this post was submitted on 21 May 2025
316 points (95.7% liked)
World News
35986 readers
675 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
These people are like the photo-negitive of Eugenicists.
anti-natalists present with reactionary ideology since they're obsessed with what other people are doing with their bodies. And they advocate for a totalitarian state to regulate that. But then they're also obsessed with environmentalism?
Maybe their lefty misanthropes? I don't get it.
Maybe the term is being taken over by eco-fascists, but I've considered myself an anti-natalist for many years and I'm only playfully misanthropic.
I don't go in for the Malthusian claptrap. I just think it's more ethical to adopt an existing, actual real child rather than make a brand new one. I think this is a really really compelling point, and I wish more parents would seriously consider it before choosing to follow their biological imperative.
It's like with nihilism, where everyone agrees life is ultimately meaningless, but some people are real babies about it (pun intended).
If you read some of the other comments here, it's more like they're the two sides of the same coin. Eugenicists want to kill poor and other disadvantaged people and antinatalists (at least going by the bomber's comments) want primarily poor people not to have kids, although they seem to try to dress it up as not wanting anyone to have kids. Who knows, this is all pretty fringe stuff.
He personally was the fringe, but antinatalism is product and offshoot of neomalthusianism and eugenicism which are in the core of imperialism. Just the big scale ones do not bomb a clinic, they bomb and starve entire nonwhite countries.