Jump to content

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Skyeking (talk | contribs)
499 edits
→‎Organization and promotion: Revert edit by Harryzilber (19:23, 26 January 2012)‎ back to “estimates” and clarified that Knight declares “millions” — overuse of “group” (counted 14) WP:BALANCE (Words to watch) / WP:NPF
The GROUP, not Knight, estimates "millions...". The ref is VHEMT.org, not Knight's personal page (eg, it refers to Knight in the 3rd person, not the 1st person).
Line 41: Line 41:
==Organization and promotion==
==Organization and promotion==


VHEMT functions as a loose network rather than as a formal organization,<ref name=o1423>Ormord 2011, pp. 142–3</ref> and does not compile a list of members. Daniel Metz of [[Willamette University]] stated in 1995 that VHEMT's mailing list had around 400 subscribers.<ref name=te/> Six years later, the [[Fox News Channel]] claimed that it had only 230 subscribers.<ref name=fox/> Knight states that anyone who agrees with his ideology is a ''de facto'' member of the group,{{cn|date=January 2012}} and he estimates that "millions of people" have independently arrived at the same conclusion as them.<ref name=aboutvhemt>
VHEMT functions as a loose network rather than as a formal organization,<ref name=o1423>Ormord 2011, pp. 142–3</ref> and does not compile a list of members. Daniel Metz of [[Willamette University]] stated in 1995 that VHEMT's mailing list had around 400 subscribers.<ref name=te/> Six years later, the [[Fox News Channel]] claimed that it had only 230 subscribers.<ref name=fox/> Knight states that anyone who agrees with his ideology is a ''de facto'' member of the group,{{cn|date=January 2012}} and the group estimates that "millions of people" have independently arrived at the same conclusion as them.<ref name=aboutvhemt>
{{cite web
{{cite web
|url=http://vhemt.org/aboutvhemt.htm
|url=http://vhemt.org/aboutvhemt.htm

Revision as of 14:23, 28 January 2012

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement
Founder
Les U. Knight
Websitehttp://vhemt.org/

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT)[A] is an environmental movement that calls for the human race to abstain from reproduction, thus leading to the gradual voluntary extinction of mankind.[3][4] Proponents of VHEMT concepts are characterized either as supporters,[5] or as volunteers (extinctionists).

The group was founded by Les U. Knight, an activist who became involved in the environmental movement in the 1970s and thereafter concluded that human extinction is the best solution to the problems facing humanity and the Earth's biosphere. VHEMT argues that human extinction is preferable because it would prevent man-made human suffering and environmental damage. The group has received a mixed reception from commentators, many of whom view its platform as unacceptably extreme.

History

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement was founded by Les U. Knight, a native of Portland, Oregon,[2] who was raised in a large family.[6] After becoming involved in the environmental movement as a college student in the 1970s, Knight concluded that most of the dangers faced by the planet were caused by human overpopulation. In response, he joined the Zero Population Growth organization[2] and was sterilized at age 25.[6] He later decided that the extinction of humanity was the only permanent solution.[2]

In 1991, Knight began publishing a VHEMT newsletter,[2] known as These Exit Times.[7] In the newsletter, he requested that individuals commit to stop procreating, to further human extinction.[2] The newsletter also contained a comic strip titled "Bonobo Baby", featuring a woman who forgoes childbearing in favor of adopting a Bonobo.[7] In 1996, VHEMT created a website,[8] which was available in 11 languages by 2010.[9]

Organization and promotion

VHEMT functions as a loose network rather than as a formal organization,[10] and does not compile a list of members. Daniel Metz of Willamette University stated in 1995 that VHEMT's mailing list had around 400 subscribers.[2] Six years later, the Fox News Channel claimed that it had only 230 subscribers.[11] Knight states that anyone who agrees with his ideology is a de facto member of the group,[citation needed] and the group estimates that "millions of people" have independently arrived at the same conclusion as them.[12][non-primary source needed]

The group conducts outreaches at environmental conferences and events,[9] including the Public Interest Environmental Law Conference.[13] VHEMT has, however, primarily spread its message through coverage by media outlets, rather than by events and its newsletter.[8] VHEMT sells buttons and t-shirts,[8] and bumper stickers that say "Thank you for not breeding".[7][14]

Ideology

Knight, the spokesman for VHEMT, says the human population is far more than the Earth can handle, and allowing humans to gradually – and voluntarily – die out is the best thing we can do for Earth's biosphere.[3] VHEMT characterises its members as "supporter", "volunteer" or "undecided" - all of whose common goal is a reduction in the rate of human births.[5]

VHEMT promotes the idea that humans are "incompatible with the biosphere"[7] and that attempts to live environmentally friendly lifestyles do not change the fact that human existence is harmful to the Earth.[7] He promotes human extinction on the grounds that it will prevent human suffering and the extinction of other species.[2] He characterizes human existence as solely self-serving, and lacking any ecological benefit.[15] He believes that there are too many humans on Earth, and that the negative effects of humanity increase with population growth.[3] He argues that humans are becoming more dangerous to the Earth and are causing more species to become extinct as time passes.[11] Though not all of VHEMT's members favor total extinction,[8] Knight believes that even if humans become more environmentally friendly, they could still return to environmentally destructive lifestyles and thus should be eliminated. He argues that the vast majority of human societies have not lived sustainable lifestyles.[6] He also believes that it is most important for residents of first world countries to stop reproducing as they consume a large proportion of resources.[16] Knight admits that his group is unlikely to succeed, but contends that attempting to reduce the Earth's population is the only moral option.[7]

Knight casts non-reproduction as a humane option for society, noting that many children die of preventable causes[6] and claiming that non-reproduction would eventually allow humans to lead an idyllic lifestyle in an environment similar to the Garden of Eden.[17] He maintains that the last remaining humans would be proud of their accomplishment.[18] Other benefits of ceasing human reproduction that he cites include the abolition of abortion, war, and starvation.[17] 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.[19] He speculates that if people ceased to reproduce, they would use their energy for other pursuits, such as gardening,[7] but also suggests adoption and foster care for people who desire children.[6]

Knight believes that animal species are more important than human accomplishments, such as art. He argues that species which are higher on the food chain are less important than lower species, and states that humans are therefore not very valuable to the planet.[7] He draws his ideology in part from deep ecology, and sometimes refers to the Earth as Gaia.[19] He argues that humanity will become extinct, and that it is better to become extinct sooner to avoid the extinction of other species.[3] Furthermore, he maintains that human extinction will promote evolution of other organisms.[8]

VHEMT rejects the use of coercive tactics and solely promotes the idea of voluntary reduction of human population,[2] only supporting the use of birth control and willpower to prevent pregnancies.[7] Knight argues that coercive tactics as unlikely to permanently lower the human population, maintaining that humanity is capable of surviving catastrophic wars, famines, and viruses.[9] Though the group's newsletter's name recalls the suicide manual Final Exit,[15] Knight rejects the idea of mass suicide,[16] and the group has adopted the slogan "May we live long and die out".[6]

Knight believes that the concepts that he promotes have existed in some form throughout human history.[20] Though the group does not take any overt political stances,[8] Knight casts contemporary society as natalist, and argues that talking about population control is seen as taboo.[6]

The VHEMT logo[21] includes the letter V for Voluntary - a core value of the group. It also includes an inverted Earth, with two connotations:

  • To represent the radical shift in our direction required to preserve life and restore ecosystems.
  • Upside down emblems are symbols of distress.

Reception

Though VHEMT has been featured in a book titled Kooks: A Guide to the Outer Limits of Human Belief,[2] Oliver Burkeman of The Guardian notes that Knight comes across in conversation as "sane" and "self-deprecating".[22] Philosophers Steven Best and Douglas Kellner view VHEMT's stance as extreme, but note that the movement formed in response to what the group sees as extreme anthropocentrism.[23] They promote a more extreme ideology than Population Action International, a group which argues that humanity should reduce—but not eliminate—its population to care for the Earth. VHEMT promotes a more moderate—and serious—platform than the suicide-advocating Church of Euthanasia.[11][17]

Writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, Gregory Dicum states 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.[6] Stephen Jarvis echoes this skepticism in The Independent, noting that the group faces great difficulty due to the human drive to reproduce.[7] Guy Dammann applauds their goals as "laudable" and "magnificent" in The Guardian, but similarly questions whether compassion for the planet could successfully drive humans to voluntary extinction.[24] 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.[25] In response to these arguments, Knight contends that though sexual desire is natural, human desire for children is culturally conditioned.[7] Katharine Mieszkowski of Salon.com recommends that childless people adopt VHEMT's arguments when facing "probing questions" about their lack of children.[26] Writing in the Journal for Critical Animal Studies, Carmen Dell'Aversano notes that VHEMT seeks to renounce children as a symbol[27] and casts the movement as a form of "queer oppositional politics".[28] She argues that the movement seeks to come to a new definition of "civil order".[27]

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York has criticized VHEMT, arguing that the existence of humanity is divinely ordained.[11] The Economist characterizes Knight's claim that voluntary human extinction is advisable due to limited resources as "Malthusian bosh". They admit that Knight's support for reduction of the human population based on compassion for the planet has some validity, but they state that it does not necessarily require extinction. However, they view VHEMT as the "tentative sprouting of an idea which can transfigure humanity". The paper argues that voluntary extinction is a laudable goal, believing that extinction is unavoidable and preferring voluntary extinction as the most peaceful and noble.[2] In the journal Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society, psychologist James Ormrod claims 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 what he sees as a failure to develop a consistent and unambiguous ideology.[19] Brian Bethune writes in Maclean's that Knight's logic is "as absurd as it's unassailable". However, 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.[17] In response to VHEMT, journalist 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.[3] Alan Weisman, author of The World Without Us, suggests a one child per family limit as a more preferable alternative to human extinction.[17]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ VHEMT is pronounced "vehement",[1] "because that is what they are".[2]

References

  1. ^ Pesca, Mike (May 12, 2006). "All Choked Up". NPR. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k "Sui genocide". The Economist. December 17, 1998. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  3. ^ a b c d e "Earth a gracious host to billions, but can she take many more?". CNN Technology. 2007-10-05. Retrieved 2012-01-27. {{cite news}}: |first= missing |last= (help); Text "last-Keck" ignored (help)
  4. ^ "Good Job! Fast – Slow". The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved 2012-01-27.
  5. ^ a b "How to join VHEMT". The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved 2012-01-28.
  6. ^ a b c d e f g h Dicum, Gregory (November 16, 2005). "Maybe None". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  7. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Jarvis, Stephen (April 24, 1994). "Live long and die out: Stephen Jarvis encounters the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement". The Independent. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  8. ^ a b c d e f Ormord 2011, p. 143
  9. ^ a b c Weisman 2010, p. 310
  10. ^ Ormord 2011, pp. 142–3
  11. ^ a b c d "Anti-People Group Pushes for Man's Extinction". Foxnews.com. July 29, 2001. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  12. ^ "About The Movement - When and how did VHEMT start?". The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved 2012-01-23.
  13. ^ Sylwester, Eva (March 13, 2008). "Don't Save the Humans". Eugene Weekly. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  14. ^ "How do I order bumper stickers (car stickers), buttons (badges), T-shirts, and back issues of These EXIT Times?". The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  15. ^ a b Savory, Eve (September 4, 2008). "VHEMT: The case against humans". CBC News. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  16. ^ a b Buarque, Daniel (October 31, 2011). "Cada pessoa nova é um fardo para o planeta, diz movimento da extinção [Every new person is a burden on the planet, says the extinction movement]". Organizações Globo (in Portuguese). Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  17. ^ a b c d e Bethune, Brian (August 6, 2007). "Please refrain from procreating". Macleans. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  18. ^ Weisman 2010, p. 312
  19. ^ a b c Ormord 2011, p. 158
  20. ^ Ormord 2011, p. 142
  21. ^ "Symbolism of the logo for the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement". Vhemt.org. Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved January 22, 2012.
  22. ^ Burkeman, Oliver (February 12, 2010). "Climate change: calling planet birth". The Guardian. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  23. ^ Best & Kellner 2001, p. 269
  24. ^ Dammann, Guy (December 28, 2008). "Am I fit to breed?". The Guardian. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  25. ^ O'Reilly, Abby (November 24, 2007). "No more babies, please". The Guardian. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  26. ^ Mieszkowski, Katharine (November 16, 2005). "No need to breed?". Salon.com. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  27. ^ a b Dell'Aversano 2010, p. 107
  28. ^ Dell'Aversano 2010, p. 108

Bibliography

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Movement&oldid=473689595"