Natal conference, to be held in Austin in December, promoted on far-right podcast circuit and set to host self-described eugenicists
A high-end hotel in the liberal Texan enclave of Austin is playing host to a conference whose theme is boosting global birth rates, but which will in fact feature racist and eugenicist internet personalities and far-right media figures.
The Natal conference – whose website warns that “by the end of the century, nearly every country on earth will have a shrinking population, and economic systems dependent on reliable growth will collapse” – is scheduled to be held on 1 December at the Line Hotel.
The world has almost 8 billion people. Maybe we could do with a few less.
I think that according to economists, no. We just need enough to keep the replacement rate up.
Which economists? I’m sure I can find some who believe that population should be reduced. Economics is more opinion than science.
The prevailing consensus of economists in capitalist countries is that we should just keep running on that treadmill to generate “limitless” growth.
How does Social Security or any other pension plan survive?
Taxing the rich would fund social security for a long time.
UBI?
UBI instead of, or in addition to currently existing social safety nets?
I think it would be simpler to have only ubi
Anyone who thinks that should start with themselves
Removed by mod
We’re not even close to the point at which population growth becomes unsustainable. We’re in the position we’re in because we failed to invest in infrastructure.
Yes, about 3000 billionaires will do. But I doubt that’s who you meant…
The rhetoric you’re using does serve them though:
https://www.theworldmind.org/home/2021/12/10/the-dangerous-myth-of-overpopulation
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/9/26/16356524/the-population-question
https://theecologist.org/2020/apr/16/debunking-overpopulation
For reasons I don’t understand, people seem to be incapable of separating any discussion of overpopulation from racism and eugenics. I think it’s at the point where it’s disingenuous, willful, or at the very least a massive blind spot in people talking about the problem. You should understand that bad people can embrace overpopulation with bad conclusions, and that should not taint reality. Hitler was an animal lover - does that mean it’s wrong to love animals? That’s the level of flawed argument we’re dealing with here.
Jfc…
It’s because they’re fucking inseparable, you not understanding why or how (never mind being as wilfully ignorant as you are since you clearly didn’t read word in the links I posted) doesn’t change that
Let me copy pasta myself for the sake of anyone who actually wants to learn more before I leave this dumpster fire:
Well that was a totally reasonable response from someone who is totally capable of considering the merits of an argument without relying on bad articles trying to drum up weak support for the author’s preordained conclusion with circular reasoning. Nothing to see here folks. This guy has it all figured out and we should totally worship his correctness without debate.
IMO the only myth is the belief that it’s a myth. The evidence is overwhelming.
This is a fine position if you’re ok with your worst enemy getting to make the decision about who gets to procreate and live.
That’s not what is being suggested in this thread.
The suggestion is that people (all of them) should have better access to, and education about, contraception.
I responded to this:
Which is vague. And vagueness is often used to give plausible deniability when eugenicists are on the march. So cool on you for giving such grace to an internet stranger, but when I read things like this, it always includes what is between the lines.
And which social or ethnic group in particular do you suggest should be the ones to be sacrificed exactly? The answer to eugenics is not more eugenics.
That escalated quickly! Zero to genocide in one comment.