Surely you're not implying that population reduction due to a lower birth-rate is as traumatic as living through the Black Death, just because the GP unfortunately used it as an example?

As for Malthusianism - it seems to me the GP is correct in pointing out ecological stress is proportional to human population size, and that the ecosystem is in crisis. Were you hoping we would overlook this fact by calling it "Malthusianism"?

Rarely have I seen so many dishonest arguments compressed into so few words.

> As for Malthusianism - it seems to me the GP is correct in pointing out ecological stress is proportional to human population size, and that the ecosystem is in crisis.

Population size? No, the problem is human greed and corruption.

I'm not saying those aren't a problem. I'm saying that ecological stress is proportional to human population size. Are you claiming we'd have the same ecological problems, of the same severity, if the human population were 1/10th its size?

The claim is so simple and obvious I'm sure you misunderstood it deliberately.

And what about those who didn't, who were born one to four generations after? Malthus is wrong about overpopulation killing through lack of resources, but anyone who disagrees that setting expanding human populations loose on little-populated lands creates more individual agency and personal benefit than trying to fit that same group into an existing crowded and stacked hierarchy is ignorant of history.