Free placebo birth control pills..
Thanks for demonstrating exactly the kind of doomerism we want to avoid.
How about, we should teach them to assess situations realistically, rather than filling their head with doomer nonsense?
I’m going to avoid debating what the realistic assessment is, but probably denying that there will be major problems is not being truthful. They know better. But civilization itself is not going to disappear. And unfair as it may be to those who will likely bear the worst impacts, any future grandkids and great grandchildren of mine living here will likely not suffer the most.
I don’t believe doomerism though is a huge factor.
Why? It’s not moral to condemn children to a future of suffering out of some irrational desire to deny reality and “avoid doomerism”. They are “doomed”.
There are some serious problems going forward, but it’s absurd to pretend that it will be some hellscape. Even in the most dire scenarios, our kids and grandkids will have it much better than people did a century ago. And there was no need to warn kids back then that they’ll be condemned to a lifetime of suffering.
I get that you’ve given up on society and any future for humanity. Really, I do - you make it VERY clear in thread after thread after thread.
You aren’t objectively correct to have done so. The rest of us are going to go about having a society and living. You’re welcome to join us, if you’d like.
No? The most dire scenarios do involve a collapse of industrialized civilization, or even agriculture. Nobody knows how bad it will get because humanity has literally never existed under the upcoming climatic conditions. But the fact is we don’t even know if agriculture will be possible under the new climate, much less anything more than that. So the “most dire scenario” would in fact be the collapse of humanity permanently to a hunter-gatherer society, with the associated loss of the great majority of our population and knowledge in the process.
And even under more ecologically optimistic assumptions there’s still the depletion of resources, and the likelihood they’ll be living under some variety of fascist theocracy. I sure as hell wouldn’t expect a woman to be living as well as a century ago, or anyone not white and Christian.
Agriculture is not going to “collapse”. It might get less efficient and will probably mean eating less meat. But every calorie that moves from meat to vegetable is a 10x efficiency gain, so there’s enormous room to absorb losses.
Women had just gotten the right to vote a century ago. The idea that we’d regress to anywhere close to that is absurd.
Again, we don’t know if it will or not, because humanity has never existed in a “hothouse” climate. Agriculture may simply no longer be possible, depending on how unstable the weather is.
Unless we blow way past even the worst estimates, there will still be a wide band of arable land. It’ll probably move farther north. It’s not going to be as immediately productive as existing land, but again, we produce way more food than needed due to high meat consumption.
A lot of other things are going to end before food production is a serious issue. Like, say, international travel. But these are luxuries.
It’s not about arable land; it’s about the stability and predictability of the weather. According to some theories agriculture is only possible in a narrow range of climate that we are now leaving.
I didn’t know these existed. But it’s the kind of thing I was referring to when I talked about older people having outsized political power due to demographics. This policy benefits older people and harms younger ones, same as blocking building more housing does, and many things in society have become tilted this way for the same reason. It’s much worse here in the UK.
Yes, this is exactly the attitude I was talking about. I’ve seen plenty of people online saying it would be pointless or even unethical to have kids, because the world is going to hell in a handbasket, or because humans are a plague on the planet or whatever. Can’t imagine it’s their main reason, but it helps reinforce the decision.
We need to teach kids that we can fix problems and overcome obstacles if we work together. Doomerism is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Given the wide range of climates in which agriculture is already possible, I find that doubtful. There will be changes and they’ll be disruptive. But a total collapse of all agriculture? Not gonna happen. And that’s ignoring the possibility of high-productivity indoor farming, which eliminates the weather (and water) problem completely.
You’re aware the faction currently in control of the USA includes people who have exactly that agenda, right (taking the vote away from at least some women)? Low probability, sure. Absurd? Nope.
They come in various forms–Prop 13 limits the rate at which property tax can increase, so there’s a huge benefit to staying in one place for a long time. Also has negative effects on housing mobility in general. Some states have explicit exemptions for people over 65.
But yes, that outsized influence–both due to demographics and generally greater political power (due to wealth, personal connections, and so on)–make these things difficult to fix. It might be easier to just build new housing. At least the US still has large swathes of open land where this is possible.
Indoor farming has high energy costs, though, and the needed labor force is quite different than that of traditional agriculture. It may have a role, but it’s not THE answer.
Bwuh?
We live in a world where there are places women are literally not allowed to show their face in public. Absolutely it is possible for women in the US to lose the vote or otherwise regress to where they were a century or two ago, or worse. What’s absurd is you thinking it is absurd.
It’s basically impossible unless our entire system of government falls apart. Women’s suffrage is a constitutional amendment. Repealing would require passing three impossible bars (2/3 of each house and 3/4 of the states). Just not going to happen.
Yeah, actual theocracies that never had any sort of constitutional protection for these things.
Sure, any crazy thing can happen, in principle. But if the changes are that dramatic (total abandonment of the Constitution, etc.), then we’ll be worried about far worse things than the women’s right to vote. Or anyone’s right to vote, for that matter.
You understand that there are ways to make some women voting functionally impossible without a repeal, yes? Similar to the current way Black voting can be functionally difficult in some places.
Would you like to compare photos of women in Iran today vs the 60s? That kind of regression very much can happen.