In the fictional world of the P.D. James novel Children of Men and its movie adaptation, humanity has lost the ability to reproduce and thus faces certain extinction. We are meant to understand this as a bad thing, but a subset of people consider it a utopia. To them, Earth is doomed as long as it is infested with humans.
One such person is a YouTuber named Sam Mitchell, who identifies as an “Eco-Nazi,” an “unapologetic doomer” and an “unrepentant collapsitarian.” In a recent Medium post titled “Why I Am Proud to Be an Eco-Nazi,” he writes that humanity is a plague upon the Earth, that all right-thinking people should therefore sterilize themselves immediately to avoid making more — as Mitchell claims he did when he was 22 — and that “breeders” are “clueless morons.”
Anybody who identifies as a “Nazi” of any sort should struggle to win converts. I probably would not be writing about this manifesto except for the fact that it was amplified by the much-better-known X account of author and former math professor Eliot Jacobson, which was then re-amplified by the even-better-known X account of University of California, Berkeley climate scientist Zeke Hausfather.
It does get at an anxiety that breeders and the breeder-curious alike feel at a time of chaotic climate change (not to mention wars, pandemics, mass shootings, megalomaniacal leaders and more): Should we really bring children into this world?
Jacobson’s post quoted this line from Mitchell’s article, one of the few that delivers anything like verifiable data: A “vegan electric car driver with one child will do a HELLUVALOT more damage to this planet, and cause countless more suffering to his or her fellow Earthlings, than a meat-eating, SUV-driving, jet-setting corporate executive with no children will ever do.”
The climate scientist took issue. “This is utterly untrue (and reprehensible),” Hausfather wrote, correctly. “It assumes we fail at decarbonizing our economies within our children’s lifetimes. In reality, someone in the UK today emits half the emissions in a year that their grandparents did. In the US we emit about a third less than our parents did.”
It is actually a little better than that: US per-capita carbon emissions fell 38 percent between 1973 and 2022 (the latest data available), according to Global Carbon Budget numbers crunched by the Web site Our World in Data. UK emissions fell about 60 percent in that time. China made up some of the difference, but the net effect was that global carbon intensity remained about flat for 15 years even as the global economy expanded by about 46 percent.
That is an extraordinary human accomplishment, and political leaders have promised to do much more by eradicating emissions altogether in another generation. They are not on track to achieve that yet, but little humans are growing less polluting and wasteful by the year.
Meanwhile, the hot anxiety these days is not a population bomb, but a population bust, with forecasts calling for humanity to peak sometime this century and decline, maybe sharply, thereafter. This makes economists anxious, but should be good news for environmentalists.
Of course, people can have plenty of good reasons not to reproduce. Conscientious parents cannot deny fearing the impact their children could have on the planet, or vice versa. Polls and studies have shown climate change is a top factor in the decision not to have children.
As my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Lara Williams has written, babies born today could see unimaginable economic and physical destruction in their lifetimes if global heating is not brought under control.
Climate scientists often gear studies toward finding out how the world will look in 2100, when the environment could be in full boil. That feels unimaginably distant to me, a person born in the 20th century, but if my daughter, who was born in 2013, lives as long as my grandmother, who died at 96, then she will experience every bit of it.
This can seem like a terrifying prospect — except that my daughter is already far better off than a child born in, say, 1913, when the Spanish Flu, Great Depression, World Wars I and II, the Holocaust and a Cold War were in store. Or 1313, when the Black Plague was around the corner. Or 513, not long before what historians agree was the worst year to be alive. Or 30,013 BC, when just turning 30 was an accomplishment.
In other words, there has never been a perfect time to be a human baby, and yet we keep making them. That is partially down to base stuff like biology and ego, but optimism plays a big role. As a three-time breeder, I am biased.
However, I would like to think that teaching my children to care for their neighbors and their environment would help them build a better world. Polls consistently show young people are more concerned about the climate than their elders and more likely to take action.
In turn, adults can start improving the world for children right now, as my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Faye Flam has written. Millions are already experiencing the effects of climate change, particularly the poor in both developed and developing countries, who unfairly bear the brunt of conditions they did not create.
Telling people to simply stop having children is unrealistic at best and inhuman at worst. The best vision for the future treats both people and the planet with care and hope.
Mark Gongloff is a Bloomberg Opinion editor and columnist covering climate change. He previously worked for Fortune.com, the Huffington Post and the Wall Street Journal. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
As Ukraine leads the global fight for democracy, Taiwan, facing a potential war with China, should draw lessons from Ukraine’s cyberwarfare success. Taiwan has been enhancing its arsenal with advanced weapons from the West in anticipation of a possible full-scale invasion. However, Taipei should also consider Ukraine’s effective digital warfare, notably the “IT [information technology] Army,” a decentralized force instrumental in Kyiv’s cybercampaigns. In February 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine marked the onset of a significant cyberwar, where fears of a “digital Pearl Harbor” in Ukraine were unmet, thanks to robust cyberdefenses backed by Western public and private support. This led
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is attempting to create an alternative international world order to the US-dominated model. China has benefited hugely from the current order since former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) opened up its economy five decades ago. Countries can be categorized as continental or maritime, and to a great degree this determines their optimum foreign policy. China is continental, as is Russia. The US initially followed a continental foreign policy, before it settled on a maritime model. The British empire was so successful because a tiny island kingdom built a formidable naval presence. The US-dominated world order, stabilized by
“You are Taiwanese? Do you speak Taiwanese then?” Growing up in Buenos Aires, my school memories were filled with Spanish, a language that dances off the tongue with the same rhythm and elegance as the tango. However, in my house, a different melody would play — one that alluded to my roots, an artisanal, homemade combination of Taiwanese Hokkien and Mandarin. Although it was a beautiful sound, it was not a tempo I could follow. Put simply, the Taiwanese language was too hard for me to grasp. Eventually, my parents gave into my requests and abandoned that unique fusion of Chinese and
On April 24, US President Joe Biden signed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. The law, which was overwhelmingly approved by the US Congress, requires the popular video-sharing app TikTok to divest from its parent company, China-based ByteDance, or face a ban in the US. The legislation highlights a dilemma faced by democratic countries, including Taiwan, that pits free speech against national security interests. The US ultimatum is meant to address national security concerns that, according to China’s National Security Law and National Intelligence Law, obligates Chinese individuals and organizations to support national intelligence work, allowing the