sorry not clear how that is related to the topic or the thread

His "caveman" views don't lead to 1.0 fertility rate, like your preferred views. It means his views are sustainable in the long run, and yours aren't.

>Sustainable for what?

Sustainable for population not declining / self-deleting their culture by being outpopulated by those who don't have 1.0 fertility rate. It's very simple. If Africa doesn't have 1.0 fertility rate, then Africa it is as the inheritor of the planet.

>For reducing human suffering?

So your plan for reduction of human suffering is human extinction? Nice. I dare say typical. In that sense the Ukraine-Russia war is just accelerating that -- why suffer living in Ukraine and Russia when you can stop that existential suffering by enlisting.

Demagogery is what regarded leftist khohols do.

>Population decline does not mean

Pretty much means discontinuation of an identity and its associated culture. For example, The West and the Western civilization is pretty much linked to Europeans to a lesser extent to Christianity. If they get outpopulated in their countries, the other civilizations, for example the Muslim one, will prevail, enforcing its accompanying culture, (political, philosophical, epistemological etc etc), a culture much less compatible with technological progress. But leftists are also against limiting immigration, so it's a double whammy of an idiotic policy.

>Human populations through the history have jumped back and forth in numbers

What kind of retarded shit is this? I was saying that your post implied that less people = less suffering. Nobody here was even saying humans are going extinct is the issue, because for sure not everyone is so hellbent on self-extinction. I was talking about cultures identities with their associated ethnicities going extinct together.

I need a technological civilization that could colonize space. Your hedono-leftism preoccupied with "not suffering" to the extent of not even reproducing at the sustainable rates, doesn't satisfy even the bare minimum requirements for that. The conservatism of Charlie Kirk's ilk, however retarded is it, is at the least much better in that regard -- they are supportive of a technological civilization that doesn't go extinct.

And of course I don't fucking care about humans "surviving" in some animal-like state (due to loss of culture, institutions and so on) and tiny numbers. Tiny numbers is anti-humanistic. The number of humans should only be limited by ecological considerations.

The idea that some super advanced but tiny in number civilization could continue existing with any kind of reliability is just dumb.

>They are rooting for return to medieval times

Bunch of bullshit. Kirk was the mainstremest of mainstream Republicans. Republicans aren't against technology, or reasonable standards of truth. By all standards, their interpretation of the Bible, a bronze age book, with slavery, stoning and so on, is fairly progressive, if looked at the big scale of things, which includes Wahhabis, Taliban, and Haredim, etc.

And I have to remind you that their actually conservative views, are the views that made the west where they are now -- because at least in the 19th and early 20th century the dominant culture was pretty close to what they are preaching.

>it is as backwards

Whatever. It either perpetuates itself, or it ceases to exist, or continutes in highly mutated, altered form, losing key characteristics.

>begging for a fix in a next iteration

The next iteration could be the actual return to the medieval state of affairs, not imaginary, like in case of republicans. And non-reproducing hedonists preoccupied with homosexual's well being are making it ever closer.

That's just identity politics. Politics can be irrational here and there. In the big picture of things republicans are more pro technology than the American left. Especially if Trumpism is subtracted, which will soon happen due to the age and term limits.

>hypercapitalist

I don't even care to know what that word was supposed to precisely mean. Larry Ellison might be a dick, but some of his software products I interacted with do function well enough. And his companies operate much better than some leftist opensource projects, full of infighting between leftists, with regular accusations of fascism and racism.

>which ordered building of new reactors was Obama's

He didn't order shit, his administration provided a loan, and his NRC appointee Gregory Jaczko voted against building said reactors. Per usual this shit was wildly over budget and Trump admin gave more money:

https://apnews.com/general-news-38189fb0550e401da6b339ad9870a007

Building reactors in the US isn't a partisan issue really. People (NIMBYs) just don't want them, and democratically pressure their representatives not to do it. Especially indicative is the story about storing nuclear waste, where the democratic senator from Nevada blocked implementation of that facility. And nuclear energy isn't really cheap nowadays, especially for southern states.

In the republican lead Texas, solar and wind is growing by 30-50% per year for the last decade. And republicans aren't even small government party really. They like to advertise themselves as such, but reality is different. They also give out money on various useful projects. Unless of course there is politics involved, with various non-republican signalling associated with it.

>Identity and culture are fairy tales similar to Tolkien writings,

You have to have something irrational at the foundational level in order to prevent "rational" and self-destructive hedonistic dissolution into one culture without regional competition, levels of isolation, etc. If "fairy tales" help prevent that, then "fairy tales" it is. Because nothing is more scary than the planetary monoculture.

>so many subcultures competing in the open.

The key word here is *subculture*. They have trivial differences. Subculture in the west is mostly a form of entertainment for the idle. The fundamental concepts, moral imperatives etc, are mostly common among those.

wow you so smart. You are blowing my mind /s

Ethics, morality, whatever you call it, whatever its true nature may be, is very important -- defines the character of the civilization. A civilization of nihilists existing for any significant time frame is basically an impossibility.

Yes, instead it leads to women dying from preventable health conditions (https://www.propublica.org/article/texas-abortion-ban-miscarriage-blood-transfusions) and unsafe illegal abortions (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2709326/).

Natural selection.

>The guy who killed Kirk was from LDS family

It is not clear and has not been proven yet that guy actually did it.

It seems he confessed in some way, and a rifle with cartridges was recovered supposed to be the weapon of the crime, but that's no proof by itself.

It is e.g. not clear whether that guy is able to handle that type of rifle in a way to be able make a sure kill from the first shot.

We can both disagree on Kirk's political positions, but it's not a justification for his murder. All he was doing is expressing his opinions, making legal political and activist organizations and exercising his First Amendment liberty as the US citizen.

Such political violence can lead only to destruction and chaos.

>Now, this fucker went to America universities

In this particular case this "fucker" went to a University in UTAH, where at least the majority of students are supportive of his opinions (information for the more elite, and therefore more liberal BYU, is easily available - it's 50% conservative and 30% liberal), you dumb retarded fuck. All of the people who gather there to listen to him saying his shtick weren't haters.

So whatever you were implying is just wrong -- he wasn't shot where the dominant opinion was against him. And the dude who killed him is local.

So it's more like shouting "trans rights are human rights" in San Francisco, and getting stabbed by one crazy local for that.

> All he was doing is expressing his opinions, making legal political and activist organizations and exercising his First Amendment liberty as the US citizen.

Sure, it's alright. Just somebody came by and exercised his Second Amendment liberty as a US citizen.

Also that Kirk guy said it's OK for him that arm rights require some small toll expressed in human lives.

No problem, it was just his life this time.

Сказал чел, у которого уже дохуя лет сраный торчок на аватарке.