lets all please line up nicely and yell at each other now :)

    • communistthrowaway69 [none/use name]
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      4 years ago

      It works like this.

      You have no kids.

      I have ten.

      You die with nothing.

      My lineage multiples exponentially.

      Dialectics ain't just a mouthful, it's basic fucking cause and effect reasoning.

      You lose. Therefore it is a pointless, self defeating position based in lib logic about what's "morally right" in an evil universe you haven't bothered to fucking fix.

      It's like shooting yourself in the head instead of doing your chores.

      Now the house is dirtier and you're dead. Good job.

      • frompeaches [she/her,they/them]
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        People forgetting kids are their own people and aren't your fucking toys to pour your thoughts into and that you can also adopt kids. Peak shit is unironically calling biological kids lineage.

        The rest I agree with, don't kill yourself etc – but children are not yourself. Children are other people you brought into the world for fucks sake.

        • Gorn [they/them,he/him]
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          4 years ago

          I think you're not paying attention to the extreme extent to which ideology follows familial patterns. People, in the vast majority, are basically what their parents raise them to be, with very few exceptions.

          • Leon_Grotsky [comrade/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            I think this is a generalization that is losing valence with modernity, and was largely caused by people gaining most of their life experiences or "wisdom" through their familial relations. With information more readily accessible than ever before, it's become effortless to get your hands on whatever information you want (whether it's reliable or not.) It's been easier to amass experiences completely distinct from your parents than ever before.

            • Gorn [they/them,he/him]
              ·
              4 years ago

              I think it is and isn’t. I think people are mostly educated into being who they will be by the time they’re five, like psychology indicates.

              Political beliefs are largely just emergent properties of our basic peronsalities coming to terms with the political realities as we get old and exposed. But, for most people, who they ‘are’ is largely defined by how they were raised in their youngest years.

              Look at Rigt-wing Authoritarianism, for example. There will always be outliers/rebels, etc., but I think the trend holds.

              • frompeaches [she/her,they/them]
                ·
                edit-2
                4 years ago

                Lib shit. I'd love to see something replicable that actually indicates that this is not evopsych bullshit or 'right wingers hate trying out new foods' pop sci which is like phrenology but for leftists.

              • Leon_Grotsky [comrade/them]
                ·
                edit-2
                4 years ago

                I think people are mostly educated into being who they will be by the time they’re five, like psychology indicates.

                Oh I'm not trying to refute that, I'm saying maybe those formative years are getting less... formative? Maybe people as a whole are just getting more cynical IDK, I understand I don't have a background in pediatric psychology so I probably shouldn't be speaking w/ too much confidence here.

                • Gorn [they/them,he/him]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  I also don’t have that background, but I’ve been looking at politics from a psychological perspective for a little while in the hopes of learning something hahaha personality is really big in political beliefs, because the vast majority haven’t thought about it that hard tbh

                  But I agree with you that we’re a lot more free on the internet now. But a lot of people use that freedom to just explore more of who they are. Sociologists talk about people becoming siloed because of interests, and society fragmented as we move online. There are available tunnels to, like, any ideology you want, and a lot of people choose to change!

                  But! I would wager that the vast majority of chapos have leftist or left-leaning parents. Maybe some of us have moved to the left of our families, and the ones who have moved to the right... are on a different site haha

                  Like, as I grow and heal and try to become a better person, I resent that I started off where I did haha I can see my political journey, and I’m always more who I want to be, but I wish I just started off there. I don’t really plan on having kids, but I can see the historical importance of providing that better place for the next generation to start off

          • frompeaches [she/her,they/them]
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 years ago

            And yet Kamala and Pete are related to Marxist academics. Everyone in this sub is likely to be far lefter than their parents.

            We radicalise people through theory and education and popular movements that change their material conditions. We don't rely on breeding programs.

            • Gorn [they/them,he/him]
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              4 years ago

              ‘Breeding programs’ isn’t exactly a generous reading of ‘it’s ok to have children, folks; people won’t hate you, or I won’t, and you might actually just create more leftists’.

              There are always exceptions, but as socialists it’s important to look at the evidence. And the evidence shows that political beliefs are highly heritable. It’s just how people are.

              Kamala and Pete are in the dem party. They’re on the left side of shitty american politics, because their parents were left. And they’re extremely invovled in politics, likely because their family are marxists.

              These trends aren’t definitive, they don’t set people’s lives in stone. But the beliefs one’s parents hold are extremely influential on their children, and I think it’s kinda silly to pretend otherwise. It’s just what the science says

              • frompeaches [she/her,they/them]
                ·
                4 years ago

                Okay, look, yes it's possible to say that's an unfair reading. But from my perspective whenever we lean hard into the ideas children are legacy and we win at life by having more of them... We end up at breeding programs and cults that control children. Because that's what implementing natalism for those reasons looks like. If that's the goal you want to optimise for, and not humans should have kids because it's human and we love kids, you will get bad outcomes.

                • Gorn [they/them,he/him]
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  God ew that sounds horrible. In my experience with Indigenous peoples, chilren are super important, and considered the future and taken seriously as individuals. And also, everyone is a part of the community/family but... it’s not breeding programs haha that’s not why we’re still here, 2 million years later. What I mean to say is that I agree with you, totally, people should just have kids if they want to do that part of the human experience, and for no other reason.

                  I get what you’re saying, because I made the unfair comparison between antinatalists and the Quiverfull movement. I didn’ mean to say we should have as many kids as we can, like ‘you need to do your part’ old-school communist propaganda about having more kids haha no way. And I totally understand getting weirded out by that. Like, Quebec did that shit and it was suuuuper gross.

                  I just mean to say that we shouldn’t make ‘not having kids’ an important part of the leftist program, because that’s a recipe to lose against CHUDs who actually do do that cult shit, and have been for decades. Like I’m not saying we try to outbreed them hahaha I’m just saying... don’t give up. We’ll make it through, and having children is actually kind of an important part of that

                  I deal with a lot of rad-lib antinatalists who don’t want to give up capitalism, they just want to be vegan and fly less and it’s like... no, antinatalism is not important, and counter-productive imo. I have a lot of pent-up feelings about the whole thing haha imagine telling people... not to have kids, it’s kinda messed up imo

                  Prolly much for the same reason one would get disgusted if I went around trying to convince people to have kids hahaha. Just, do it if you want it, like we always have

        • communistthrowaway69 [none/use name]
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 years ago

          That's not what I'm saying. That can't be inferred from my refutation.

          The point is that antinatalism is not a thing. It doesn't make sense no matter how you look at it, it's dumb in every direction and all the way down.

          That is not then a prescription to create a cult out of your children, it's not even a prescription for you as an individual to have children or not. That's all based on circumstance and maturity and parenting skills etc etc.

          Do what you feel is right and what works for you, but antinatalism still dumb af.

          (And, if we're being honest, it's more than a little adjacent to Malthusian notions of population control and eugenics, which is definitely reactionary.)

          • frompeaches [she/her,they/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            Then we have no beef. I agree with the logic that anti natalists are too far up their ass with moral haranguing. Humans gotta human. I just feel very very strongly about children being respected and having rights and not being viewed as some kind of forever property of their parents. Thence, I take issue with the framing of denying anti natalism because otherwise we won't be able to outbreed chuds and libs.

            It's leftism, we radicalise people, we don't start reactionary fertility programs for leftist couples.

        • communistthrowaway69 [none/use name]
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 years ago

          Then that's not antinatalism? Someone just had ten kids. Like maybe you're not understanding what it is.

          It's not saying, "I don't want to have kids because XYZ..."

          It's saying, "having kids is wrong and no one should do it because (literally no good universal prescriptive reasons.)"

          Again, I said this in my previous response.

          What you choose to do, as an individual, is up to you. It's context dependent.

          Saying no one should have kids is fucking stupid. Full stop. No exceptions.

      • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 years ago

        Dialectics ain’t just a mouthful, it’s basic fucking cause and effect reasoning.

        Dialectics is whatever you want it to be.