Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle
It's worked sometimes and other times it hasn't worked, so I don't think simply stating it's an option w/o more depth is correct. Sometimes people will oppose something violently and achieve their goals (American Revolution), and sometimes people will oppose something violently and be slaughtered (Bosnian War). Just because we say something will work doesn't mean it will actually work.
I don't see how people who consume ~30 times more energy per capita can complain about someone in another country having twice as many children. Maybe if people in this thread were all using ~50kWh/month of electricity, drove vehicles that averaged ~350mpg, and so on, then they would have a platform that was at least not riddled with hypocrisy, but as it stands that isn't the case AFAIK. Complaining about other people of similar consumption habits having more kids makes sense I suppose, but not complaining about people having twice as many kids when they only consume a thirtieth of the resources.
|
My POV is it's about QUALITY of life, something that hasn't been considered in the strict "is it physically possible to max out human pop per square inch" discussions. Do the Haitians use 50 kwh/mo? Do their vehicles get 350 mpg? They may be consuming 1/30 the resources of the average American but I'd wager they aren't consuming 1/30 the resources I do. Even if they were, it still comes down to quality of life; I'm not going to eat dirt in order to gain some moral ground here. I think it's sad and pathetic that they selfishly choose to put more people (their children and everyone else there too) in that situation... and for what? Nobody can ever explain what purpose it serves to max out one's reproductive capabilities. I think it's because they don't want to admit it is nothing more than egomania.