May We Live Long And Die Out

“I think somebody has to actually tell it as it is, that the intentional creation of one more human by anyone anywhere in the planet can’t be justified at this time.”

VHEMT promotes the voluntary extinction of people, to let the biosphere of earth recover from our actions.

Les U. Knight is internationally known as spokesperson of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT). As the name clearly states, the movement believes that we as people, should voluntarily cause our own extinction by stop procreating, allowing other species and the biosphere to recover from humans’ catastrophic impact.

According to Knight, the movement counts few millions of people worldwide- including “those who decided by their own to apply the same philosophy to their life without being aware that there was a movement about it.”

Even though what the movement proposes would, to some extent, solve some of our biggest issues, it is a radical viewpoint that raises many controversies.

As reported on VHMT’s website, Knight “gave the name ‘Voluntary Human Extinction Movement’ to a philosophy or worldview which has existed for as long as humans have been sapient”. In the following interview, Knight introduced us to the movement explaining the reasons behind their beliefs.

The extinction of our species through not procreating is also strongly supported by the South African philosopher David Benatar. His book, published in 2006, Better Never to Have Been: The Harm Of Coming Into Existence argues that coming into existence causes serious harm and procreation is always wrong. Although there are some common beliefs, they are not related and are different in certain aspects.

Others, instead, are critical despite acknowledging the environmental crisis we are facing, “While I don't believe that a voluntary move towards self-extinction makes a lot of sense, either theoretically or practically, I certainly accept the underlying premise that the activities of human beings are the primary cause of environmental deterioration, and that the only way forward is to severely limit the impact of our activities on the planet. This would include both reducing our numbers as a species, and also reducing the impact of each person on the environment” James Connelly, professor of Political Theory at the University of Hull, told ADHOC.

When asked for an opinion about the VHEMT, associate professor at the Department of Anthropology of UCL Marc Brightman told us, “The environmental damage that humans cause undermines the conditions of our own prosperity, but it causes some species to flourish (often ones we don’t like!) The movement is thus simultaneously misanthropic and anthropocentric - as such it amounts to a kind of nihilism.”

The group's imagery shows humans joining extinct species

In addition, he argued that the movement wrongly assumes that mankind in general causes extinction without specifying between different forms of livelihood. “There is plenty of evidence that some human groups - native Amazonians for example - are not responsible for species extinction or environmental destruction, and indeed that, in some cases, they contribute to increasing biodiversity.”

Something that unites the movement and the critics is the fact that both recognise the environmental crisis which we are causing. Overpopulation and Global Warming are the greatest challenge we must face, and whatever our point of view is, it is now clear that we cannot waste any more time.

By Francesco Tamilia