World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
You probably don't want children. For people who do, this is an enormous sacrifice I wouldn't ask of anyone. Just because of the comfort and luxury of developed nations, other people are somehow the problem. And not to mention it opens the door to fascists with specific ideas to cull the population
When did I say we should restrict people from having kids. ?
I offered other solutions to the problem.
All of those solutions would be voluntary.
They are not solutions, that's where you're dead wrong
I think you don't understand how social services work.
Making contraceptives more accessible does in fact reduce pregnancy . There is a ton of research on this.
Secondly, making adoption more socially acceptable and easier would encourage people to adopt.
Cultural ideas and misconceptions about children often make people discount this adoption both as an option for persons giving up baby and potential parents who could adopt.
Those are not solutions to overconsumption. There has to be some kind of limit. People have to learn they can't exploit the planet and other people indefinitely.
It's like adding more lanes to a congested highway. It provides temporary relief but none of the needed changes. Fewer people is not a solution for climate inaction at all. And it opens the door for fascists with other motives
Okay I don't think you understand that big problems are complex and involve many aspects of human behavior.
Will a lower population magically fix everything? No.
But in combination with other changes it will.
It doesn't matter how efficient we get at reusing materials , or creating less waste. Ultimately, more humans will cancel out those gains.
Both are needed.
Less humans and more sustainable actions.
The only reason to increase our population is to create more people for capitalism to use and discard.
More young men fed to wars. Their lives worthless and short.
The only people saying we need more bodies are the people wanting to use those bodies for their own gain.
Capitalism oligarchs. Exploitation. And fueling the war machine.
The earth is finite.
It's about time we acknowledge this.
We can't grow indefinitely.
The ecosystem cannot support nor absorb our waste production.
It's illogical and naive to assume in the near future someone will just figure out how to make it so humans create zero pollution and waste.. so no point in doing anything about it now.
Those are all great arguments for limiting consumption. I think not having children is of a different order, though. I think pressure to not have children is morally different from pressure to reduce consumption. Not having children will cause certain groups to disappear and that prospect will be exploited.
Like I said, it's always "them" who will be asked to stop having children, never "us". And the rich and/or powerful will keep having children anyway without any accountability. But mostly it's fascism In worried about. Once we say fewer children is the solution, they will hear they don't have to reduce consumption as long as those pesky minorities don't create more rivals in their Mad Max world of all against all
Nothing I suggested targets specific nations or ethnicities.
Change is inevitable.
We can't preserve everything forever.
We especially can't use that as an excuse to not do anything about the problem of stripping this world of every natural resource and expanding populations until nothing is left.
Why is giving people access to contraceptives, safe abortions, and adoption so horrible?
I honestly don't see why anyone thinks this would be harmful.
Let people choose. Let people have options.
Forcing pregnancies on people who don't want them from a lack of contraceptive access, or safe abortions. or pushing the narrative that a child is only yours if it has your genetics is outdated.
These things are harmful. Not the suggestions I made.
It will not stay voluntary if you keep presenting not having children as a solution to climate change.
I chose to recycle. Because it's an option. And I want to.
People having a choice is not forcing anyone to do anything. Jesus.
Taking away access to contraceptives and abortion is the forced choice.
Bailey: We should have fewer children to solve climate problems
Motte: Access to contraceptives and abortion should not be taken away
Holy cow