![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wingedbeastPost Apocalyptic scenarios are fraught with the question of how you rebuild the human population. How do you get people to make more people so that your society has a future when it most seems like society doesn't have a future?
There's another question you need to seriously consider first. Is it even right to bring more people into this world?
You need to seriously consider that question and take it as a given that there are conditions in which it is reasonable to answer "no".
For one example, if there are is only one possible breeding pair of humans remaining, the right thing to do may just be to let the human race die. That possible breeding pair making more humans would make a future generation that has the choice between letting the species die and incest. Two possible breeding pairs, in ideal circumstances, delays that choice for a generation.
You will need enough people before it's the right choice. The good news is that you might not need hundreds, but a few tens at the very least.
For another example, if resources aren't replenishable and humanity will die at their near end, then the final gasp of humanity isn't all that improved by a few more humans.
I want to be clear. I'm not saying that anything short of that is an automatic "yes." And, I'm not telling you to give up. I'm telling you to interact with that question as though the "no" can be reasonable so that you can, then, address the reasons.
Wayward Pines establishes that the culture views everybody as having a responsibility to reproduce, a responsibility that starts at age twelve and inability to do so may risk death penalty.
Okay, I think I can trust people not to think that forcing twelve-year-olds to have sex and bare children is a good idea, but we're talking about the pressures of a post apocalypse, here. So, to be clear, that will cause a massive increase in the fatality rate for pregnancy and childbirth, resulting in less of a future generation, not more. If the moral reasons don't stop you, the bare fact that it won't work should. If neither stops your society... well, that "no" sounds a bit more reasonable.
I'm of the philosophy that, if you can get people to meet the society's needs without force, you should. Force of law may be required, but it shouldn't be the primary method. So, assuming you have enough people and a chance at a future, that reproduction might be a moral choice, look at the reasons your citizens might say that it wouldn't be right to bring more children into the world.
You might not be able to solve all of the reasons. That's okay, you don't need to. If you have enough citizens, all of them producing children isn't needed. But, you will be able to do things like make schools, provide food and shelter, establish the framework that says that, yes, there will be a future.
For the most part, these are going to be things you should be doing, anyway. You're not seeking a future generation just so that it can exist and die. You want more than bare existence for and from these children. You want them to grow up healthy and well educated so that your society will be adaptive and robust.
From there, you've got nature working for you. Again, not everybody will want children, but the good thing about nature is that it doesn't have to be enforced. Enough people will want children, assuming that they can reasonably predict good lives for those children.
Establishing things like schools, building safe playgrounds, and building up an infrastructure, that'll be in the next tip.
There's another question you need to seriously consider first. Is it even right to bring more people into this world?
You need to seriously consider that question and take it as a given that there are conditions in which it is reasonable to answer "no".
For one example, if there are is only one possible breeding pair of humans remaining, the right thing to do may just be to let the human race die. That possible breeding pair making more humans would make a future generation that has the choice between letting the species die and incest. Two possible breeding pairs, in ideal circumstances, delays that choice for a generation.
You will need enough people before it's the right choice. The good news is that you might not need hundreds, but a few tens at the very least.
For another example, if resources aren't replenishable and humanity will die at their near end, then the final gasp of humanity isn't all that improved by a few more humans.
I want to be clear. I'm not saying that anything short of that is an automatic "yes." And, I'm not telling you to give up. I'm telling you to interact with that question as though the "no" can be reasonable so that you can, then, address the reasons.
Wayward Pines establishes that the culture views everybody as having a responsibility to reproduce, a responsibility that starts at age twelve and inability to do so may risk death penalty.
Okay, I think I can trust people not to think that forcing twelve-year-olds to have sex and bare children is a good idea, but we're talking about the pressures of a post apocalypse, here. So, to be clear, that will cause a massive increase in the fatality rate for pregnancy and childbirth, resulting in less of a future generation, not more. If the moral reasons don't stop you, the bare fact that it won't work should. If neither stops your society... well, that "no" sounds a bit more reasonable.
I'm of the philosophy that, if you can get people to meet the society's needs without force, you should. Force of law may be required, but it shouldn't be the primary method. So, assuming you have enough people and a chance at a future, that reproduction might be a moral choice, look at the reasons your citizens might say that it wouldn't be right to bring more children into the world.
You might not be able to solve all of the reasons. That's okay, you don't need to. If you have enough citizens, all of them producing children isn't needed. But, you will be able to do things like make schools, provide food and shelter, establish the framework that says that, yes, there will be a future.
For the most part, these are going to be things you should be doing, anyway. You're not seeking a future generation just so that it can exist and die. You want more than bare existence for and from these children. You want them to grow up healthy and well educated so that your society will be adaptive and robust.
From there, you've got nature working for you. Again, not everybody will want children, but the good thing about nature is that it doesn't have to be enforced. Enough people will want children, assuming that they can reasonably predict good lives for those children.
Establishing things like schools, building safe playgrounds, and building up an infrastructure, that'll be in the next tip.
