[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / edu / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/edu/ - Education

'The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.' - Karl Marx
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
[ Return / Go to bottom ]

File: 1673382821530.jpeg (74.01 KB, 638x479, antinatalism-is-a-mental-….jpeg)

 No.14251[View All]

Serious discussion.

The right completely rejects any anti-natal ethic (see pic related). most antinatalists are overwhelmingly pessimists (or cynics) and when politically active they tend to be leftist socialists (Think Thomas Ligotti, David Benatar, Philipp Mainländer… etc). antinatalism is very underground, even more so than veganism and is mostly perceived in a negative light even by the left. it's seen as reactionary and extreme and therefore dismissed.
however, I think that anti-natal ethics have a huge potential to reduce a lot of suffering as antinatalist philosophy often asks deeper questions about life, meanwhile most of the leftist discourse is focused on social identity and capitalism. it's not that antinatalists don't think of those things as big problems that need to be overcome, on the contrary, antinatalists tend to be hardcore socialist leftists but they also recognize deeper issues that (I would argue) are even more pressing than the overcoming of capitalism.
now before you slam antinatalists as genocidal defeatist nihilists, you should understand that antinatalists are not a monolith, some are apolitical and some aren't, some have unconditional anti-life attitudes and some are transhumanists and so on…
the point im trying to make here is that I think it's a mistake to outright reject antinatalism or antinatalists from leftist discourse, and as allies, as antinatalists care deeply about suffering, something that the left is synonymous with.
417 posts and 69 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.14670

>>14669
>It's not doom posting if true
It's still doom posting, and there is still a laundry list of things worth doing instead of arguing about the meaninglessness of existence. Nothing is more meaningless then expressing discomfort on the Internet

 No.14671

>>14492
this shit slaps

 No.14672

File: 1678670380133.png (290.7 KB, 1280x1532, poll-gene-editing-babies-2….png)

>>14616
>designer babbis especially under class alienation is bound to be dystopic as fuk.
Why?

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jsEt7zDxRzY

 No.14673

>>14366
>hurr durr kys
Horrible takes on antinatalism is the intersection of /pol/ and /leftypol/.
No one wants to touch it. They devote the least amount of critical consideration possible, find a nice slogan, and call it a day.

 No.14674

実はここのやつらが言う反出生主義は結構反女性なのです。

 No.14675

>>14300
Underrated post

 No.14676

>>14545
im a rape victim and don't find this analogy insulting at all.
in fact I find it very accurate.

 No.14677

https://twitter.com/Logo_Daedalus/status/1649112066165178

 No.14678

>>14265
>I am le chad pepe xdxd
Imagine unironically posting weird, self-aggrandizing stuff like this.
>>14674
Little weeaboo was so proud of his Japanese studying and was peeing himself waiting to show it to the class.

 No.14679

>>14265
This.

 No.14680

As with everything, redditors go above and beyond to make the idea seem as insane as possible. Unless you're already apart of the elites or near elites, having a child is a massive uncertainty. Even in the best cases, it might still come out retarded. But also, everyone gets cancer at some point and dies so why bother to begin with?
I can only look at the 'movement' and cringe, but there's nothing really wrong with admitting you don't have much of a future to provide for a kid economically, and when society itself can't account for the kids of today you know its even more fucked ie foster care system.

 No.14681

>>14251
Non-discussion. Births are going down either way and we will reach peak population in 2040-50 if not before that.

 No.14682

>>14252
>For me, this question comes down to a personal ethical judgement.
Yea but you see me and you making a personal choice abstaining from procreation doesn't help our cause any does it now?
if the breeders aren't convinced by argument and "reason" we still have take it upon ourselves to extinguish suffering one way or another.

 No.14683

>>14681
completely irrelevant to the subject of antinatalism.
it's about extinction not just "low births"

 No.14684

Antinatalism is reddit nihilism

 No.14685

>>14683
Why not extinguish yourself?

 No.14686

File: 1685320879560.jpeg (671.5 KB, 726x1386, A31CB976-DBF0-4548-BAF2-5….jpeg)


 No.14687

>>14406
>posting that attributed quote from "Voltaire" again.

Voltaire never said that quote, it was Kevin Alfred Strom, an American neo-Nazi, who first said those words in 1993.

 No.14688

>>14251
Antinatalism is not, and will not, ever be taken seriously in spaces other than online. Procreation is obviously up to personal preference and as you said, antinatalists aren't some monolith. Deal with them as you would anyone else.

 No.14689

>>14685
because it doesn't solve the problem.

 No.14690

>>14684
very insightful anon!

 No.14691

>>14689
Start shooting up preschools like adam lanza then, another antinatalist "efilist"
Your misanthropy and self-hatred is just fuel for bloodshed

 No.14692

>>14690
Yes
You are a redditor and a nihilist who unironically posts on r/nihilism about how angry you were that you saw a happy couple carrying their baby in a park, hoping to get upvotes

 No.14693

>>14688
procreation on a case by case basis isn't the problem, I don't expect people to stop breeding even if 100% of the population were convinced antinatalists.
it's procreation being socially and "morally" accepted that's the problem.

 No.14694

>>14693
Do animals also have moral considerations before making babies, or is it just natural?

 No.14695

>>14691
still doesn't solve the problem.
Lanza was the kind of person that was going to mass shoot anyways, regardless of philosophical belief.

 No.14696

>>14695
You hate the concept of life - he killed life.
Its a job well done, no?
Are you also happy about climate change and mass pollution turning earth into a sterile wasteland? I would be in your situation.
Whats the point of "ideas" if ideas still require brains to receive them? Isnt praxis war and terrorism, until all organic matter is annihilated?
Whats your perfect strategy?

 No.14697

>>14696
no and no.
you wouldn't be happy about these if you took antinatalism seriously.
lets use the example of conflict
there is no sense in winning the battle if you lose the war. least of all battles that make you look bad in the long run (Lanza).
>Whats your perfect strategy?
no idea, that's the puzzle.

 No.14698

>>14672
Gene correction isn't what is considered designer babies

 No.14699

>>14694
That's my point, procreation is too deeply ingrained in our nature that even in an antinatalist society it would still happen.
so it doesn't make much sense to punish individuals too much for that. what matters is that everyone gets why procreation is bad then we could all be on board to extinct the rest of the planet.

 No.14700

File: 1685331574776-0.png (974.14 KB, 1100x1315, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1685331574776-1.png (316.93 KB, 561x701, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1685331574776-2.png (177.46 KB, 560x450, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1685331574776-3.png (5.15 MB, 2028x1638, ClipboardImage.png)

“Madness, mayhem, erotic vandalism, devastation of innumerable souls - while we scream and perish, History licks a finger and turns the page.”
― Thomas Ligotti

 No.14701

>>14251
> most antinatalists are overwhelmingly pessimists (or cynics) and when politically active they tend to be leftist socialists (Think Thomas Ligotti, David Benatar, Philipp Mainländer… etc). antinatalism is very underground, even more so than veganism and is mostly perceived in a negative light even by the left. it's seen as reactionary and extreme and therefore dismissed.
Antinatalism IS reactionary and also bourgeois. I have never heard of any socialist anti-natalism but they'd still be wrong. The world is full of suffering, not because of "selfish parents who, unethically, did not consider whether their child would like to have been born" but because Capitalist imperialism cannot provide for human need, only for the private accumulation of capital for a select few

>however, I think that anti-natal ethics have a huge potential to reduce a lot of suffering
framing. see above.

>as antinatalist philosophy often asks deeper questions about life, meanwhile most of the leftist discourse is focused on social identity and capitalism.
framing, see above.

>it's not that antinatalists don't think of those things as big problems that need to be overcome, on the contrary, antinatalists tend to be hardcore socialist leftists but they also recognize deeper issues that (I would argue) are even more pressing than the overcoming of capitalism.
and there it is: guys, guys, guys let's fixate on this totally made up bourgeois ethical quandary and work tirelessly to abolish natalism instead of the real material root cause of suffering

>now before you slam antinatalists as genocidal defeatist nihilists, you should understand that antinatalists are not a monolith, some are apolitical and some aren't, some have unconditional anti-life attitudes and some are transhumanists and so on…
I would not ever argue that antinatalists are genocidal, except that they clearly seem to believe that poverty is the result of too many selfish parents choosing to have children against the wishes of their *checks notes* unborn children. in that sense, it is basically rebranded malthusianism

>the point im trying to make here is that I think it's a mistake to outright reject antinatalism or antinatalists from leftist discourse, and as allies, as antinatalists care deeply about suffering, something that the left is synonymous with.
antinatalists don't actually care about suffering. they don't want to address the actual material root cause of suffering. rather, they want to distract from the issue of the exploitative nature of imperialist capitalism by fixating on bourgeois moral debate

 No.14702

File: 1685333957091.png (764.59 KB, 1080x1080, ClipboardImage.png)

>>14701
>Antinatalism IS reactionary and also bourgeois
see pic rel

>I have never heard of any socialist anti-natalism
I am socialist antinatalist

 No.14703

>>14702
who cares what musk says, dude is also constantly speaking against ai "despite" being an openai investor (actually wants gov to regulate ai and let openai have a monopoly on it)

 No.14704

>>14703
He is fearmongering so that people use only his AI and drive competition out. Anyway the point is that socialism can take care of material needs true but that doesn't mean there wont be antinatalists in a socialist society due to philosophical and other reasons

 No.14705

>>14701
>Antinatalism IS reactionary and also bourgeois. I have never heard of any socialist anti-natalism but they'd still be wrong. The world is full of suffering, not because of "selfish parents who, unethically, did not consider whether their child would like to have been born" but because Capitalist imperialism cannot provide for human need, only for the private accumulation of capital for a select few

Wrong, you have no understanding of reality to even begin forming a philosophy as a counter argument.

 No.14706

File: 1685643626585.jpeg (589.6 KB, 620x1340, 4CF25C31-22DE-436A-B009-2….jpeg)

How do anarchists respond to this?

https://twitter.com/AvaGrac46763969/status/1664320944926490624

 No.14707

>>14706
Anarchism doesn't have a single master-thinker the way marxism does, so for anarchists, it's not a problem to begin with.

 No.14708

>>14706
She simply didn't know about advanced biology and genetics. It's like the socialists that today say that meat is essential to human nutrition and that trans people are a modern phenomenon. They are talking of things out of their depth.

 No.14709

>>14706
Emma was based:

 No.14710

>>14706
I see nothing wrong here. Birth strike in the imperial core is objectively a good thing.

 No.14711

File: 1685859127430.jpg (66.58 KB, 602x604, main-qimg-4cf21d32749fa365….jpg)

this is stupid and schizophrenic.

the only reason you wouldn't think of bringing another life into this world is because of the horrors of capital and imperialism and the absolute destruction and greed it has brought to the earth, life itself, and you.

life can be wonderful and beautiful with meaning or no meaning, and the forces of capitalism stand in the way of that.

comrades, fight for a better and more just world, not discuss the nihilistic iniquity of not having kids of your own.

 No.14712

File: 1685859507956.png (261.97 KB, 558x605, ClipboardImage.png)

>>14711
Death solves all problems, no man, no problem

 No.14713

>>14578
That implies that rationality only cares for profit, the very definition of which we cannot pinpoint in our objective reality (simply because of it's inexistance).
Rational thinking and emotional are the ultimate spooks.

 No.14714

>Antinatalism
Oh, so eugenics isn't called "reproductive health" anymore?
https://corbettreport.com/gates/
https://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_gates.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pp-exterminating-idUSL2N2X11YN

I keep losing track with all this newspeak, there should be dictionaries for this kind of shit.

 No.14715

>>14713
You are a retard making enormous assumptions.

 No.14716

File: 1686241740208.png (210.23 KB, 2515x1134, ClipboardImage.png)

Read.

 No.14717

>>14706
BASED

 No.14718

"Leftist socialist" doesn't always equate to good. There are after all Fabian eugenicists, Nazi socialists, and lumpen anarchofascists that technically count as socialists but are fundamentally of the reactionary socialist types ultimately. Many Western socialists are simply disaffected petty bourgeois who are mad that the world has some laws.

 No.14719

>>14251
Its only positive if retards dont reproduce.


Unique IPs: 29
[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / edu / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]
[ Return / Go to top /