Mandela and Blair

REVEALED: Britain rebuffed Nelson Mandela’s appeal for oil sanctions against Nigeria after it executed environmentalists

Recently unclassified documents reveal that during the 90’s Mandela appealed for oil sanctions against Nigeria for the execution of environmental and indigenous rights activist Saro-Riwa, and Britain, being the queen of imperialist shits, rejected it outright. Why? To “protect” Shell’s corporate interests of course!

What’s this, all that mumbo-jumbo about exporting freedom and upholding democracy is just that, mumbo-jumbo? Color me shocked, who would’ve thought?! To those of you shocked by this, don’t be. Britain is still a colonial power, and is no friend of the third world. Nigeria was kicked out of the Commonwealth of Nations for three years due to this, but as we can see that was just a “symbolic statement” without substance.

This is just the usual conduct of the global bourgeoisie, all that hogwash about “freedom” and “human rights” is just that: hogwash.

A Critique of Antinatalism

Antinatalism is, at its simplest, an opposition to having more babies, or, well, “natalism.” Herein I first address several key concepts of the antinatalist movement and then move on to a short analysis of antinatalism itself. Let’s begin.

The first thing we are going to be addressing is the concept of existence and suffering, antinatalists claim that life is nothing but suffering, and nonexistence precludes suffering. That is, on its surface anyway, true, but the argument implies a subjective you to experience not experiencing suffering, while nonexistence means, well, nonexistence, “you” don’t exist, there is no “you,” not even proverbially. What this means is that nonexistence precludes suffering is irrelevant at best.

Also life is not all suffering, not existing also precludes experiencing things such as awe, joy, and wonder. Some antinatalists I have conversed with have viewed this state of nonexistence as akin to the Nirvana concept in Buddhism, but the concept of Nirvana implies that there is still a subjective you existing, so this is a false equivocation.

One other thing antinatalists like to claim is that antinatalism prevents overpopulation when in fact overpopulation is not a problem unlike what the pundits would have you believe. We have more food than people, and our rate of food production is more than enough to feed the entire population of earth many times over, it is increasing rather than decreasing, Malthus couldn’t foresee the Green Revolution and the British Agricultural Revolution, so overpopulation is a nonissue as well.

One thing I’ll give antinatalists is that antinatalism may be beneficial for the environment, but I doubt that means anything in practice, since people are still gonna have children irregardless of what other people say, it is the biological imperative of the species to do so, so other forms of environmental protections are more practical than simple antinatalism.

Introducing incentives to have fewer babies will lessen the rate of new births, but people are still gonna have children, it won’t reach zero, since people are still gonna have babies, just not as many, the species won’t die out.