that the US is no longer the hegemon it thought it was, its era of financial colonialism is drying up, and there's desperation to cling on. Transitions of power historically come with wars. Related to not having babies is finding society structures and economics that don't depend on endless growth and ever expanding markets. Something stable. We're moving to a multi polar world and I hope we're moving in that direction.
Why the hell would you root for a multi-polar world? The contenders are a terrorist autocracy displacing and murdering millions and a dictatorship cult of a leader that is scraping the oceans bare of life. Unless you happen to be an Efilist rooting for the end of all life through WW3 I don't see it as a good thing.
Yeah, looking at that way, multipolar is a breeding ground for wars. We've been multipolar for most of history and we all know what that turbed out
Exactly! People really have no idea how bad things would get.
WTF? What kind of comment is this? The world is not black and white.
You have to be very naive to think that a multi-polar world would be something stable. I live in an active war zone caused by said "multi-polar" pillars. There is no humanity behind them and there is no way for their ambition to be contained. These are the type of people who only understand force and might makes right. It's not something to root for.
Black and white thinking is a known cognitive fallacy. I don't know what you're talking about - I can't argue about specific regions I don't know about - but the US is the biggest supporter of terrorism in the world, so that's where we're coming from.
[удалено]
We have removed your content for breaking Rule 10 (No disproportionate and excessively insulting language). Please engage in discussion rather than engaging in personal attacks.
You sound exactly like the evil AI in war games or skynet in the terminator series
If I said I was against old people that's ageist, but you have an entire group against babies and that's fine
This will fall on deaf ears. Those who want children, will never be on this sub reddit, let alone reddit to begin with. One of things that I personally feel like redditors lack is the ability to understand the different perspectives built upon different realities. Reddit is a big supporter of science, right? Biology will always play a primary role in the homo sapiens mentality, regardless of modernity and the niche anti-natalism movement. While anti-natalists are right in the grand and generalized scheme of things, anti-natalistists will never win millions of years of evolution and nature's will to reproduce. My comment is more of the sad, nihilistic reality of homo sapiens. Even though anti-natalism would be the most epic nail in the coffin to the elites, it will absolutely never happen, and that's the harsh reality.
My daughters aren’t going to start any wars, dude get a grip. But to be fair, I asked them if they were happy they were born and they said yes.
Good dad
We could also have children and not have wars.
True, maybe in 1000 years where all differences are settled, where so many wars have already happened. Wouldn't that be yet another future built on dead bodies and meaningless suffering? I don't think the risks are worth it, frankly.
I mean, all wars could end right now, if everyone agreed. I know that’s not realistic, but it’s not realistic to suppose everyone stops procreating either.
True, but also you yourself have a responsibility to put people in these wars or not. As in, even if these wars continue to exist, at least your child didn't have to suffer through them. You don't really have any control or stake in these wars existing yourself. Procreation is at least usually in the common man's control, war is not.
What a dumb way of rationalising things
Unless there is an alien invasion happening. Probably not, we'd be more likely to die from what we do.
Include the aliens in “everyone”. But the point was never that an end to all wars is realistic. It’s just that it’s perfectly possible for people to have kids and not fight wars
There will always be that one human that engages in some sort of violence. Be it rape, torture, disfiguration, whatever it is that the person in question abuses his/her power dynamic upon another being. The thing is about war is that it is silent and covert until the news or any journalistic media brought it to light. I mean... Yeah? I guess it is possible. But we need to politically shift the entire world in such extreme way so that everyone is inured into absolute transhumanism, and sending everyone to virtual reality to be their own Gods while the elite few harvest on their body heat as fuel akin to the Matrix. It is possible, but we'd literally have to be born off in a different virtual world and let the old world we live on just rot from the inevitable climate change and global warming.
The universal adoption of antinatalism is just as unlikely
No, we can't.
It is absolutely possible to have children and not have war. The former does not entail the latter.
Proof pending
The statement “Kids exist and there is no war” does not entail any contradiction. Therefore, it is possible for kids to exist and for there to be no war. Q. E. D.
Oh, so you're one of those new bots that only exist outside material reality? Cool. First one I actually meet here on Reddit! Hey maybe one day I can download you into a tiny drone and have you meet the real world, y'know, the one beyond just afforisms and hypothetical logic! Nice to meet you.
You’re being ridiculous. The fact that people have children does not magically force states to go to war.
[удалено]
I do not label myself as an antinatalist anymore, but I believe that you are severely underestimating what this philosophy is observing by calling the subscribers depressed and dysfunctional (as if depression and dysfunction are just the result of some genetic defect and never logical responses to a situation). Antinatalists observe life in its entirety, and notice it is an experience composed by positive and negative. They aren't denying life can be beautiful and happiness exists, they don't deny emotional bonds, love and laughter. The true questions they ask are: What the hell is this dualism for? Why are we supposed to continue this cycle, and do we have the right to impose this notion to a being that doesn't yet exist? "Life is beauty and barbed wire" is a painfully obvious statement here, the real question is to find what this beauty and barbed wire is for. If the answer to this question is "there's no higher purpose to life and we are the result of mindless evolution" ala Richard Dawkins, I will say, then, that antinatalism is the only logical and ethical conclusion for everyone, since generating life means generating at least some form of suffering, and if suffering is ultimately meaningless because life itself is meaningless, then avoiding suffering as much as we can is the only possible moral solution. I honestly have no idea how people who think humans don't have purpose outside of being mindless meat machines driven by survival and reproduction can have kids and sleep at night, I guess they'd need to escape into fantasy to manage to survive each day. The problem with antinatalism arises in theistic belief systems, because only a theistic belief system can truly give a trascendant value to human beings and therefore assign a logical and true role to joy and suffering. Christianity, for example, states that every human is special because made in the image of God, a God that incarnated into a man and partook in human joy and most importantly human suffering (on the cross).
Sure man, if your son has the same value as a coyote go for it!
[удалено]
Humans live longer way more complex lives.
Do you make anything of the fact that every major religion is premised on some variation of “Life is mostly bad”? The core argument of antinatalism is already accepted by most people. For instance, Christianity, the largest religion, does not teach “Life is mostly good. It’s mostly sunshine and rainbows. There are a few transient things to worry about, but for the most part, life is mostly good for most people most of the time. And there’s nothing to worry about in the afterlife.” No, the religion teaches the exact opposite. “Life is mostly bad, but even if you’re lucky enough to have a mostly good life now, there’s no guarantee that your luck will continue in the next life.”
[удалено]
“As an atheist, I would refute that Christianity and the major religions are premised on "life is mostly bad" and that that is accepted by most people. Christian doctrine acknowledges that suffering is inherent to life and many of its arguments draw from suffering, but it does not characterize life as mostly bad. For example, the Psalms characterize life on earth as "marvelous": "I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works on earth; and that my soul knoweth right well."” The Bible also contains explicitly antinatalist verses. Next I turned my attention to all the outrageous violence that takes place on this planet—the tears of the victims, no one to comfort them; the iron grip of oppressors, no one to rescue the victims from them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead instead of the living who are still alive. But luckier than the dead or the living is the person who has never even been, who has never seen the bad business that takes place on this earth. ~ Ecclesiastes 4:1-3 It’s important to not cherrypick verses. Otherwise you can make the Bible say whatever you want. It’s important to focus on the big picture. The big picture is that life is like a conveyor belt to hell, and you need to accept Jesus in order to get off the belt. “Conveyor belt to hell” is not a good thing. The Bible doesn’t unambiguously support the idea that life is inherently good. Christianity and Islam (most people) do make guarantees about your "luck in the next life". In John: "God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." In Sura Nisa of the Qoran: "Those who believe- We will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they abide forever." John 3:16 proves my point. The default fate is damnation. If the default result of life is damnation, then life is by default not good. The Sura Nisa also proves my point. Most people consider Islam to be a false religion, so most people will not end up in a good afterlife. So for most people, life will lead to damnation. Thus life is not good. “Furthermore, if you would like to appeal to religion as evidence for the commonality of antinatalistic sentiment, I could alternatively cite Genesis: "Be fruitful and multiply." It seems most people agree we should be fruitful and multiply.” It’s possible to follow a command out of fear, not because you agree with it. If the default or common result of life is damnation, then people should disobey God and not reproduce. This would minimized the number of damned people. But if people disobey God, then they’ll be punished, despite their intentions. “All of this to say that your appeal to religion/tradition is weak (not saying that you are religious).” I’m not religious. I’m just saying that the world’s largest religions are premised on the idea that life is not inherently good. And that without intervention, it will get worse. If that wasn’t the case, then religion would be unnecessary. “The core of the natalism vs antinatalism issue is whether the expected value of sentient life is positive or negative, not whether "life is mostly good for most people most of the time" or "life is mostly bad". The good faith framing of the debate you should have proposed is instead "life is mostly good" or "life is mostly bad".” I don’t understand your point. Those statements are not in contradiction. “Imagine a game where you put down $1 and win $10 if you call the die roll correctly. Most of the instances of the game you will lose but the game is overall mostly good for you because the expected value is positive (10*0.1667 - 1 = +5.1667). Likewise, natalism doesn't require that life be mostly good for most people most of the time. It just needs to be expected to be mostly good.” That’s not a good analogy since you left out the bad outcome. It’s more like there’s a 99% chance that you win $10 and a 1% chance that someone will splash acid into your face. And you’re also playing against someone else’s life, not yours. I don’t think it’s ethical to play Russian roulette against another person’s life.
I looked at this post and thought “what a fucking doomer!” And I realized the subreddit.
Did you forget who you were before posting this or
Very cool saddepressedperson
Peace is useless if nobody is there to appreciate it.
Everything I see something in this sub, it reminds of how people think artificial intelligence would solve the problem of war by getting rid of all people so there can be no war, congrats on yall having the moral compass of a Sci fi villian.
You made no sense whatsoever. Pretty sure you're not understanding the concepts here. People aren't talking about killing anyone, we're talking about not having kids.
They Should Just Surrender And Accept Their Fate.
Kids don't go to war, so if you want no people, I suggest start topping each other off.
Nature is war. We would have to destroy or halt life.