Essay by Eric Worrall
The Aussie ABC thinks Zoomers are staging a baby strike until their elders fix the climate crisis.
The case against babies
Elon Musk believes the collapsing birth rate is humanity’s biggest danger. But antinatalists argue having kids is little more than a procreational Ponzi scheme, and the risks are real. This is the case against babies.
By Bri Lee for ABC’s Long Read
…
Kids and the climate change link
As I was reading about the different branches of antinatalism, it struck me that the climate emergency represents a convergence of the philanthropic and misanthropic camps. …
…
The most effective way to reduce carbon emissions was to have one fewer child, followed by not having a car at all. And thirdly, avoiding one long distance flight.
…
The difficulty with that argument is the ongoing lack of accountability. Millennials blame boomers for the heat of the planet they inherited, but millennials have been adults for about two decades now, and have proven they’re either unwilling or unable to make the fundamental changes to personal or corporate accountability required to make a real difference.
In fact, Australian Zoomers like climate activist Anjali Sharma are begging their elders to acknowledge that the government owes them a duty of care not to exacerbate the climate emergency. … In 2021 Sharma and seven other teenagers tried to sue the government, arguing it had a legal duty not to cause harm to young people by exacerbating climate change when approving coal mining projects. The government fought them and won.
In the face of a lack of policy action young people are taking control in other ways.
Is it any wonder that young people are increasingly citing “climate concerns” as a reason not to have children of their own?
…
‘I want to stop you becoming parents’
When David Benatar, the antinatalist, visited Sydney last year for the Festival of Dangerous Ideas he opened his presentation having to correct a somewhat misleading headline written about him in the Sydney Morning Herald. The article opened with the sentence “David Benatar wants to stop you from becoming a parent”.
As he clarified to the chuckling audience of men and women, he did not want to stop anyone from doing anything. He did not want to control anyone. He wanted to convince. He said “I don’t want to stop you from becoming a parent, I want you to stop becoming parents.”
…
Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-21/antinatalism-child-free-climate-change-human-suffering-baby/105695328
Sometimes these confused young people wake up in time to pop out a few kids. But there are no guarantees in human fertility, sometimes the realisation that climate alarmism is overblown nonsense comes too late.
I’ll never forget an old couple who used to live next door to my grandparents. They liked kids – once or twice I visited and they fussed over me and gave me cookies. But they never had any kids of their own. They decided not to have kids because they were worried about the bomb.
One day I noticed there was no noise coming from their house. My grandpa never explained why they were suddenly missing, when I asked he looked sad and said “they aren’t there anymore”.
If there is one thing which truly makes me sad, it is these vile anti-natalists confusing people with their alarmism, talking people out of their most basic human urges, and realising the fulfilment and joy of bringing a new person into the world.
The left has been preaching to have fewer children for a very long time. And you know what? They followed their own advice, and the result is reason number one and the only reason why they want a flood of immigrants over the southern boarder. They don’t want Cubans or people from eastern Europe. Poor people from Latin America are much more likely to vote for Democrats.
This is about Malthusianism.
Their goal is to reduce global population down to > 500mio .
As written on the Georgia Guidestones.
Before the Guidestones were set up the actual goal was > 2 Billion
via mass sterilzation as suggested by the former ice age zealots and now AGW prophets Paul Ehrlich(world recordholder in(of course 100% failed) expert apocalyptic predictions) and John Holdren (Obamas climate tzar)
in their book Ecoscience.
Now, why should a superexpert like Paul Ehrlich who predicted the end of mankind in at least 5 different ways call for mass sterilzation?
Because they absolutely do not believe in their own predictions ;
but AGW is a great method to deindustrialize which leads to a population reduction(besides bioweapons,sterilizing vaccines and wars,especially civil wars that are currently being imported into the west and flirting with a nuclear response by Russia).
Combined with the war on food and especially meatproduction this will be very effective.
The lack of food will then be blamed on AGW .
Just in case you wondered why Obama destroyed Lybias great water project
or Bill Clintons destruction of the Al Shifa pharmacy complex that increased the child mortality in that region by 1.3 million.
There is a reason why none of these countries,experts,politicians who so much believe in AGW do the most obvious things to protect us us from AGW results via stockpiling food on a gigantic scale,building reservoirs and pipelines – instead they waste money on potemkin green energy.
AGW is no problem,neither co2 – but the carbon called human is.
That’s why ” you will own nothing(not even your life) and love it” (WEF)
I’m not sure if this link works:
Optimum Trust Spreadsheet
The spreadsheet was leaked from the Optimum Trust website, AKA Population Matters (Patron Saint: David Attenborough; Chris Packham is also with them). showing where the cull of mankind is to happen, mostly all those funny little brown skinned people.
Nothing racist in that, is there?
Yes, a very old scare.
Remember “The Population Bomb”?
I have a grandchild in Australia and would love to have more but probably won’t for the reasons you describe. Any and all are blessings.
Send them a copy of this movie: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt31851190/
Honestly if idiots believe this alarmist BS they do mankind a true favour by not reproducing, as one Greta was already one too many.
“Funny” article I read a few days ago that progressives (lefties) tend to have less offspring than their conservative counterparts. That why the left tends to indoctrinate the young to make up for their own “losses” and recrute so their followers.
I believe the “demographic bomb” of falling birth rates will before long become the real problem that vanishes concern over made-up problems like climate change. Well over half the countries on the earth have shrinking populations, like Japan that is losing over 1 million people per year.
Those who champion this decrease in population don’t stop to consider that the decrease is only happening on the bottom end, with young people slowly becoming fewer and more rare. The total number of the old and elderly stays the same for decades, but their percentage of the population will grow to an amount that no welfare state will be able to care for.
I think humanity survived perfectly well with less than 1 billion humans on earth. With 7.5 billion now and still rising, I don’t think the population dropping to 5 billion or so is actually going to imperil the species.
The problem with 5 billion given current realities, is that at least 4 billion of those will be retired.
With 1 billion people, the luxuries we enjoy (GPS, Smart Phones, 80″ TVs, self-driving cars, jet airplanes, internet, and much more) would not be achievable because of economic realities. Space travel would not be possible for the same reason – nor the prospect of colonizing other planets or creating large space stations – with the possibilities of mining asteroids.
We grow – or we wither and die away.
Who gets to play God and decide who lives and who dies?
The abortionists.
If you click on the image, it will expand and become clear. Click on the
“X” in the circle to return to comment text.
As he clarified to the chuckling audience of men and women, he did not want to stop anyone from doing anything. He did not want to control anyone. He wanted to convince. He said “I don’t want to stop you from becoming a parent, I want you to stop becoming parents.”
The crazy and all too typical thing about this is the attempt to deduce from the existence of a climate crisis that people in Australia should stop having children. What good will that do?
The challenge to get reproduction right is not the quantum of reproduction, it’s the quality.
As Charlie would say –
“prove me wrong”
Actually, we are on our way to a population collapse, it just does not show because of the advances we have in longevity. Stephen J. Shaw explains all of this very well in a podcast from Chris Williamson (Modern Wisdom, also on Spotify).
A telling quote from this podcast: “Nations like Italy, Japan, and Germany that have a birth rate of 1.4 per woman will decay by 1/3 per generation. That means that in two generations, the population will fall by over half and in three generations by 70%.”
The documentary “Birthgap” by Shaw is also very insightful.
The site “populationpyramid dot net” is a place to compare the differences in age cohorts. Try Italy vs Mexico.
Thanks, John. Interesting site. I only wish the population graphs would start from zero to get the proper interpretation of the numbers. Easily fixed if I download the data and plot the graphs myself. It is clear to see that countries with a wide base manage to keep a viable population. Nigeria, for example, is going through the roof.
Thanks, that’s a great site. Helps visualize the problem with an ever shrinking cohort of young people. An inverted pyramid cannot be stable.
Only issue I have is they project global population increasing for another 60 years. With the number of countries already below replacement, and birth rates continuing to fall even in countries with the highest rates, if when haven’t already hit peak population, we will in a few years.
‘they’ project a lot of BS, almost none which is ever objectively true
there are articles and papers from the 90s that show the current ongoing population implosion of today
back in the 90s, it was estimated that peak population would occur by 2040 and then start declining. losing 25% per generation.
Don’t worry about it. Immigrants from less fortunate counties will fill the gaps even if they are less educated and can’t speak English. Who needs chemical engineers, anyway?
To begin with, what climate emergency are they talking about here anyway? Secondly, if people aren’t having kids or are restricting their numbers, the climate has little or nothing to do with it. It’s the increasing cost of raising a family and living costs in general, and these have been driven in no small part by excessive or even unnecessary environmental levies as well as green product mandates.
Yes, what people mostly fear is what our politicians are doing in supposed efforts for climate protection. I am well past the relevant age, but I am truly scared of how the United Kingdom (and many other countries, of course) are being trashed for future generations.
I’m not convinced it is a good idea for these people to procreate most other people should so there will be people to take care of us when we get old.
The China one child policy re-invented.
tragic
imagine having no siblings, no aunties.uncles.
china’s population collapse is well underway
The Population Bomb from the 60s is the manual.
I see a transference.
Back in the day, one motivation for having children is one of them might be the next Mozart or Einstein.
Now, today, the motivation for not having children is one of them might be the next Greta.
i guess i get to spend my wealth as i please. so there’s that
Well if all the people gullible enough to believe that there is a “climate crisis” stop breeding, that may be a form of natural selection (removal of the stupid from the gene pool).
Just saying…🤷♂️