this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2026
150 points (94.6% liked)

Flippanarchy

2220 readers
1507 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.

  7. No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 25 points 3 days ago

The overpopulation agenda is just Malthusianism and Eugenics in disguise.

[–] demlet@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I mean, we are overpopulated, but the solution is just to have fewer kids. Yeah, us older folks will suffer the consequences of less young people to care for us in our old age, but after that's over, things could be pretty nice for the planet.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I mean, we are overpopulated

No. The problem ISN'T that there's too many people. The problem is that rich people and rich countries are hogging almost all the resources so there's not enough to go around.

You're doing exactly what the meme is warning against.

the solution is just to have fewer kids

While that's probably a good idea for most on the micro (specific family) scale, on a macro (country, continent, planet) scale, it does almost nothing compared to better resource distribution.

us older folks will suffer the consequences of less young people to care for us in our old age

That's ALSO more of a distribution problem: with better compensation and working conditions, more people of all ages who are themselves healthy enough to do the job would care for seniors professionally, and with better social service budgets, more seniors would be able to afford it.

Moreover, people in other professions having fewer working hours and better pay per hour would allow them the time and economic breathing room to better care for their family members in their free time, which would mean fewer offspring per family would be needed for it

but after that's over, things could be pretty nice for the planet.

No. The resource hogging rich people would still be poisoning everything by perpetuating reliance on fossil fuels and other genocidal economic behaviors.

Every single problem attributed to overpopulation can be solved by distributing resources away from corporations and billionaires towards things that actually improve the well-being of humans in general AND the planet.

Pretending otherwise is helping the oppressive elite whether you intend to or not.

[–] demlet@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean, you could probably fit four families in my apartment, but does anyone want to live that way? It's not a question of how many people the planet can hold, it's a question of how many people would be comfortable for it to hold. And that's not even getting into the fact that other creatures have a right to be here also.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

you could probably fit four families in my apartment,

So you're quite comfortable, right? Just saying how you feel about the poors? jfc.

that’s not even getting into the fact that other creatures have a right to be here also.

Yes, veganism makes the planet vastly more sustainable. We're nowhere near the limits...

Unless you need hamburgers to be comfortable? In that case we should castrate the poor. \s

[–] demlet@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

No, I live in a pretty small place. My point is that we could probably find all kinds of ways to cram way more people on the planet. But would we want to? Is that really the world anyone wants to live in?

[–] nsrxn@mstdn.social 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

actual eugenics propaganda

[–] demlet@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nope, I think the world would be better with less of everyone.

[–] nsrxn@mstdn.social -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

and yet you are only advocating that English speaking lemmy users stop procreating.

[–] demlet@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

The fact that I don't speak any other languages doesn't imply that I'm only referring to English speakers. That's a ridiculous argument.

And I don't advocate that people stop procreating. I don't actually advocate anything, but I don't personally think it would be a net harm if the entire population of the world chose to have less children for a generation or two.

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 14 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I don’t understand how, logically, overpopulation is related to immigration. It’s the same number of people, just in different places.

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The tiger would prefer if the immigrants were overpopulated someplace far away from the tiger.

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 4 points 3 days ago

NIMBY bullshit. Of course. Thanks!

I came here to comment this exact same thing. I feel like you have to be a real particular sort of person to both not be racist AND fall victim to this sort of rhetoric. There’s gotta be what? Like… five of those people in the world? Everyone who believes this pretty much just has to be racist.

[–] HostilePasta@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

The only way I can see that making any sense is if it's immigration into a very resource-poor area. Maybe a desert or tundra? I guess Las Vegas comes to mind, it's overpopulated for what is naturally found there. Areas like the Sahara desert especially.

Other than that kind of very specific circumstance, definitely racist.

[–] NostraDavid@programming.dev 4 points 2 days ago

We (the Netherlands) is overpopulated. 40% of social housing is taken by immigrants (of all sorts - expats, refugee, etc) There's a severe housing shortage, because we can't build houses fast enough, because we have a nitrogen problem (it's too high in most regions, so we can't build as much as we want), as well as not enough people who build the houses.

100k migrants coming in per year. I say close the border to alleviate the housing problem, until the nitrogen + building problem has been solved.

"Oh, but muh GDP" - I don't give a damn if I (and many others) have to wait 10+ years to be even able to see the first available fucking house. This situation is insane!

If my basic (Physiological) needs from Maslow’s Hierarchy Of Needs can't even be met: fuck the rest of humanity.

[–] Ilixtze@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago

Gunther put that down!

[–] vivalapivo@lemmy.today 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The ecology has value insofar it provides humanity with resources to live. When you fall for ecofascism you necessarily exclude someone from humanity. Please don't do it.

[–] seathru@quokk.au 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm OK with excluding billionaires from humanity. I am not a perfect person.

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@anarchist.nexus 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I like the fire but I don't think it's a good precedent to exclude bad people from humanity, more accurately from basic human decency. IMO that does NOT mean that the billionaires don't get the wall, they ought to get the wall at a bare minimum as self-defense against their ongoing violence against the working class, but they should only get the wall and nothing worse than what is needed (e.g. torture).

[–] alexquiniou@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago

Watch kingsman (first movie) It's brilliant !