Seems like a super-nerdy medical idea that would work without capitalism and has nothing to do with capitalism.
A lot of things terminally online people claim is capitalism has nothing to do with it.
Yeah, sounds like a dumb hypothetical you’re having with your nerdy friends or a staff member of Hitlers cabinet discussing the next big thing after eugenics.
Good news boys, if we’re willing to use women this way, we can actually do the same for men! This is one unique sexual reproduction horror story that can in theory be inflicted on both sexes!
Pregnancy without a uterus, impossible! You say. But ectopic pregnancies are a thing. We all start out as parasites. As an embryo develops, it looks for a surface of flesh rich in blood vessels to latch onto. The primary function of the uterus is to provide an inner lining that is sort of a “disposable surface.” The inner lining is rich in blood vessels, the ideal environment for a zygote to latch onto and grow from. The embryo can integrate its blood vessels with the uterine lining and thoroughly mess those up. Then after pregnancy the whole inner lining is just sloughed off. That in inelegant terms is the uterus - an organ that produces a nice safe surface for the zygote to latch onto that won’t harm the person carrying the pregnancy.
But, things don’t always go well. If a zygote somehow tears through the uterine wall, then ectopic pregnancy, pregnancy outside the uterus, can result. And this a serious life-threatening medical condition. The fetus as it develops will latch onto not the intended uterine surface, but the vital abdominal organs. Giving “birth” in this case is done surgically, and it’s more akin to cutting out a cancer than a healthy live birth.
But while it hasn’t been tried due to the obvious health risks and huge medical ethics issues, there’s little reason to think that ectopic pregnancies couldn’t be carried in a male admomen. DNA and chromosomes shouldn’t be a barrier. The placenta that the fetus grows is evolved to prevent the fetus from being rejected like a donor organ. It’s not like mothers and infants share their DNA.
So in theory we could use men in vegetative states as one-time use surrogates. There has been research proposed and papers written on the possibility of trans women carrying children via uterine transplant, but this method, deliberate artificial ectopic pregnancy, is in principle a lot simpler. You don’t need to transplant a delicate organ and find a way to carry a pregnancy while taking anti-rejection drugs. You just implant an embryo in the surrogate abdomen and let it go to town. Let it latch in to whatever internal organs it wants. Then after nine months, just cut open and discard the surrogate father.
It wouldn’t be as simple as just implanting an embryo. The pregnant vegetative man would likely need to have his hormone profile monitored and heavily manipulated. But this is easy enough. Testosterone production could be nuked by simple castration, and erogenous estrogen and progesterone could then be introduced as needed before and during the pregnancy. After the pregnancy, it is unlikely the man would survive. So this is a one time deal. But if we’re OK treating people in persistent vegetative states like resources to be exploited, I see no reason to throw out half of our potential surrogate population simply because they happen to be men.
This should be a horror movie plot
Yeah, that’s the kind of persistent vegetative state you don’t want to wake up from.
But really this kind of abuse of people in these states goes way beyond pregnancy. If we’re willing to do this to women, why not keep vegetative patients of both sexes alive for years as continuous blood donors? I could easily see someone justifying that, especially if the victim has a rare or that universal donor blood type.
Or how about organ donation? We do currently take organs from deceased donors, but usually it’s a one time deal. When it comes time, if the person is a willing donor, you pull the plug, and then harvest whatever organs you can that you have a recipient for at the moment. But you could make that a lot more efficient if you could keep the donor alive for a long time, perhaps years. Just keep them alive, waiting for someone in need. Someone needs the first kidney? Give it to them. Someone needs a second kidney? Give it to them and put the donor on permanent dialysis. Someone needs a hear or lung? Take the donor’s and keep them going via artificial means. Or maybe we could take skin graft after skin graft, growing new skin again and again. Treat them like sheep being shorn. It’s the difference between having to use a butchered animal up all at once vs being able to freeze most of it for later. Hospitals could have whole wards of these donors caught for years in a state of half-disassembled living death.
This is an ethical Pandora’s box we REALLY do not want to open.
I’m cool with anencephalic humans/clones, with or without genetic engineering to reduce rejection, being used for spare parts.
Have you read House of the Scorpion?
I have not. Looks like it’s YA, which I tend to steer away from. Is it full of tropes and oversimplification like Divergent or Mockingjay stuff, or is it better than that?
I mean its alright it just covers this topic exactly while also not showing it integrated into society at large too well.
That horror movie would make any HP Lovecraft stuff look like a children’s book.
They did a comedy with Arnold and Danny devito called JR
No, you don’t understand, people’s lives can only be thrown away in accordance with tradition. Men die in wars, women are exploited for children. You can’t cross the beams, frogs will turn gay!
You will get this passed as soon as we have a gender neutral draft and 50-50% wartime casualties between genders.
Basically face hugger reproduction from the Alien franchise?
Essentially yes. Again, we all start as parasites. A uterus primarily is just a way for pregnancy to be survivable. But in theory it is perfectly doable in males.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_pregnancy#Ectopic_implant
As that article notes, pioneers in reproductive healthcare have even commented that it would likely be possible. We just don’t do it because it’s medically unconscionable to deliberately create an ectopic pregnancy. It goes against the whole, “and first, do no harm” principle. But if we’re throwing ethics to the wind and involuntarily impregnating people we consider already dead anyway, why not do the same to males?
I hope this doesn’t awaken anything in me…
Tap for spoiler
It most certainly did.
The fact that anyone would need this amount of mental gymnastics to find reason enough to relate to the women potentially being targeted, to be against it, is pretty fucked up in its own right.
A large part of how patriarchy works is that men aren’t expected to, so often don’t, give a shit about the harm it causes until something impacts them directly, and even then, they will only actively oppose it if it harms them significantly more than what the patriarchy benefits them (toxic masculinity being a prime example of self harm many men are reluctant to fight).
Catering to this feature of the system only perpetuates it. Stop creating convoluted ways for them to relate (even “your mothers and sisters” shouldn’t be needed), and start expecting, and demanding, they simply consider and therefor treat all humans equally (which magically leads to caring about what happens to women just as much as they would if it were men under threat).
With all due respect, you seem to be actively seeking to be offended. This comes down to bodily autonomy. And providing an example of how this effects everyone is not some monstrous thing perpetuating the patriarchy. I think you’re a little too deep in the gender theory here.
I’m a trans person. I have had to fight for bodily autonomy my entire life. The fight for bodily autonomy is what ultimately connects trans rights with what are traditionally labeled “women’s issues.” Ultimate the right to abortion or contraception is about the right of everyone to bodily autonomy. To have final ownership and control of your own flesh and blood effects women’s reproductive rights, trans rights, the right to die, organ donation, etc. This goes way beyond just traditional women’s issues.
And honestly, the scenario isn’t convoluted or absurd. If the government did ever allow this kind of surrogacy, there would be no need to confine it to just one sex. Hell, I would be actively petitioning to apply it to everyone regardless of sex. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and I AM that pettty. I would absolutely demand that atrocities be applied equally. And if we’re doing this, we’re probably also doing involuntary organ donation. So again it all comes back to bodily autonomy.
What is horrifying about this proposal is not that it would be done to women. What is horrifying about it is that it would be done to human beings. And I don’t feel the need to throw up artificial barriers and get offended that someone would dare to point out the broader implications of this beyond narrowly defined and ghettoized “women’s issues.”
I don’t know, I think OP is making A Modest Proposal
The spice must flow. The Tlielaxu will have their Axolotl Tanks.
That’s an incredibly expensive bad idea. Dialysis will likely be necessary and the beating heart corpse just kind of slowly breaks down over time with multi system organ failure. 9 months would require a heroic effort at life support. Makes sense it was suggested by a philosopher. She also suggested using male bodies as incubators. Might as well use pigs if you’re going that far. Humerous that the philosopher that suggested it was a woman though.
It is a good thought experiment to gauge where people stand on brain death and personhood too I guess. I obviously think a body with a brain that is dead to the stem is just a corpse. That brain will actually end up liquefying because it is actively necrotizing.
In reality, I also agree with the premise that actual surrogacy is worse. An economic trade where someone rich buys someone else’s health is no different than buying a kidney. So that point they made is absolutely not wrong. Surrogacy should be abolished, though this obviously has no chance of taking it’s place.
The problem aren’t babies, its funding those babies. Raising children is fucking expensive, and in the age of infinite growth nobody is allowed to slowdown to raise children. Adoption centers and foster homes are abysmal, and having kids is too expensive for most people.
The rich dont want to pay for peoples kids, they just want to squeeze the value out them. Thats why Elon and his vice president trump wants more H-1B visas. They don’t have to pay for the childcare or education, they can just drain educated workers from another struggling country
The best way to get people to not care that you’re raping (or otherwise abusing / exploiting) their children is to make sure they have too many to keep track of.
Jesus fucking Christ i want to schedule a hysterectomy and i don’t even have one of those.
Donate one.
that paper has GOT to be a thinly veiled gruesome fetish manuscript, involving at least a couple corpses.
I don’t know what this has to do with capitalism. This sounds like a shitty lab experiment which can happen under any form of government or economy. Oh wait I checked and it’s from .ML. I am posting this in the hopes to get banned from that entire instance because blocking didn’t seem to work.
Nah bro, just read more theory bro. You just haven’t had dialectical materialism explained to you the right way bro. Don’t worry bro, give me like a quick 4 hours and it’ll all make sense.
Marx was right about so many things it’s wild considering he was writing about this shit in the late 1800s. He wasn’t perfect but the fact that so much of it rings true in 2024 is impressive.
But like Jesus, it’s his fucking followers that are so goddamn annoying.
And the whole read more theory bro shit is fucking ableist and classist. I had a brain injury as a teenager and I struggle with longer reads especially stuff written in a version of English that isn’t current (sure it’s not Shakespeare which is impossible to me even before the TBI but it’s also not 2024 English) and also very dense. Most Americans can’t read beyond a sixth grade level, good luck getting them to read theory when they won’t even read simple novels for pleasure.
And no amount of theory reading is going to make this anarchist support an authoritarian system. I don’t trust people in power even if they’re people I agree with. There’s something fundamentally wrong with people who seek power regardless of ideology…
I struggle with longer reads especially stuff written in a version of English that isn’t current and also very dense.
The marx madness podcast was started with the intent to fill this obvious gap and make theory just a little more approachable. Highly recommend even if you aren’t able to read along and just use the podcast as a kind of sparknotes.
Thanks I’ll check it out
Mikhail Bakunin sounds more your speed tan Marx
Probably. It’s on my reading list that I can’t seem to get to lol
The amount of babies isn’t the issue America, it’s the fact that we can’t afford them.
And that the government won’t do shit-all to help them. A baby born to a corpse is not going to have a good life in America.
I just threw up in my mouth a little when you pointed that out. Yes the article says that too, but this accurate re-wording kinda really makes it “click”
What if they are a rich corpse?
Okay, but imagine if you could have one really rich guy impregnate a thousand captive comatose women at once, to improve efficiency.
From a Lomgtermist perspective, this would be great for the future of our Brave New World
What I really hate about longtermism is that it actually tells us nothing about what policies are best, as we don’t know what paths will lead to the best future.
You could argue that low taxes on billionaires will give them the resources needed to do space colonisation. Thus, in the long term, not taxing billionaires now is good. Or you could argue that a robust social safety net and UBI is the best path to a long term best future. How many Einsteins throughout history died illiterate peasants? By providing resources for everyone, we maximize our chances of the truly talented having a shot at elevating us all through new science and discoveries.
Hell, I could even justify a nuclear war through longtermism. Economies grow more worn-in and sclerotic over time. Every so often you need a historical arsonist like Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan to run through an area, burn the existing order to ashes, and give people a chance to start again. Existing elites prevent necessary change. And often the only way to remove them is to burn everything down. On the next attempt at civilization, they can learn from their predecessor’s mistakes. For example, destroying the fossil fuel industry now is effectively impossible; they’re simply far too entrenched and powerful. By voluntarily starting a global thermonuclear war, we will smash their power. Civilization can then rebuild powered entirely by solar and wind. Yes, we lose 90% of the human population today, but we prevent total human extinction via complete biosphere collapse, which appears to be the road we are on now. From the long term perspective, deliberately starting a global thermonuclear war is the only rational choice.
Climate Change is good for humanity because killing off the bulk of life on earth will give us a fresh slate to build on.
~ Op-Ed at the Atlantic or WSJ or some other smug contrarian navel gazers warehouse
What if they are a rich corpse?
Edit: Replied in wrong place.
What does this have to do with capitalism?
Capitalists are freaking out over the declining birthrate because anyone with a brainstem knows “AI” and robots won’t replace human workers for a long time, and the machine is hungry.
It seems like its just ethno-nationalists freaking out. Capitalists have been tackling this problem with immigration for a long time.
Immigration is going to stop working as developing countries develop
In about 80 years global population growth should finish leveling out, at which point immigration will become a more difficult strategy for all but the most popular destinations. In the meantime, development only seems to be a barrier for importing huge numbers of low skilled labor, and thats mostly because many of the jobs were exported directly to them instead. A more developed globe has actually been a boon for anyone looking to import skilled labor.
Don’t forget AI and automation.
McDonalds threatened to replace their employees with machines, and when they tried it cost them millions…
“15 an hour? Meet your replacement!” was nothing but a scare tactic, if machines were viable they’d already be in use.
I imagine they will finally succeed in having robots running the operations, but there will be a warehouse full of underpaid wage slaves controlling the robots from somewhere in India
They already have robots taking orders and payments, I think the last thing that will be automated in Maccas will be burger assembly
Lol. What? Who? Which “capitalists”?
I swear, Lemmy is sometimes just as bad as the far right talking about “antifa”.
can’t wait for the socialists to be out on the streets when other peoples money runs out
If “other people’s money” ever ran out we wouldn’t have billionaires.
Please open a book. Remember: it only counts if it contains more sentences than pictures.
ive read more than you
Japan PM says country on the brink over falling birth rate
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-64373950?ref=hir.harvard.edu
Famously socialist japan
Oh the hilarity! Someone on a French instance stepping in. 😁
Maybe this is more relatable to you:
France pension reforms: Macron signs pension age rise to 64 into law https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65279818
And you are the loudest protestors as well! Thank you for very likely personally proving my point (IRL as well!)
can’t wait for the socialists to be out on the streets when other peoples money runs out
Why are you linking all these imperialist nations with strong ties to capital and industry? I’ve never seen someone kick their own ass so hard. Most nations are capitalist nations. The globe is factually dominated by capitalist interests. Congrats, your ideology already won.
Go touch grass and do not reply.
If it becomes a thing capitalists could try to implement systems that make more brain dead women than would exist naturally, so that there are more babies to become workers. Look at for profit prisons and how we have more people in prison than any other country. If they want something they can pay to get it
But this came out of a public university in Colombia. Nobody ever suggested doing it for profit.
More babies = more future workers = $$$
Same logic for communism too.
Removed by mod
Capitalism is when bad stuff
we need the original author’s names.
they need to be on a list somewhere for… additional oversight.
just saying you don’t come to this ‘scientific conclusion’ in a vacuum, someone needs to check the rest of their… social circle.
Well it was a woman philosopher and likely written with the dichotomy in mind that we accept brain dead organ donation while reviling paying people to sell one their kidneys/part of their livers/one of their lungs and also accept surrogacy while reviling this modest proposal.
Lois Lowry. Wasn’t this a thing in The Giver?
man I read that so long ago, but I don’t remember this…
The only thing I took away from reading it in elementary school was the discovery that my english teacher couldn’t identify a pedophile if given a map, a copy of the criminal indictment for pedophilia and a big flashing neon sign that reads “pedophile”…
whenever I encounter people like that it makes me wonder if they’re pedos…
I think this specific one is more down to shifting cultural attitudes, but yeah broadly I certainly agree. Some people…
My brother in christ, this is not OG sleeping beauty, wtf. How did they expect that conversation to go down?
“Yes, I know your daughter is brain dead, but good news, she will be able to breed for the nation! What? You don’t like the idea of state sanctioned rape and forced breeding?” It baffles me that some people really just see women as a vessal. No thoughts on how horrific that would be for any woman going into the hospital (if something goes wrong, I don’t even get a respectful death), and for their families should one of the worse case scenarios occur (“You can bury her after we’ve popped out a few wave slaves”). Not even thoughts on the children that would be produced by such horrors.
Literally anything than make the world a better place for people to raise children in.
No one sees Women as a Vassal buddy, but you do see Unborn Children as a “Cluster of cells” that can be murdered at a whim
Unborn children get the fuck out of here. You don’t even care about the born children so get off your pious high horse of bullshit.
When you start supporting social welfare benefits maybe you can have a leg to stand on, but instead your insane ideology kills women and forces the birth of unwanted children who are the products of rape or incest, or who would not be viable for long in the world while risking the lives of the already living (mothers).
I do waaaaaay more than you, I value children’s lives over everyone else & I am a heavy supporter of social welfare The difference between me & you is that you support child-killing & I don’t As for mothers, these said mothers would rather use children as cash-cows & emotionally abuse them for fun (& I have the data to back it up, look up CircMoms) & since your priority is to kill unborn children & not punish the rapist
I say you are pretty much a bottom-of-the-barrel in term of humanity & are unwanted in this world, so you can screw off with your fake virtue-signalling, Pro-Child murder BS
You’re a real piece of shit.
Says the vile monster who prioritizes killing children over punishing rapists
Nah I’m a different person who happened to wander by and saw you expressing your fucked up misinformed beliefs while spewing hatred, vitriol, and putting words in other people’s mouths that they never said. Get bent.
LMFAO WTF women dying in childbirth is totally cool with you I guess
If they’re suggesting the brain dead body of a woman be kept alive solely to breed, that’s very vassal like to me.
I regards to abortion, I absolutely believe that people start as a cluster of cells and would choose the mother’s life, livelihood, and happiness before the cluster. I think people that are “pro-life” are virtue signaling sycophants that are more concerned with being “right” over actually doing anything to help people. Imagine how many less abortions there would be if they put half of that energy into sex education, better access to contraception, and accessible education and extra curriculars. Imagine some of that energy pointed to the kids already here and needing support and care. But nah. Let’s all stand outside of a medical facility and scare the patients and be assholes online. For the cluster. 🙄
but you do see Unborn Children as a “Cluster of cells” that can be murdered at a whim
Do you consider acorns to be trees?
Ummm yesh, they’re future trees Do you think women’s lives are equal to that of an Acorn’s ?
Is an egg a chicken?
You’ll be pleased to know that it would be perfectly possible to use men in persistent vegetative states as well. In theory, it’s perfectly possible for a male to carry a pregnancy ectopically. It just hasn’t been done, because as the embryo grows, it latches onto and messes up the internal organs. The placenta has to be cut out like a cancer afterwards.
But if we’re using people in vegetative states like this, there’s no reason to throw out half of our potential surrogates. Males in vegetative states could easily be used as one time use surrogates. You first castrate the male to nuke testosterone production. Then you introduce estrogen and progesterone. Finally you implant an embryo in the abdominal cavity. After it grows to term, you remove it surgically and let the surrogate father die.
But like… why babies? We already have way too many of those. We need fewer babies.
If we’re going to delve into some seriously murky ethical water here, why not forcus on something there’s an actual need for, like organ and blood harvesting? And that would double donor pool by including men as poss-- …oh. Oh yeah. That’s why. -_-
That’s already a thing in many countries, an opt-out program for organ donating, so by default they will take my organs if I’m braindead
I mean a step or two beyond that- like keep a braindead body alive via feeding tube and ventilator so it’s just constantly generating blood that drips into donor bags. Keep just enough in the body’s circulation to keep it ticking, but bag the rest – it would produce WAY beyond the output of a mind-intact donor.
Bone marrow transplant? Done. Skin grafts? Hit it. Fucking hair for wigs? Plasma? Hell, even fecal transplants are a thing (restores GI microbiome that got wiped out… it’s gross as fuck, but it’s a thing - and it requires the donor to follow a VERY specific diet, that can now be force-fed).
Basically anything the body passively generates that we have some use for; keep a braindead-human-cattle-donor on life support and milk it for all it’s got.
…that sounded a bit bit like a sales pitch - gist is to illustrate just how far we could take this. Putting the focus on babies will just worsen the population problem, but also showcases an extreme lack of imagination!
Ok, repeat after me: “Warhammer 40k is not an instruction manual”
Silence, Heretic
I doubt the blood is more useful than all the organs required to produce it.
But if I lie braindead in a hospital, I would be happy if my body is divided up in the way a doctor determines to be the most useful for society.Depends on the needs of the patient. If you’re bleeding to death and the hospital you’re actively dying in is out of your blood type, then absolutely blood is more useful than organs.
If you need a new lung, a huge stock of blood transfusion bags isn’t going to do you much good.
The goal would be for supply to outpace demand for all of the above.
It really depends on your blood types.
the population problem
That’s on track. Children are too expensive now so birth rates everywhere are below replacement rates already or will be soon
We may find the real population problem is we will have fewer smart people to help us fix the climate problem
We may find the real population problem is we will have fewer smart people to help us fix the climate problem
Oh no, there’s no ‘may’ about it - we’re 100% fucked on that front.
The “may” in that is that we really don’t know which way population will go after we hit peak population.
It might stabilise, it might drop, it might drop precipitously
The prediction I recently saw was the latter, a fast population drop after a peak
If we’re going to delve into some seriously murky ethical water here, why not forcus on something there’s an actual need for, like organ and blood harvesting?
Speaking of, I just watched the MST3K episode on The Clonus Horror. It didn’t end well.
Tap for spoiler
It didn’t start particularly good either. And the middle was a slog.
But like… why babies? We already have way too many of those. We need fewer babies.
Capitalism has a need for unlimited growth and also most national pension systems globally take the current working generation’s money to pay for the retirement of the current retired generation - so the future working generation needs to be big enough to support the current working generation in turn.
My own country did a footgun thing here. We had a mandatory 2nd pillar system where you contribute to a fund, the gvt matches (well, doubles) your contribution, and that gets added to the normal 1st pillar national pension when you retire, either you take it out as a lump sum, or get paid a portion of it per month. You literally couldn’t take money out of it prematurely. Except the right-wing populists decided to allow taking money out of it with the caveat that you can’t rejoin it for 10 years. A large percentage of people took money out, something like 30%?
Now the next generation are going to have to shoulder the responsibility for the current generation again. This was supposed to reduce this dependence on future generations.
But governments are not willing to do the one thing that would make for higher fertility - make the country a nice place to live, with enough support for parents so having a child isn’t an economic disaster
I wonder what my country will be like with half the number of people. We’re building so many houses, my town has two new suburbs opened in the last ten years as we head toward peak population, but our fertility rate is just over 1.6, replacement rate is 2.1. many countries are worse
I remember when we had a population in my town of 200,000 we are currently just short of half a million
We also let people take their money out of their retirement fund if they want it for buying a home (or rather put a deposit on a mortgage for a home).
Cancer has a need for unlimited growth, that doesn’t mean we should coddle a tumor: cut that shit out, then put it under the microscope so we know how to stop it from happening again.
Your county’s findings that right-wing populists are trash are consistent with a myriad of similar ‘studies’ around the globe. Mine just elected an orange neonazi who loves making decisions that hurt the quality of human life, so we’ll be adding plenty of data to that pile pretty soon here too.
deleted by creator
We need fewer babies.
I don’t know who this “we” is. Circumstances vary heavily by household and neighborhood.
I don’t know who this “we” is.
The inhabitants of planet Earth. Making a baby is one of the largest carbon footprint things anyone can do. The climate is actively writing humanity’s (and plenty of other critters’) eviction notice via the heat we’re pumping into our planet.
The needs of the individual household include not being cooked to death, and I’d wager that supersedes whichever other circumstances you had in mind.
We need fewer babies.
Making a baby is one of the largest carbon footprint things anyone can do.
The median Indian resident produces carbon under the threshold for a sustainable climate. And that country has some of the highest population growth in the world. Babies aren’t the reason your carbon footprint is high. Coal fired power plants and ICE powered automobiles and AI data centers are what’s driving up the emissions rate.
The needs of the individual household include not being cooked to death
The emissions of a single household are minuscule relative to the emissions of international industry. Not having a child will do nothing to discourage Andressen Horowitz or Jack Ma from shoving another billion tons of carbon into the atmosphere in pursuit of a larger ROI.
We need fewer babies.
We need fewer billionaires.
The carbon footprint of having a child will depend on the family it’s being born into, for sure. I don’t know jack about the median Indian resident, but I’m fairly confident that their carbon footprint is higher than zero, so even looking at them as a best case scenario, reduction is still beneficial. And the emissions of industries will reduce alongside the population they target and workforce they deploy.
AI data centers
Yeah fuck that shit.
Billionaires
Yeah fuck those pieces of shit. Population reduction needs to happen in tandem with guillotine day, as you’re 100% right that the damage they’re doing is wildly beyond the scope of -any- decision you or I could make, good or bad.
Population reduction needs to happen in tandem with guillotine day
Population reduction is already in force because guillotine day isn’t coming. The whole peril of climate change is that is renders large developed regions and concentrations of people impossible to sustain. But our inability to curb emissions isn’t a consequence of our sheer quantity of people. It is deliberately obstructed by profit-seeking actors in the highest reaches of authority.
You can kill every Gazan, bomb out every Ukrainian or Russian city, and massacre humanity along the length and breadth of the US-Mexico border. It won’t curb emissions because these aren’t the people burning all the fossil fuels.
I don’t mean reduction by cherry picking a population out of existence (except for billionaires - their extinction would be a win for literally all other life), but that humanity in general needs to slow the fuck down.
We won’t. We’re too stupid to act on any consequences beyond the scope of the fiscal year; but we need to.
Literally the plot of Shinsekai Yori (don’t watch Shinsekai Yori, it will fuck you up)
Also around Season 3 of Handmaid’s Tale, with Janine.
To be fair to them, when the rat queen was fully conscious, she freely killed / maimed / raped her own kind.
I don’t want to excuse Squealer’s actions, any more than I would Hitler’s, but I will say that he rightfully upset a horrific “natural order” likely imposed by earlier humans
WHAT THE FUCK!
