upvote
Okay but if other groups aren’t doing it, the planet is still doomed and now your group is worse off. Congratulations, you have accomplished nothing!
reply
The environment is doomed either way without action. Is the issue that some demographics will become more dominant?
reply
Is it not an issue if your group becomes less powerful than other groups? You are then putting yourself at their mercy, and we cannot assume that everyone has the same values (they don't).
reply
We can't also assume that your offspring will have the same values as you.
reply
Sure of course, I was too vague. I’m not referring to our descendants having different values from us or myself. We do have some control over that, but not complete control, and exerting whatever control is available in the modern day risks future blowback. We are in agreement here.

I’m referring to the value of not persecuting based on ethnic or cultural background.

Not everyone in the world holds this value, and relocating to different land is not what makes a person hold one value or another.

So if groups who don’t hold this value grow numerically to the point where the lack of this value becomes dominant, we are putting our own group at risk of being subjected to it in the future, which seems rather unwise.

reply
You shouldn't be OK with them having any random values, either.

If you have a civilization, you have a vision about life, and what's good and what's bad, and you want to see it to continue.

That some of them will inevitable change over time is not the same as you preactively having no preference and guidance for your offspring whatsoever, and thinking "no problem, anything goes".

reply
A group having more power has little to do with numbers. If that was the case the rich would be more numerous than the poor, and India would be the most powerful country in the world.
reply
I mean within a territory. If the global population of whomever grows however, that is not necessarily a risk, I agree.

Rich being more numerous than poor is impossible and I don’t think your argument makes any sense there. Being rich is basically being able to direct the labor of lots of poorer people. If everyone is rich nobody is rich.

reply
The "power" of a country, however you define it, lags the population growth. China was the biggest country for decades, its power only really started exploding some 10 or 15 years ago.
reply
And now its power is declining rapidly.

Peter Zeihan "Don't be Surprised by China's Collapse":

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=8997844...

reply
That's why people shouldn't take life advice from cartoons and celebrities
reply
I mean, I probably saw this when I was 4 or so, and I don't have any children now. I can't really blame my four year old self for being impressionable. I'd say this is probably more of an example of why people should be cautious of the kind of content they put in front of their kids.
reply
Likewise in the 90s the idea of fearing unintentional pregnancy was intentionally infused into teen oriented TV shows and PSA. It created the idea that pregnancy is something to avoid unless you are super ready which is understood to have moved the needle.

There's something beyond idiotic about a society that frames it's own reproduction as a negative.

reply