Either we make sensible choices while we still can make choices, or face widespread famine and the inevitable oppressive regimes that follow it.
Now that it looks like we'll coast up to not quite 10 billion by the end of the century with a flattening thereafter and maybe a slight gradual decline that would take at least another century to get back to the 8 billion level that we're at today... many people are reacting in a way I don't understand.
Even this mild moderating of human population growth is being presented as the end of humanity, with imagery of ghost cities and "last human please turn of the lights" storytelling. Yet lower end of the forecast still predicts more humans in 200 years than we have today.
There's nothing antinatalist about it. People who care about humanity continuing into the future should be celebrating our luck that nature seems to be giving us a chance to pause population growth while we figure out how to have 8-10 billion in decent living conditions while not wiping ourselves out.
That is exactly what is happening: people are choosing to reproduce themselves less abundantly than they did in the past, and a lower population will be the natural result. There's nothing sinister about it. If people in the future worry that the population is getting too low, the solution is simple and time-tested!
This article isn't antinatalist.
This article states the irrefutable fact that as certain events occur, birthrates tend to decrease, and that it is not a cause for alarm as individuals and systems whose fortunes are tied to endless growth are asserting.
My wife and I have two children. Not the four of my parents and three of my wife's. That is not antinatalism, it is prudence.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_impact_on_the_environmen...
[2] https://www.ipcc.ch/working-group/wg2/
[3] https://www.npr.org/2022/02/28/1082564304/billions-of-people...
[4] https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/07-11-2022-statement---...
Should there be any upper bound or should we all live in microflats and eat bugs?
It's not antinatalist to think that this would suck. I hope that my friends and family are all able to live happy lives and reproduce at will, but scaling that up to literally everyone is disastrous. We don't even have enough resources for half of the current population to live my life.