I think it's a bit dishonest to associate anti-natalism with genocide. Genocide implies the targeting of a specific group.

Let's look at the roots.

the Latin word gens or gentis, meaning birth, stock, race

And cidium, in it's french form cide, meaning killing

Genocide is the destruction of people based on their ancestry. We all know this, so I'm not sure why this has to be exained.

Let's look at some major genocides, shall we?

Armenian Genocide:
I consider the name here inaccurate, because Armenians were not the only target. Christian genocide might be more accurate. The ultranationalist Young Turks regime engaged in, and encouraged, the mass killing of Pontic Greek, Armenian, and Assyrian Christian populations within the Ottoman Empire. This was carried out by Muslim Turks, Kurds, and Arabs, mostly by the military.

Rwandan Genocide:
Mass killing of the Tutsi population of Rwanda by the Hutu majority after the assassination of the Hutu president. Pretty straightforward.

Holocaust:
Extermination of groups labelled subhuman by Germany's Nazi regime. Bit more emphasis on eugenics than ethnic cleansing, ethnic Germans were as likely to be targeted as others if they suffered from a disability. Possibly the most disturbing cases of this were the forced sterilizations of women suffering from ailments as mundane as depression or anxiety. German dissidents were killed as well. The Holocaust was, essentially, the Nazi regime's policy for the removal of undesirables.

Genocide targets specific groups. It is carried out largely by one or more other groups with the intent to destroy the target group.

I really don't see how anti-natalism is genocide, given that it is entirely based on inaction, not the use of force, and is not intended to target a specific group. In fact, anti-nataliism and force are antithetical. Anti-natalism is a radical view where extreme value is placed on consent. You may not, in this mindset, make any decision for another person, even choosing to give them life. At least, as I understand it.

I think it's disingenuous to call it genocidal in its current state, though the parallels are there.

This raises a question-
If members of a group engage in genocidal acts against their own, is that true genocide? Or something else?

Can genocide be self-inflicted?

Who cares, anti-natalism is stupid anyway

Quote from: Sargon of Akkad on March 27, 2015, 08:47:08 PM

Anti-natalism from, say, a radical environmentalist mindset, could be genocidal. Say a group decides humans should die out because they encroach on natural habitats and pollute the earth. They sterilize themselves and begin forcibly sterilizing everyone else. This is pretty close to genocide.

I think I recall Verb saying that he believes abortions should be mandatory at some point. So that might qualify for the kind of thing you're talking about.

Not de jure, but de facto. If everyone was an anti-natalist, everyone would be okay with getting abortions anyway. Not to mention, everyone would be smart enough not to get each other pregnant in the first place.

So yes, that was an exaggeration.

Obviously. Equating AN to genocide is the most juvenile complaint anyone could possibly level at it.

threats to humanity.

You thinking of me as a threat makes my dick ROCK hard.

We're only a threat for as long as there is a reason to keep humanity around. Which there isn't.
And you're not gonna find one. And this isn't the thread to discuss it anyway. And I won't discuss it with you, of all people.

I just wanted to make that clear.

If there's no reason for humanity to be around, I'm about as much of a threat to humanity as a trash can is a threat to garbage.

I'm gonna call you McCarthyX from now on.

Or maybe just demagogueX.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, kid.

If it helps you sleep at night to believe that, kid.

Nineteen, kid.

I guess I'm supposed to take kindly to being referred to as a genocidal maniac.