I am actually taking a real assessment of how I want to be spending my time. The future was never "guaranteed", and it's never been guaranteed to anyone. But it feels a lot more tenuous now.
EndlessNightmare
joined 1 year ago
I think that I’d like it even more if people who weren’t forced to drive weren’t driving,
I actually don't mind driving so much as I mind driving in heavy traffic. Driving along on an empty road, or lighter traffic at least, isn't so bad.
But society pretty much forces everyone to drive. Even people who don't want to drive or are simply bad at it.
But I think that a healthy society includes a few child-free people.
Regardless of one's views on antinatalism, we absolutely need to acknowledge that not everyone is suitable for parenthood. I'm not suggesting that we (as a society) impose restrictions on it. Rather if someone self-selects for not having kids, people need to STFU and accept it rather than trying to shame or pressure them.
Because I don’t think there’s a point to living without reproduction.
So the meaning of life is ... the continuation of life? Or to put it another way, life is the meaning of life. That seems rather tautological.
Housing can either be affordable or a good investment. I should be affordable, but unfortunately it would seem that society has chosen the latter.
There are real consequences of sex though: pregnancy and communicable diseases. Some of these can be mitigated (e.g. modern contraceptives), but I think they are at least factors to consider in favor of monogamy.
That said, I believe that life-long monogamy (as would be prescribed by marriage) is fighting against human nature.
We should make inheritance less powerful but also make it easier to build up your own financial security and have better social safety nets.
Generational wealth is in opposition to the idea of equality and egalitarianism.
Antinatalism: the belief that the creation of sentient life is morally wrong
One could say that it's a "supervisor".
/not quitting my day job
It's the reason I don't bike, even though distances are reasonable. I consider using an unprotected bike lane next to a busy 45mph stroad to be a matter of when (not "if") I'm involved in a collision that could cause serious injury or even a fatality. All it takes is one driver with their face in their phone.
My point is that Democrats, whether progressive or centrist, shouldn't be supporting this. It shouldn't matter (on this particular topic) if progressives aren't voting; I'm not willing to give centrist Democrats a pass and will condemn them just the same.
I keep hearing that progressives aren't voting in the numbers that they should be, but there might be another problem: there simply aren't that many progressives to get offices. As a "Reddit refugee", I realized that we are overrepresented in a lot of these online echo chambers.
If 3.5% can make a change, then 3.5% can also work in opposing that change.
3.5% can probably do it if such a change is unopposed. But it isn't unopposed.