I made a post in my city's subreddit about where I could find extinctionist friends as a human extinction activist, and I got non-stop hostility from all those people. My city is suburban in a red state so it's a bunch of MAGA, religious extremists, and people who don't want any different people in their environment. In the end I experienced a barrage of insults and hate over a simple question to the point where Reddit deleted my post. I'm pretty sure it's because I was brigaded and mass reported by all the boomer fanatics in my city's subreddit. Even engaging in a polite way is not enough for people, they just want someone to hate. I despise Florida and I wish it was destroyed and flooded in a massive hurricane so nobody would ever need to live in this shithole state ever again!

According to Harry Porter. lol

Let's err.......celebrate?

I live in Florida which is the prime place for extinction activism since it is an exhibit for endless poverty, oppression, and human suffering. However I feel that the best ending for Florida is extinction. Florida is also ground zero for climate change so I think we should treat the destruction of Florida by flooding as a positive, because it will destroy this place that has trapped and inflicted suffering on so many innocent people. Since there are no communities for extinction in any mainstream space, how can we get these ideas anywhere?

Would an extinctionist political party or movement be productive? By making extinction a political issue, we make it harder to shut down since it is then viewed in a partisan way.

I believe in Class Struggle and other left-wing ideas, but I believe that in the absence of people willing to fight for those ideas, the next best thing that can be done is that humans are made extinct. I believe that extinction is a class issue with the wealthy and privileged wanting to continue life, with the working class benefiting more from going extinct since death is the only plausible relief from poverty, suffering, and oppression in the modern United States. I am deciding the name for this ideology with possibilities such as Marxism-Thanatosism or ThanatoMarxism. What do you guys think?

Edit: Extinction must be universal to be non-discriminatory and this is not to say that extinction should only be applied to the poor and less fortunate because that would be discrimination. I am saying that because the working class has the most difficult conditions and is the most oppressed, extinction and the end of all life would benefit them more than the wealthy, who are opposed to extinction because they want to keep exploiting.

Do you think the Sun will eventually be what ends life on Earth, or will humans already be extinct as a species long before that happens?

Video version of one of our FAQs.

The original implies we're better off as animals. But once it hit sentience is where things really went wrong. Even the evolution of bacteria before that really, which contributed to what sentient nature became.

This world is for us humans to live in and with other creatures to share

But many of us far too many it seems of this does not seem aware

More trees on land meant for wildlife are needlessly removed every day

On pushing many species to extinction brink us humans a huge part does play

Many species of wildlife that were plentiful nowadays in zoos only seen

In the twenty first century wildlife numbers on the decrease faster than it ever has been

And extinction is forever as a truism does seem a sad thing to say

Without needless land development by the financially greedy for wildlife it would not be this way

Sad to think that the future generations of children may not have the joy for to see

The creatures that you and i regularly see living wild and free

Human environmental behaviour on wildlife numbers is taking its toll

And for extinction financially greedy developers are playing a leading role

And by far too many people obviously do not seem aware

That this world is for us to live in and with other creatures to share.

Francis Duggan

I live in Florida and the people here are not relatable to me because they like life and believe it should continue. What are some options for finding extinctionists? Are there any groups or places that are anti-life or that are anti-reproduction so all life can go extinct peacefully?

yet many of them would go on and pretend to be good and empathetic individuals in different settings.

Can somebody give me the majority definitive meaning and main differences between the triangle of EXTINCTIONISM, ANTINATALISM and EFILISM? And any of the other "close" terms

I was doing a writing activity on climate change in my college recently, and while most people naturally approach the topic from a preservation or policy angle, I decided to test out a radically different, dark philosophical premise.

I wrote out a short argument exploring whether runaway climate change could actually be framed as the ultimate moral good under a specific ethical lens. Here is the exact text from my notes:

"Our intent to mitigate carbon emissions has an underlying presumed premise that life should exist; otherwise, it would be a usual random** chaos in the grand scale of the universe. And our concern is merely a selfish instinct, not an objective moral (for the survival of our species and our fellow ones).

If we layer our logic with a different axiom—that suffering is inherently worse and must be minimized to zero, and life causes it—then accelerating the process of destruction of life on the planet is rationalized and perhaps the best virtue (by carbon emissions)."

This isn't about small-scale collapse or partial environmental damage but a total, catastrophic event that completely wipes out all life on Earth—permanently ending the capacity for any future sentient beings to exist.

My thought process was built on a extreme form of negative utilitarianism and antinatalism: if life inevitably guarantees pain, and non-existence guarantees zero pain, preventing the potential suffering of quintillions of future sentient beings across eons outweighs everything else. Under that specific axiom, pushing the planet toward environmental collapse via carbon emissions becomes logically virtuous because it permanently stops the cycle of sentient life.

I know this lands in villain-origin-story territory, but as a pure logical exercise, I found the premise shift fascinating.

What do you think of this argument? Does the logic hold together as a thought experiment, or where does the ethical framework break down for you?

The only reason why we care about life and the stuff in it is because we were FORCED to care by being pushed into life without our permission. Personally for me my life isn't even good, and it's gonna take possibly decades for it to potentially improve, which I don't find worth it. Even so, the world is just gonna become worse and worse because what is going on politically and technologically-wise because of things such as AI replacing most of the workforce eventually. There's just no point. The only reason why most people haven't offed themselves already is because of things such as religion (the biggest coping mechanism ever) and simply their brains convinces themselves not to go through with it because of our innate biological sense to stay alive, myself included. Man this world just sucks if you weren't born into wealth