There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Putin is urging women to have as many as 8 children after so many Russians died in his war with Ukraine 


<span style="color:#323232;">Russian President Vladimir Putin is urging Russians to have more children. 
</span><span style="color:#323232;">"Large families must become the norm," Putin said in a speech Tuesday. 
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Russian birth rates are falling amid war in Ukraine and a deepening economic crisis. 
</span>

Russian President Vladimir Putin is urging women to have as many as eight children as the number of dead Russian soldiers continues to rise in his war with Ukraine, worsening the country’s population crisis.

Addressing the World Russian People’s Council in Moscow on Tuesday, Putin said the country must return to a time when large families were the norm.

“Many of our grandmothers and great-grandmothers, had seven, eight, or even more children,” Putin said.

ATDA ,

With what husband? Got em

IHadTwoCows ,

When Russia collapses again they can pay all these mothers and their kids in vodka like they did last time.

bruderschaft ,

My Russian brothers and sisters, hold fast. As an American, there will soon be a change in American political power that will align with sanity and not disinformation like this evil and corrupt incompetent American president. Soon you will be free from antagonizing drug addicted neighbors that intentionally create false nuclear attacks upon your unsuspecting and peaceful people putting fear in you and your children. We support you brothers and sisters of Russia!

bruderschaft ,

Wow. Didn’t know Lemmy censored. Might as well be the red version of Russia. For shame!

salvador ,

If that’s the reason, then the Ze must be urging the women in UA to have as little as 162 children

kashara , (edited )

Ordinary Western and US propaganda - no matter what Putin may do, it’s a sign of his weakness. Whether he eats ice cream, smiles, fucks women, sleeps, urges the women to give birth to more children, washes his teeth or itches his left shoulder – it’s a proof that he’s weak.

In reality, he’s ever stronger and supported by the russians – thanks to none other than the West and US.

SendMePhotos ,

Isn’t he just a Russian trump?

kashara ,

Yeah. He’s smart and strong.

Meowoem ,

Yeah the media have a tendency to exaggerate his flaws but this isn’t a well thought out move, it’s probably a mix of that white birther thing musk is into and general desperation at the industrial and military problems he faces.

The reality is Russia is not doing well economically, Russian families can’t afford to bring up eight kids even in the poverty conditions they’re getting increasingly used to. The Russian state can’t afford even the shitty education kids get now so it’s certainly not going to cope if there was a sudden baby boom.

This isn’t a well thought out economic, social, or moral plan so what else is it beside foolish bluster and weak minded desperation?

vsh ,
@vsh@lemm.ee avatar

Wow defending alternative Hitler is such a bold move. Now go birth/rape until you have 8 kids like your daddy Poutine said. Landmines won’t clear themselves!

kashara , (edited )

Wow. Defending Boris Jonson, Ze and Biden is akin defending Adolf Hitler. They’ve already killed over a milltion of ukranians by sending them to the russian meatgrinder. And they’ve made UA complitely dependent on their own financial aid.

vsh ,
@vsh@lemm.ee avatar

Welcome to politics 🤷

havokdj ,

This is truly the greatest orphan grinding machine of All Time.

GardenVarietyAnxiety ,

Putin will be remembered as the man who destroyed Russia.

netchami ,

And Ukraine

saywhatisabigw ,

They already have the Day of Conception - Wikipedia - en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_Conception

HawlSera ,

Well I wonder whose fault this was? Probably the guy who was so bloodthirsty and crazy that he actually annexed Chernobyl of all places

chaosppe ,
@chaosppe@lemmy.world avatar

Good luck solving the fertility problem. I don’t think any country has managed to figure it out yet.

voidMainVoid ,

It isn’t a problem. There are already too many people on the Earth.

espinosaav ,

There are enough resources, they’re just not distributed correctly.

INHALE_VEGETABLES ,

And they never will be, which is why there is too many people.

DeepGradientAscent , (edited )
@DeepGradientAscent@programming.dev avatar

For some, it’s never about having enough or even a lot. It’s about making sure everyone else has less than them.

Tinidril ,

Nonsense. Sure, we are getting what we need out of the planet, but we are destroying it in the process. Modern agriculture absolutely cannot continue producing what it is now indefinitely. Fertilizer alone is massive issue, never mind the destruction of old growth forest for farmland, or the contributions to climate change.

qyron ,

Nonsense.

Close to one third of total agricultural production is wasted yearly, with almost half of that never even leaving the fields.

Fertilizers are another scarecrow but there is a never ending source of nitrogen and phosphor right at hand going to waste in many countries with no second thought: waste water treatment muds.

And there are more fields laying fallow today than there were 50 years ago in many countries.

More forest is cut down to be replaced by palm tree for oil than for conventional agriculture and the clearing for cattle is just bad manegement of lands.

Tinidril ,

Reducing our agricultural output by 1/3 wouldn’t come close to making it sustainable, though it would certainly be an improvement. Fertilizer costs have been a big problem worldwide, so if using waste products were practical we would be doing it already. Shifting weather patterns from climate change are why a lot of those fields are fallow, and that’s only going to get worse.

Countries that use less than average resources are working far harder to use more resources than rich countries are working to use less, and I don’t see a plan to make that change. As individual choices go, no choice a person can make will reduce their impact more than having one less child than they otherwise would. We just don’t need 10 billion people on this planet.

qyron , (edited )

Adoption of new alternatives is not easy nor fast.

Try and give a call to your local waste water treatment plant and ask for a tour. Tell them you want to understand better what they are doing and how, what destination they give to muds, etc. You’ll be surprised to know most countries sent those nutrient rich by-products to landfills for decades and only very recently the muds started to be valued.

And are you sure about that? Because I’d quicker point to population exodus from rural to city areas.

The discussion about cutting back on agricultural production is just starting. Too much goes to waste, when too many go without. The point is that by reducing production, resource management will be a forced point of action. Debateable but it is as valid as any other idea.

But like it or not, the human population will peak and stabilize at the 10 billion and we can sustain ourselves without burning the house down.

Tinidril ,

Name one society that has ever managed significant decreases in production of anything to help the environment. We’ve found ways to lower the impact of increasing production, and we’ve even found ways to reduce the impact of current production. I can’t think of a single instance of a society broadly adopting a reduction of goods and services for the environment.

The fact is that, while there are many improvements to be made, every one of those improvements would work better with a lower population. There are also no realistic projections of humanity reaching a reasonable level of long term sustainability. We also have a long history of badly failing to reach projected sustainability targets. Ignoring a multiplicative factor that impacts sustainability in every area is just foolish.

Yeah, we are projected to peak around 10b. 9b would be better though, or even 9.9b. 1b would have been fantastic, though probably still too high. But what happens when you get all the lifestyle and efficiency increases you dream of? How do you know that population trends won’t shift? It doesn’t take much. Just a +/-0.2 difference in children per family can have a profound impact in one direction or the other. You are gambling everything on an assumption that trends won’t change. Trends always change.

qyron ,

It never existed because it was never a problem.

And the problem here is not to reduce for the sake of environment but for the sake of not wasting resources for production: energy, water, machinery, etc. Things that cost money that can not be recouped. Environmental impact is a very welcome off shoot.

There are at least three possible scenarios to counter your position:

  1. nothing changes and current trend of population shrinking maintains
  2. everything gets better, standards of life improve and number of offspring decreases for increase of parental investment per child
  3. everything gets worse and either we kill ourselves or the planet does

Numbers, statistics, projections, whatever argument we put on the table, boiled down, comes to these.

Tinidril ,

You are both oversimplifying the reality and overcomplicating it at the same time. There are thousands of different aspects to sustainability, including many that we simply haven’t identified yet. Modern farming methods that provide us such great yields are simultaneously robbing us of important nutrients that aren’t being replenished in the soil. This has a knock on effect to meat and dairy as well. We are running out of fresh water for farming, residential, and industrial use. Forever chemicals are building up in the oceans, aquafers, soil, and air. Oceans and rivers are running out of fish. Noise pollution, light pollution, heat pollution, and just ordinary misplaced trash don’t seem likely to abate any time soon. Good luck getting cooperation on any of these issues, when we can’t even get people to wear masks in the middle of a plague.

Every one of these aspects of sustainability will relate differently to your scenarios. In the end, we are left with the simple truth that every effort to address every one of these issues will be aided by a reduced population. Either reduced from where it is today, or reduced from whatever future predictions you want to work from. (I’ve been ignoring the fact that humanity has generally been pretty shit about accurately predicting the future, because those predictions are entirely irrelevant to my point).

I’m not talking about culling the population, ethnic cleansing, forced sterilization, etc. People should be absolutely free to make their own family planning choices. But there are lots of ways to promote having fewer children without being coercive. Child free lifestyles should be more respected. Birth control should be more widely available. People should be more aware of the fragility of this planet, and the impact we have on it. Having one less kid than one would otherwise have is always going to blow away the impact of whatever other things we do to promote sustainability.

commie ,

But there are lots of ways to promote having fewer children without being coercive

i don’t believe you can do that without artificially selecting one part of the populace, but not another, or just having disproportionate impacts. even this comment was written in english, and even if it’s well-intentioned, everyone who doesn’t read english is not subject to the propaganda in it. by posting it on lemmy, you are also targeting lemmy and the broader fediverse as a demographic. so everyone who’s not online is already immune to this propaganda.

Tinidril ,

Your pushing the boundaries of “propaganda” pretty extensively there. Sure, technically it could apply, but then it applies to any political opinion communicated in any way by anyone, including you.

Of course it won’t be communicated equally. Neither will messages encouraging more children, something far more common from current governments. The right wing in this country (and others) explicitly encourages more “white Christian” children because of “replacement theory”. That’s far more sinister than suggesting that people in general should consider the impact before having more children.

Nothing in reality is ever totally fair, just like no society is ever totally sustainable. A perpetual motion machine is only possible in an ideal world, and so is a sustainable society. We will only ever be able to approximate sustainability, and that will require contributions systemic and cultural changes. That means “propaganda”, and it means that some demographics will cooperate more than others, meaning it won’t be “fair” regardless of the approach.

commie ,

but you see how this is exactly what eugenicists would do, right? create propaganda to discourage undesirables from procreating and create ineffective propaganda for their preferred demographic group. the intention doesn’t matter, to me. it’s all eugenicist propaganda as far as I’m concerned.

Tinidril ,

You just love that word, “propaganda”, but where did “undesirables” come in? I never mentioned targeting anyone, or even running an information campaign at all. I’m pointing out the reality that fewer people would be better. You can’t argue against that, so you make a bunch of ridiculous assumptions and attack those.

I think that when this topic is discussed, people should be honest and rational about it. You clearly don’t.

commie ,

I’m pointing out how quickly malthusianism becomes eugenics.

Tinidril ,

Even as slippery slope arguments go, this is truly pathetic.

commie ,

are you suggesting I’m too vigilant against eugenicist propaganda? better than laying the groundwork for a genocide, I think.

Tinidril ,

Thanos was right.

commie ,

I think that when this topic is discussed, people should be honest and rational about it. You clearly don’t.

i think calling your advocacy propaganda rubbed you the wrong way, and you can’t see what i’m saying.

Tinidril ,

I can see what your saying just fine. I’m not the one who’s unhinged here.

commie ,

I never mentioned targeting anyone, or even running an information campaign at all.

you ARE running an information campaign.

Tinidril ,

No YOU are running an information campaign. Fuck this is getting dumb.

commie ,

fewer people would be better. You can’t argue against that

yes, i can.

Tinidril ,

Then I gotta wonder why you haven’t. All you’ve claimed is that there are other options. All things being equal, a world with fewer people needs fewer resources. If we get the whole world on solar, that will still be true. If we get everyone to give up meat, it will still be true. If we stop polluting our waterways it will still be true. You have not argued against that, and you can’t do so in any rational way.

commie ,

this is some ecofascist shit

Tinidril ,

LOL, sure it is.

commie ,

I know.

Tinidril ,

Got anything but ad hominems? You pretty much proved my point.

commie ,

please don’t spread malthusianism.

Tinidril ,

Please stop throwing around labels like they are arguments.

IHadTwoCows ,

Everything was better when there were half as many of us.

Ataraxia ,
@Ataraxia@lemmy.world avatar

It’s not a problem. When us women have the resources to be able to educate ourselves in the realities of the bull shit that’s been peddled to us, we stop being brood mares.

AgentGrimstone ,

I bet Putin sucks at StarCraft

vrighter ,

we know he plays zerg at least

quinkin ,

Requires more pylons peons.

TransplantedSconie ,

I’m waiting in line for my food giggling like a motherfucker at this comment. 🤣

SendMePhotos ,

Jfc calm down bro. Didn’t need to go that far.

fne8w2ah ,

Even Putler wants to flirt with the idea of turning his empire into fucking Gilead.

Clbull ,

That’s one way to deal with an ageing population demographic.

Another way is to perhaps not throw every able-bodied young man into a militaristic meat grinder because you still yearn for the Soviet Union days.

Mistic ,

He’s probably yearning for the Russian Empire instead of Soviet Union.

Russian governmental officials have some really outlandish views for an average Russian person.

They’re very religious, believe in conspiracies, actively anti-lgbt, don’t support abortions, antisemitic to name a few. None of these qualities are present in the general masses. They are in their own informational bubble.

As far as I understand it, he believes that the Russian Empire and collective Europe were always at each other’s throats, and that never changed for over 200 years. At the same time, Russia is a successor of the Russian Empire, and USSR is being omitted for some reason. That’s the simplistic explanation of it.

For you to understand how crazy that is, Russians (in general) have little to no idea of how the Empire worked and what the views those people held. USSR essentially wiped out all of that culture.

TheWoozy ,

Putin seems to be in a competition with Trump for the stupidest authoritarian prize.

Shapillon ,

Javier Milei, Matteo Salvini, Boris Johnson, Geert Wilders, Jair Bolsonaro & a frightening whole lot of others have entered the chat.

electrogamerman ,

Maybe they can open the borders to immigrants?

TransplantedSconie ,

Those also will be thrown into the grinder.

All they get are 70 year old alcoholics to lay back and think of the empire for.

electrogamerman ,

I doubt any immigrant on its right mind would move to Russia, and even if some did, no immigrants on its right mind would fight a war for RuSsIA

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •