Voluntary Human Extinction Movement

Last updated
Voluntary Human Extinction Movement
Formation1991
Type NGO
Founder
Les U. Knight
Website vhemt.org

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT [upper-alpha 1] ) is an environmental movement that calls for all people to abstain from reproduction in order to cause the gradual voluntary extinction of humankind. VHEMT supports human extinction primarily because it would prevent environmental degradation. The group states that a decrease in the human population would prevent a significant amount of human-caused suffering. The extinctions of non-human species and the scarcity of resources caused by humans are frequently cited by the group as evidence of the harm caused by human overpopulation.

Contents

VHEMT was founded in 1991 by Les U. Knight, an American activist who became involved in the American environmental movement in the 1970s and thereafter concluded that human extinction was the best solution to the problems facing the Earth's biosphere and humanity. Knight publishes the group's newsletter and serves as its spokesman. Although the group is promoted by a website and represented at some environmental events, it relies heavily on coverage from outside media to spread its message. Many commentators view its platform as unacceptably extreme, while endorsing the logic of reducing the rate of human reproduction. In response to VHEMT, some journalists and academics have argued that humans can develop sustainable lifestyles or can reduce their population to sustainable levels. Others maintain that whatever the merits of the idea, the human reproductive drive will prevent humankind from ever voluntarily seeking extinction.

History

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement was founded by Les U. Knight, [2] [3] [upper-alpha 2] a graduate of Western Oregon University [5] and high school substitute teacher living in Portland, Oregon. [2] After becoming involved in the environmental movement as a college student in the 1970s, Knight attributed most of the dangers faced by the planet to human overpopulation. [2] [6] He joined the Zero Population Growth organization, [2] and chose to be vasectomized at age 25. [6] He later concluded that the extinction of humanity would be the best solution to the Earth's environmental problems. [2] He believes that this idea has also been held by some people throughout human history. [7]

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement cartoon by Nina Paley Voluntary Human Extinction Movement2.jpg
Voluntary Human Extinction Movement cartoon by Nina Paley

In 1991, Knight began publishing VHEMT's newsletter, [2] known as These Exit Times. [3] In the newsletter, he asked readers to further human extinction by not procreating. [2] VHEMT has also published cartoons, [8] including a comic strip titled Bonobo Baby, featuring a woman who forgoes childbearing in favor of adopting a bonobo. [3] In 1996, Knight created a website for VHEMT; [9] it was available in 11 languages by 2010. [10] VHEMT's logo features the letter "V" (for voluntary) and a picture of the Earth with north at the bottom. [11] [upper-alpha 3]

Organization and promotion

VHEMT functions as a loose network rather than a formal organization, [12] and does not compile a list of members. Daniel Metz of Willamette University stated in 1995 that VHEMT's mailing list had just under 400 subscribers. [2] Six years later, Fox News said the list had only 230 subscribers. [13] Knight says that anyone who agrees with his ideology is a member of the movement; [2] and that this includes "millions of people". [14] [upper-alpha 4]

Knight serves as the spokesman for VHEMT. [2] He attends environmental conferences and events, where he publicizes information about population growth. [10] VHEMT's views have, however, primarily been spread through coverage by media outlets, rather than events and its newsletter. [9] VHEMT sells buttons and T-shirts, [9] as well as bumper stickers that read "Thank you for not breeding". [3]

Ideology

Knight argues that the human population is far greater than the Earth can handle, and that the best thing for Earth's biosphere is for humans to voluntarily cease reproducing. [16] He says that humans are "incompatible with the biosphere" [3] and that human existence is causing environmental damage which will eventually bring about the extinction of humans (as well as other organisms). [17] According to Knight, the vast majority of human societies have not lived sustainable lifestyles, [6] and attempts to live environmentally friendly lifestyles do not change the fact that human existence has ultimately been destructive to the Earth and many of its non-human organisms. [3] Voluntary human extinction is promoted on the grounds that it will prevent human suffering and the extinction of other species; Knight says that many species are threatened by the increasing human population. [2] [13] [16]

James Ormrod, a psychologist who profiled the group in the journal Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society, notes that the "most fundamental belief" of VHEMT is that "human beings should stop reproducing", and that some people consider themselves members of the group but do not actually support human extinction. [9] Knight, however, believes that even if humans become more environmentally friendly, they could still return to environmentally destructive lifestyles and hence should eliminate themselves. [6] Residents of First World countries bear the most responsibility to change, according to Knight, as they consume the largest proportion of resources. [18]

Knight believes that Earth's non-human organisms have a higher overall value than humans and their accomplishments, such as art: "The plays of Shakespeare and the work of Einstein can't hold a candle to a tiger". [3] He argues that species higher in the food chain are less important than lower species. [3] His ideology is drawn in part from deep ecology, and he sometimes refers to the Earth as Gaia. [19] He notes that human extinction is unavoidable, and that it is better to become extinct soon to avoid causing the extinction of other animals. [16] The potential for evolution of other organisms is also cited as a benefit. [9]

Knight sees abstinence from reproduction as an altruistic choice [6]  – a way to prevent involuntary human suffering [20]  – and cites the deaths of children from preventable causes as an example of needless suffering. [6] Knight claims that non-reproduction would eventually allow humans to lead idyllic lifestyles in an environment comparable to the Garden of Eden, [21] and maintains that the last remaining humans would be proud of their accomplishment. [22] Other benefits of ceasing human reproduction that he cites include the end of abortion, war, and starvation. [21] Knight argues that "procreation today is de facto child abuse". [19] He maintains 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, [3] and suggests adoption and foster care as outlets for people who desire children. [6]

VHEMT rejects government-mandated human population control programs in favor of voluntary population reduction, [2] supporting only the use of birth control and willpower to prevent pregnancies. [3] Knight states that coercive tactics are unlikely to permanently lower the human population, citing the fact that humanity has survived catastrophic wars, famines, and viruses. [10] Though their newsletter's name recalls the suicide manual Final Exit , [17] the idea of mass suicide is rejected, [18] and they have adopted the slogan "May we live long and die out". [6] A 1995 survey of VHEMT members found that a majority of them felt a strong moral obligation to protect the Earth, distrusted the ability of political processes to prevent harm to the environment, and were willing to surrender some of their rights for their cause. VHEMT members who strongly believed that "Civilization [is] headed for collapse" were most likely to embrace these views. [23] However, VHEMT does not take any overt political stances. [9]

VHEMT promotes a more extreme ideology than Population Action International, which argues for population reduction but not extinction. However, the VHEMT platform is more moderate and serious than the Church of Euthanasia, which advocates population reduction by suicide and cannibalism. [13] [21] The 1995 survey found that 36% considered themselves members of Earth First! or had donated to the group in the last five years. [24]

Reception

Knight states his group's ideology runs counter to contemporary society's natalism. He believes this pressure has stopped many people from supporting, or even discussing, population control. [6] He admits that his group is unlikely to succeed, but contends that attempting to reduce the Earth's population is the only moral option. [3]

Writing in the San Francisco Chronicle , Gregory Dicum states that there is an "undeniable logic" to VHEMT's arguments, but he doubts whether Knight's ideas can succeed, arguing that many people desire to have children and cannot be dissuaded. [6] Stephen Jarvis echoes this skepticism in The Independent , noting that VHEMT faces great difficulty owing to the basic human reproductive drive. [3] At The Guardian 's website, Guy Dammann applauds the movement's aim as "in many ways laudable", but argues that it is absurd to believe that humans will voluntarily seek extinction. [25] Freelance writer Abby O'Reilly writes that since having children is frequently viewed as a measure of success, VHEMT's goal is difficult to attain. [26] Knight contends in response to these arguments that though sexual desire is natural, human desire for children is a product of enculturation. [3]

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York has criticized Knight's platform, arguing that the existence of humanity is "divinely ordained". [13] Ormrod writes that Knight "arguably abandons deep ecology in favor 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] The Economist characterizes Knight's claim that voluntary human extinction is advisable due to limited resources as "Malthusian bosh". The paper further states that compassion for the planet does not necessarily require the pursuit of human extinction. [2] Sociologist Frank Furedi also deems VHEMT to be a Malthusian group, classifying them as a type of environmental organization that "[thinks] the worst about the human species". [27] Writing in Spiked , Josie Appleton argues that the group is indifferent to humanity, rather than "anti-human". [28]

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. [21] In response to Knight's platform, 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. [16] Alan Weisman, author of The World Without Us , suggests a limit of one child per family as a preferable alternative to abstinence from reproduction. [21]

Katharine Mieszkowski of Salon.com recommends that childless people adopt VHEMT's arguments when facing "probing questions" about their childlessness. [29]

Knight's organization has been featured in a book titled Kooks: A Guide to the Outer Limits of Human Belief , [2] The Guardian journalist Oliver Burkeman said that in a phone conversation Knight seemed "rather sane and self-deprecating". [30] Weisman echoes this sentiment, characterizing Knight as "thoughtful, soft-spoken, articulate, and quite serious". [28] Philosophers Steven Best and Douglas Kellner view VHEMT's stance as extreme, but they note that the movement formed in response to extreme stances found in "modern humanism". [31]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ VHEMT is pronounced "vehement", [1] because, according to Knight, that is what they are. [2]
  2. ↑ Knight denies that he is the founder, saying that "I'm not the founder of VHEMT, I just gave it a name". [4]
  3. ↑ VHEMT states that the inverted Earth represents the radical shift in human direction the movement seeks, and notes that upside down emblems are often used as symbols of distress. [11]
  4. ↑ On its website, VHEMT characterizes the participants in its movement as "volunteer", "supporter", or "undecided", each of whom share an interest in a reduction in the rate of human births. [15]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Misanthropy</span> General dislike of humanity

Misanthropy is the general hatred, dislike, or distrust of the human species, human behavior, or human nature. A misanthrope or misanthropist is someone who holds such views or feelings. Misanthropy involves a negative evaluative attitude toward humanity that is based on humankind's flaws. Misanthropes hold that these flaws characterize all or at least the greater majority of human beings. They claim that there is no easy way to rectify them short of a complete transformation of the dominant way of life. Various types of misanthropy are distinguished in the academic literature based on what attitude is involved, at whom it is directed, and how it is expressed. Either emotions or theoretical judgments can serve as the foundation of the attitude. It can be directed toward all humans without exception or exclude a few idealized people. In this regard, some misanthropes condemn themselves while others consider themselves superior to everyone else. Misanthropy is sometimes associated with a destructive outlook aiming to hurt other people or an attempt to flee society. Other types of misanthropic stances include activism by trying to improve humanity, quietism in the form of resignation, and humor mocking the absurdity of the human condition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Extinction</span> Termination of a taxon by the death of its last member

Extinction is the termination of a taxon by the death of its last member. A taxon may become functionally extinct before the death of its last member if it loses the capacity to reproduce and recover. Because a species' potential range may be very large, determining this moment is difficult, and is usually done retrospectively. This difficulty leads to phenomena such as Lazarus taxa, where a species presumed extinct abruptly "reappears" after a period of apparent absence.

Green anarchism, also known as ecological anarchism or eco-anarchism, is an anarchist school of thought that focuses on ecology and environmental issues. It is an anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian form of radical environmentalism, which emphasises social organization, freedom and self-fulfillment.

Overconsumption describes a situation where a consumer overuses their available goods and services to where they can't, or don't want to, replenish or reuse them. In microeconomics, this may be described as the point where the marginal cost of a consumer is greater than their marginal utility. The term overconsumption is quite controversial in use and does not necessarily have a single unifying definition. When used to refer to natural resources to the point where the environment is negatively affected, it is synonymous with the term overexploitation. However, when used in the broader economic sense, overconsumption can refer to all types of goods and services, including manmade ones, e.g. "the overconsumption of alcohol can lead to alcohol poisoning". Overconsumption is driven by several factors of the current global economy, including forces like consumerism, planned obsolescence, economic materialism, and other unsustainable business models and can be contrasted with sustainable consumption.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Church of Euthanasia</span> Religious organization

The Church of Euthanasia (CoE) is a religion and antinatalist activist organization founded by Chris Korda and Robert Kimberk in Boston, Massachusetts in 1992. As stated on its website, it is "a non-profit educational foundation devoted to restoring balance between Humans and the remaining species on Earth." Its members affirm that this can only turn into a reality by a massive voluntary population reduction, which will depend on a leap in human consciousness to species-awareness. According to Korda, it is likely that this church is the world's only anti-human religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paul R. Ehrlich</span> American biologist (1932–present)

Paul Ralph Ehrlich is an American biologist known for his predictions and warnings about the consequences of population growth, including famine and resource depletion. Ehrlich is the Bing Professor Emeritus of Population Studies of the Department of Biology of Stanford University.

Voluntary childlessness or childfreeness describes the active choice not to have children. The word childfree first appeared sometime before 1901 and entered common usage among feminists during the 1970s. The suffix -free refers to the freedom and personal choice of those to pick this lifestyle. The meaning of the term childfree extends to encompass the children of others, and this distinguishes it further from the more usual term childless, which is traditionally used to express the idea of having no children, whether by choice or by circumstance. In the research literature, the term child-free or childfree has also been used to refer to parents currently not living with their children, for example because they have already grown up and moved out. In common usage, childfree might be used in the context of venues or activities wherein (young) children are excluded even if the people involved may be parents, such as a childfree flight or a childfree restaurant.

Anne Howland Ehrlich is an American scientist and author who is best known for the predictions she made as a co-author of The Population Bomb with her colleague and husband, Paul R. Ehrlich. She has written or co-written more than thirty books on overpopulation and ecology, including The Stork and the Plow (1995), with Gretchen Daily, and The Dominant Animal: Human Evolution and the Environment (2008), among many other works. She also has written extensively on issues of public concern such as population control, environmental protection, and environmental consequences of nuclear war.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human extinction</span> Hypothetical end of the human species

Human extinction is the hypothetical end of the human species, either by population decline due to extraneous natural causes, such as an asteroid impact or large-scale volcanism, or via anthropogenic destruction (self-extinction), for example by sub-replacement fertility.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmentalism</span> Philosophy about Earth protection

Environmentalism or environmental rights is a broad philosophy, ideology, and social movement about supporting life, habitats, and surroundings. While environmentalism focuses more on the environmental and nature-related aspects of green ideology and politics, ecologism combines the ideology of social ecology and environmentalism. Ecologism is more commonly used in continental European languages, while environmentalism is more commonly used in English but the words have slightly different connotations.

The "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity" was a document written in 1992 by Henry W. Kendall and signed by about 1,700 leading scientists. Twenty-five years later, in November 2017, 15,364 scientists signed "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice" written by William J. Ripple and seven co-authors calling for, among other things, human population planning, and drastically diminishing per capita consumption of fossil fuels, meat, and other resources. The second notice has more scientist cosigners and formal supporters than any other journal article ever published.

Ecofascism is a term used to describe individuals and groups which combine environmentalism with fascism.

Human overpopulation describes a concern that human populations may become too large to be sustained by their environment or resources in the long term. The topic is usually discussed in the context of world population, though it may concern individual nations, regions, and cities.

<i>The World Without Us</i> 2007 non-fiction book by Alan Weisman

The World Without Us is a 2007 non-fiction book about what would happen to the natural and built environment if humans suddenly disappeared, written by American journalist Alan Weisman and published by St. Martin's Thomas Dunne Books. It is a book-length expansion of Weisman's own February 2005 Discover article "Earth Without People". Written largely as a thought experiment, it outlines, for example, how cities and houses would deteriorate, how long man-made artifacts would last, and how remaining lifeforms would evolve. Weisman concludes that residential neighborhoods would become forests within 500 years, and that radioactive waste, bronze statues, plastics and Mount Rushmore would be among the longest-lasting evidence of human presence on Earth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Antinatalism</span> Family of philosophical views

Antinatalism or anti-natalism is a family of philosophical views that are critical of reproduction — they consider coming into existence as bad or deem procreation as immoral. Antinatalists thus argue that humans should abstain from having children. Antinatalist views are not necessarily limited only to humans, but may encompass all sentient creatures, claiming that coming into existence is a harm for sentient beings in general.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Global catastrophic risk</span> Potentially harmful worldwide events

A global catastrophic risk or a doomsday scenario is a hypothetical event that could damage human well-being on a global scale, even endangering or destroying modern civilization. An event that could cause human extinction or permanently and drastically curtail humanity's existence or potential is known as an "existential risk."

Deep ecology is an environmental philosophy that promotes the inherent worth of all living beings regardless of their instrumental utility to human needs, and the restructuring of modern human societies in accordance with such ideas.

In environmental science, a population "overshoots" its local carrying capacity — the capacity of the biome to feed and sustain that population — when that population has not only begun to outstrip its food supply in excess of regeneration, but actually shot past that point, setting up a potentially catastrophic crash of that feeder population once its food populations have been consumed completely. Overshoot can apply to human overpopulation as well as other animal populations: any life-form that consumes others to sustain itself.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental issues</span> Concerns and policies regarding the biophysical environment

Environmental issues are disruptions in the usual function of ecosystems. Further, these issues can be caused by humans or they can be natural. These issues are considered serious when the ecosystem cannot recover in the present situation, and catastrophic if the ecosystem is projected to certainly collapse.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Global catastrophe scenarios</span> Scenarios in which a global catastrophe creates harm

Scenarios in which a global catastrophic risk creates harm have been widely discussed. Some sources of catastrophic risk are anthropogenic, such as global warming, environmental degradation, and nuclear war. Others are non-anthropogenic or natural, such as meteor impacts or supervolcanoes. The impact of these scenarios can vary widely, depending on the cause and the severity of the event, ranging from temporary economic disruption to human extinction. Many societal collapses have already happened throughout human history.

References

  1. ↑ Pesca, Mike (May 12, 2006). "All Choked Up". NPR. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 "Sui genocide". The Economist. December 17, 1998. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Jarvis, Stephen (April 24, 1994). "Live long and die out: Stephen Jarvis encounters the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement". The Independent. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  4. ↑ "Personal information about Les U. Knight". The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved March 23, 2012.
  5. ↑ "Forum of the Future".
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dicum, Gregory (November 16, 2005). "Maybe None". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  7. ↑ Ormrod 2011, p. 142.
  8. ↑ "Sites answer 300 million questions". Barre Montpelier Times Argus. October 22, 2006. Archived from the original on October 19, 2013. Retrieved March 9, 2012.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ormrod 2011, p. 143.
  10. 1 2 3 Weisman 2010, p. 310.
  11. 1 2 "Symbolism of the logo for the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement". Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved January 22, 2012.
  12. ↑ Ormrod 2011, pp. 142–3.
  13. 1 2 3 4 Park, Michael Y. (July 29, 2001). "Anti-People Group Pushes for Man's Extinction". Fox News. Archived from the original on April 29, 2011. Retrieved February 19, 2012.
  14. ↑ "About The Movement — When and how did VHEMT start?". The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved January 23, 2012.
  15. ↑ "How to join VHEMT". The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  16. 1 2 3 4 Keck, Kristi (October 5, 2007). "Earth a gracious host to billions, but can she take many more?". CNN Technology. Retrieved January 27, 2012.
  17. 1 2 Savory, Eve (September 4, 2008). "VHEMT: The case against humans". CBC News. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  18. 1 2 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 an extinction movement]. G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  19. 1 2 3 4 Ormrod 2011, p. 158.
  20. ↑ "Breeding to Death". New Scientist. May 15, 1999. p. 19.(subscription required)
  21. 1 2 3 4 5 Bethune, Brian (August 6, 2007). "Please refrain from procreating". Maclean's. Archived from the original on June 25, 2013. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  22. ↑ Weisman 2010, p. 312.
  23. ↑ Ellis 1998, p. 267.
  24. ↑ Ellis 1998, p. 382–3.
  25. ↑ Dammann, Guy (December 28, 2008). "Am I fit to breed?". The Guardian. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  26. ↑ O'Reilly, Abby (November 24, 2007). "No more babies, please". The Guardian. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  27. ↑ Furedi, Frank (September 12, 2007). "Environmentalism". Spiked. Retrieved March 9, 2012.
  28. 1 2 Appleton, Josie (July 20, 2007). "Unleashing nature's terror". Spiked. Archived from the original on May 21, 2013. Retrieved March 9, 2012.
  29. ↑ Mieszkowski, Katharine (November 16, 2005). "No need to breed?". Salon. Archived from the original on September 24, 2015. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  30. ↑ Burkeman, Oliver (February 12, 2010). "Climate change: calling planet birth". The Guardian. Retrieved January 7, 2012.
  31. ↑ Best & Kellner 2001, p. 268–9.

Bibliography

Further reading

Listen to this article (15 minutes)
Sound-icon.svg
This audio file was created from a revision of this article dated 6 April 2012 (2012-04-06), and does not reflect subsequent edits.
(Audio help  · More spoken articles)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.