Voluntary Human Extinction Movement

The VHEMT logo, showing an inverted Earth

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, often referred to as VHEMT, is an organization that seeks to convince people to stop reproducing to bring about the extinction of humanity for moral and altruistic reasons. The group was founded by Les U. Knight. After becoming involved in the Environmental Movement in the 1970s, Knight concluded that human extinction is the best solution to the problems facing humanity and the earth's biosphere. In 1991, he began publishing a newsletter known as These Exit Times. Five years later, he started a website for the organization. Though the group never developed a formal structure, media coverage has raised awareness of the movement.

VHEMT argues that human extinction is preferable because of man-made human suffering and environmental damage. Knight maintains that there will be mass starvation if the earth's human population continues to grow at the same rate and that the cessation of human reproduction would allow free up resources to be devoted to existing problems. Knight believes that the unsustainable lifestyles led by many humans has a negative effect on the earth's environment, citing the number of species that are driven to extinction by humans as evidence.

VHEMT has received a mixed reception from commentators, many of whom view it's platform as unacceptably extreme. Commentators have argued that humans can develop sustainable lifestyles or can reduce their population to sustainable levels. Others argue that, whatever the merits of the idea, humans will never voluntarily seek extinction due to their drive to reproduce.

History

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement was founded by Les U. Knight, a native of Portland, Oregon, who was raised in a large family. After becoming involved in the Environmental Movement as a college student in the 1970s, Knight concluded that most of the dangers the planet faces are caused by human overpopulation. In response, he joined the Zero Population Growth organization and was sterilized at age 25. He then decided that the extinction of humanity is the only permanent solution.

In 1991, Knight began publishing a VHEMT newsletter, known as These Exit Times. In the newsletter, he requested that individuals commit to stop procreating to further human extinction. The newsletter contained a comic strip title "Bonobo Baby", featuring a woman who forgoes childbearing in favor of adopting a Bonobo. In 1996, VHEMT created a website, that was available in 11 languages by 2010. The site sells buttons and t-shirts, and the group has sold bumper stickers which say "Thank you for not breeding". The group conducts outreaches at environmental conferences and events, and Knight spoke at the 2008 Public Interest Environmental Law Conference. VHEMT has primarily spread its message through media publicity.

VHEMT functions as a loose network rather than as a formal organization, and does not compile a list of members. Knight states that anyone who agrees with his ideology is a de facto member of the group. Daniel Metz of Willamette University stated in 1995 that VHEMT's mailing list had around 400 subscribers. Six years later, the Fox News Channel claimed that it had only 230 subscribers.

Ideology

Knight believes that humans are "incompatible with the biosphere". He argues that the existence of humans is self-serving, and otherwise serves no ecological benefit. He promotes human extinction on the grounds that it will prevent human deaths and the extinction of other species. Knight casts non-reproduction as a humane option for society, noting that many children die of preventable causes and claiming that non-reproduction would eventually allow humans to lead an idyllic lifestyle in an environment similar to the Garden of Eden. Benefits of the end of human reproduction that he cites include the end of abortion, war, and starvation. He maintains that the last remaining humans would be proud of their accomplishment. He sees reproduction as a type of child abuse, arguing that the standard of human life will worsen if resources are consumed by a growing population rather than spent solving existing issues. He speculates that if people ceased to reproduce, they would use their energy for other pursuits, such as gardening. He also suggests adoption and foster care for people who desire children.

Knight believes that animal species are more important than human accomplishments, such as art. Knight argues that human extinction will promote evolution of other organisms. Knight draws his ideology in part from deep ecology, and sometimes refers to the earth as Gaia. Knight argues that humans are becoming more dangerous to the earth and causing more species to become extinct as time passes. He believes that even if people attempt to live environmentally friendly lifestyles, their existence is still harmful to the earth. Knight argues that species which are higher on the food chain are less important than lower species, and notes that humans are therefore not very valuable to the planet. Knight believes that there are too many humans on earth, and that the negative effects of humanity increase with population growth. He argues that humanity will become extinct, and that it is better to become extinct sooner so as to not cause other species to become extinct.

VHEMT promotes the idea of voluntary reduction of human population and rejects the use of coercive tactics, only supporting the use of birth control and willpower to prevent pregnancies. Knight casts such tactics as unlikely to succeed, maintaining that humanity is capable of surviving catastrophic wars, famines, and viruses. Though the group's newsletter's name recalls the suicide manual Final Exit, Knight rejects the idea of mass suicide. The group has adopted the slogan "May we live long and die out".

Though not all of the group's members favor total extinction, Knight believes that even if humans become more environmentally friendly, they could still return to environmental destruction at any time and thus must be eliminated. He argues that the vast majority of human societies have not lived sustainable lifestyles. He also believes that it is most important for residents of first world countries to stop reproducing, noting that they consume more resources. Knight notes that his group is unlikely to succeed, but believes that attempting to reduce the earth's population is the only moral option.

Knight believes that that the concepts that he promotes have existed in some form throughout human history. The group does not take any political stances. He casts contemporary society as natalist, and argues that anti-natalist ideas are seen as taboo.

Reception

Steven Best and Douglas Kellner see VHEMT as extreme, but note that it was formed in response to what the group sees as extreme anthropocentrism. Though it has been featured in a book titled Kooks: A Guide to the Outer Limits of Human Belief, Oliver Burkeman notes that Knight comes across in conversation as "sane" and "self-deprecating". The group takes a more extreme stance than Population Action International, which argues that humanity can continue to exist while caring for the earth. VHEMT promotes a more moderate—and serious—platform than the suicide-advocating Church of Euthanasia.

Writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, Gregory Dicum notes that there is an "undeniable logic" to Knight's arguments, but doubts whether his ideas could succeed, arguing that many people desire to have children and are unwilling to consider other options. Guy Dammann applauds VHEMT's goals as "laudable" and "magnificent" in The Guardian, but similarly questions whether compassion for the planet could successfully drive humans to voluntary extinction. Stephen Jarvis echoes this skepticism in The Independent, noting that the group faces great difficulty due to the human drive to reproduce. Abby O'Reilly writes in The Guardian that because having children is frequently viewed as a measure of success, VHEMT's goals will be difficult to attain. In response to these arguments, Knight contends that though sexual desire is natural, human desire for children is culturally conditioned.

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York has criticized VHEMT, maintaining that the existence of humanity is ordained by God. The Economist argues that Knight's claim that voluntary human extinction is necessary to ward off mass starvation is "Malthusian bosh". They note that Knight's support for reduction of the human population based on compassion to the planet has some validity, but does not necessarily require extinction. In Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society, James Ormrod writes that VHEMT "arguably abandons deep ecology in favour of straightforward misanthropy". He notes that Knight's claim that the last humans in an extinction scenario would have an abundance of resources promotes his cause based on "benefits accruing to humans". Ormrod sees this type of argument as counter-intuitive, arguing that it borrows the language of "late-modern consumer societies". He faults Knight for not developing a consistent and unambiguous ideology. Brian Bethune writes in Maclean's that Knight's logic is "as absurd as it's unassailable". He doubts Knight's claim that the last survivors of the human race would have pleasant lives and suspects that a "collective loss of the will to live" would prevail in such a scenario. In response to VHEMT, Sheldon Richman argues that humans are "active agents" and can change their behavior. He contends that people are capable of solving the problems facing earth. Alan Weisman suggests that limiting reproduction to one child per family would be a better idea than seeking human extinction.

The Economist views VHEMT as the "tentative sprouting of an idea which can transfigure humanity". The paper argues that voluntary extinction is a laudable goal, believing extinction to be unavoidable and contending that voluntary extinction is preferable because it would be more peaceful and noble. Writing in the Journal for Critical Animal Studies, Carmen Dell'Aversano notes that VHEMT seeks to renounce children as a symbol and casts the movement as a form of "Queer oppositional politics". She argues that the movement seeks to come to a new definition of "civil order". Katharine Mieszkowski recommends that childless people adopt the group's arguments when facing "probing questions" about their lack of children.

See also

• Childfree
• Negative Population Growth

Bibliography

• Best, Steven; Kellner, Douglas (2001). The postmodern adventure: science, technology, and cultural studies at the Third Millennium. Guilford Press. ISBN 978-1-57230-665-3Template:Inconsistent citations{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link)
• Dell'Aversano, Carmen (2010). "The Love Whose Name Cannot be Spoken: Queering the Human-Animal Bond". Journal for Critical Animal Studies. VIII (1/2): 73–126Template:Inconsistent citations{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link)
• Ormrod, James S. (2011). "'Making room for the tigers and the polar bears': Biography, phantasy and ideology in the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement". Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society. 16 (2): 142–161. doi:10.1057/pcs.2009.30Template:Inconsistent citations{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link)
• Weisman, Alan (2010). The World Without Us. HarperCollins. ISBN 978-1-4434-0008-4Template:Inconsistent citations{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link)