« Dem Congressman Reserves a Room in the Capitol for Islamic Terrorist Front Group | Main | Driving Out Halliburton »
March 13, 2007
The Next Stage of Environmentalism: Antinatalism
We can't build homes, eat meat, domesticate animals, farm, drill for oil, generate nuclear power, exterminate mosquitoes, or even drive to work without committing some crime against Gaia and the animals. Even if we were to go back to living in trees, no doubt we would damage the branches and create carbon emissions with our flatulence. What exactly does the Left expect us to do?
The answer is straightforward: stop existing.
David Benatar provides some sophistical support for the ultimate in depraved objectives in his book Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence. From the Amazon book description:
Most people believe that they were either benefited or at least not harmed by being brought into existence. Thus, if they ever do reflect on whether they should bring others into existence — rather than having children without even thinking about whether they should — they presume that they do them no harm. Better Never to Have Been challenges these assumptions. David Benatar argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm. Although the good things in one's life make one's life go better than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been deprived by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be deprived. However, by coming into existence one does suffer quite serious harms that could not have befallen one had one not come into existence. Drawing on the relevant psychological literature, the author shows that there are a number of well-documented features of human psychology that explain why people systematically overestimate the quality of their lives and why they are thus resistant to the suggestion that they were seriously harmed by being brought into existence. The author then argues for the 'anti-natal' view — that it is always wrong to have children — and he shows that combining the anti-natal view with common pro-choice views about foetal moral status yield a 'pro-death' view about abortion (at the earlier stages of gestation). Anti-natalism also implies that it would be better if humanity became extinct. Although counter-intuitive for many, that implication is defended, not least by showing that it solves many conundrums of moral theory about population.
Benatar isn't the first to wish the human race would just go away. To quote the well-entrenched member of the liberal literary establishment Kurt Vonnegut:
We are killing the planet as a life support system. We may have gone so far already that there's no recovery from it. The game may be over. … I think the earth's immune system is trying to get rid of us. And it's high time they did. We are a disease on the face of this planet … it's time we got out of here. We are a disease on the planet, and I think we ought to become syphilis with a conscience and stop reproducing.
A group calling itself Voluntary Human Extinction Movement is also up-front about its hopes to rid reality of humans.
It's becoming clear why the one human activity the Left adamantly approves of is aborting our own children, as well as why it uses all the means at its disposal to impose its nihilistic view that human life has no special meaning.
People could be excused for thinking that past totalitarian ideologies such as Islam, fascism, or communism represent true evil. But under each of these ideologies, some people do benefit, at least to the extent they gain power over others. All of them offer a conception of utopia, even if profoundly twisted. None of them is sick enough to call for the extermination of the human race.
Only with modern environmentalism has humanity managed to attain pure evil. Like a polar bear, it looks cuddly at a distance. Only up close do you realize it's a monster.
On a tip from V the K.
Posted by Van Helsing at March 13, 2007 8:19 AM
OT: Columnist James Kilpatrick, "What's the big deal about kiddie pr0n?""
Posted by: V the K at March 13, 2007 8:51 AM
David Benatar should set an example. He's a hypocrite with each breath he takes.
Posted by: Jimbo at March 13, 2007 8:54 AM
Obviously the only way we can save the planet is by blowing it up, thus removing it from the potentially harmful influences of selfish human beings. Benatar needs to increase the size of his carbon footprint immediately! This is the same approach Janet Reno used to save the children at Waco, and it seems to have worked out very well for all concerned.
Posted by: nixonsninja at March 13, 2007 9:03 AM
"None of them is sick enough to call for the extermination of the human race."
Oh they're sick enough alright. They're just not honest enough to express it publicly. I'd like to hear what is being said at their little tin-foil crackpot gaia-fests.
Posted by: dnc_hindenburg at March 13, 2007 9:11 AM
I just wish these genocidal environmental misanthropes would "think globally and act locally," if you get my drift.
Posted by: V the K at March 13, 2007 9:18 AM
It's amusing how these "human race should die out" proponents never take the first step in supporting their own philosophies. I really wish they'd lead by example!
Posted by: Pam at March 13, 2007 10:11 AM
Awesome idea. The lefties can drink the cool aide first.
Posted by: J buzz at March 13, 2007 11:04 AM
So why, then, are they anti-war? Why are they against global warming? Why are they against the death penalty?
If the heat and floods are going to kill us all, stop complaining about it! Rev up that SUV!
Posted by: NudeGayWhalesForJesus at March 13, 2007 11:12 AM
Although counter-intuitive for many
Counter-intuitive? WTF? Of course its counter-intuitive you moron, its built into our frackin DNA! Survival instincts have been with us since long before we crawled down out of the trees and became the first apes to swim.
And just to agree with us, why is it these a$$holes don't simply drink the cyanide-laced Kool-Aid and do us all the favour? If you're going to stand firmly behind mankind dying out, have the balls to actually paint your brains on the wall!
Posted by: Brooklyn Red Leg at March 13, 2007 12:04 PM
While the "environmentalists" conveniently ignore that big, glowing ball of gas that's busily fusing hydrogen into helium and other heavier elements just 93 million miles away ("It's all mankind's fault!"), they equally disregard anything that would actually help the human race live better lives, with less disease and better nutrition here in the real world (Capitalism). Like a rose, a lib is a lib is a lib.
However, it does look as though the elites among the Gaia-lovers would love to be able to stick around the planet (so I guess they're not entirely opposed to human life on the Earth), it's just all those nasty, "common" folks out there who really, really have to go, so the "better people" can be happy and become One With Nature.
Posted by: jc14 at March 13, 2007 8:06 PM
"And just to agree with us, why is it these a$$holes don't simply drink the cyanide-laced Kool-Aid and do us all the favour? If you're going to stand firmly behind mankind dying out, have the balls to actually paint your brains on the wall!"
Spend two seconds thinking about it, and you'll come to the answer. Simply put, if we were to kill ourselves, then our message would die with us; thereby allowing you animals to continue breeding out of control and causing further unnecessary suffering. By living out the natural term of our existence, we can continue to work towards keeping at least a few more lives from being brought into this world by your ilk.
Posted by: Anonymous at March 14, 2007 12:30 AM
Additionally, it's very humorous to see how you all say, "Lead by example and kill yourself!", "Increase your carbon footprint and destroy the world!", "Why be against war!?".
All of these comments go to show that you are the ones who are truly sick, as you do not care about the suffering this will cause to those who presently exist. No one in the anti-natalist camp advocates this kind of active extinction that causes suffering to present humans; rather, the concept endorses a passive extinction that prevents the suffering of sentient beings that you have no right to create.
Posted by: Anonymous at March 14, 2007 12:39 AM
"...the concept endorses a passive extinction that prevents the suffering of sentient beings that you have no right to create."
man, you are sick...
I love this quote too:
"As VHEMT Volunteers know, the hopeful alternative to the extinction of millions of species of plants and animals is the voluntary extinction of one species: Homo sapiens... us."
All living beings have the right to reproduce, even pets like cats and dogs. We are all hardwired with the survival instinct to reproduce. Taking away that right should not be in anyone's power.
Posted by: Freedom Now at March 14, 2007 3:13 PM
"the concept endorses a passive extinction that prevents the suffering of sentient beings that you have no right to create"
Wow, what a weirdo.
On the one hand, he hates us all, but on the other hand, he wants to prevent the sufferings of the "sentient beings"...which are...us. hehe.
Thanks dude, you are, personally, what this site is all about! Good laughs for all! hehe
Posted by: NudeGayWhalesForJesus at March 21, 2007 11:08 AM