Only the last 30 seconds or so are not just scratching the surface. The general idea and its click-baity way to present itself on YouTube are mainly status quo affirming, if anything. In a hyper capitalist world, the pure number of people won’t change anything. Neither good but bad. Only the means of oppression and exploitation, and how intense they are applied, changes. At its core the problem is, that people are just used to make rich people richer. And as more and more gets funneled to the top, more and more people are living more constraint lives. Opening this discussion as an actual way to solve problems is just affirming the false competition between us.

The moral imperative of less people equals better also devalues human life itself. This opens the door for problematic worldviews and hurts the optimistic community-based idea.

Regardless of the arguable monetary value, capitalism as a system to allocate and distribute resources is such a scam. What a waste.

Great interview, thanks!

This is my personal key point:

Creating more democratic spaces in the workplace and guaranteeing the democratic participation of everyone in decision making processes. These are the ideas that might create some conditions for enriching or cultivating different kinds of desires instead of consuming more because you feel lonely and you feel stressed.

I think degrowth really needs to provide a more positive vision of the future because degrowth as such is just a negation of growth.

Looks interesting. Probably too much on the non-affordable side of things for normal people, I bet. But what bothers me most is the term collapse-proof. I get that they likely address the high level of autonomy. I would still rather focus on having a high level of adaptability and being a solid foundation to enable community-building instead. (end of optimistic rambling)

This is cool, thanks