[imtringued]

>Even in this extreme case, it is still a self correcting problem. There is no need to artificially correct it.

You're forgetting the most extreme form of self correction... People killing each other in a coordinated fashion AKA war.

The problem with your argument is that you consider wars to be an acceptable solution.

[betwixthewires]

Well, first of all, I demonstrated how this extreme case is impossible, but let's address war.

In such a world where there are too many people, we get suggestions such as instituting a one child policy, forced sterilization, outward extremists even discuss culling populations. What's the difference between that and war? The difference is, in war you have agency. War happens organically between people. An authoritarian solution takes agency away entirely. People are not free to be people, but you wind up with, best case scenario, the same result with regard to resource management. So yes, even in extreme circumstances where war is a response to resource shortages, it is still a preferable outcome to authoritarianism.

[salawat]

>It is impossible to exceed the carrying capacity of the earth. Let me explain why.

>Well, first of all, I demonstrated how this extreme case is impossible, but let's address war.

Did you happen to be an engineer working on the design or marketing of the Titanic in a past life? You sure sound like it. You also sound like you have not once ever grown a plant.

You can go from perfectly green and healthy to dead in a week if you don't pay attention. A seed can flourish just fine, only to eventually die as the energy burden required for it to thrive is no longer met. If this happens before you go to seed, congratulations, your population of plants just went extinct due to breaching the carrying capacity of their environment.

Try raising an orchid some time. I guarantee you'll learn something. One of the Vanilla ones in particular is best.

Your arguments are naive and reek of "not my problem" type thinking. You may believe that carrying capacity is a a priori defined as "I'm here, therefore not exceeded" but it isn't.

We're all hot-house flowers who are facing the possibility of the gardener (humanity collectively) just saying "screw it" and destroying our chances at continued success.

And war... War'll happen, and calling that a systemic self-correction is both callous and wretched beyond all reason. Nevermind that no one tends to factor in environmental damage that occurs as a result of warfare.

[betwixthewires]

I grow lots of plants.

Try to stick to discussing the topic and my point rather than attacking me personally, it is much more effective and productive.

[bronson]

> So yes, even in extreme circumstances where war is a response to resource shortages, it is still a preferable outcome to authoritarianism.

War IS authoritarianism. History shows that war pretty much requires it.

[betwixthewires]

Again, I need to point out that this extreme example is hypothetical for the sake of discussion and I've established that it is not possible. I'd like to stay on topic so I'm not going to get deep into why I think this, I allude to my reasoning in my previous comment, but I disagree that war is authoritarianism. That isn't to say war is good.

[amanaplanacanal]

Authoritarianism is my countries leaders trying to impose their will on me. War is some other countries leaders trying to impose their will on me. Not sure I like either option.