Demographic winter denial

1. The Nazis were in favor of procreation.
2. Therefore, being in favor of procreation makes you a fascist.

Goldberg, anyone?

No one looking out my window can take global warming seriously, except as a hope of something to come! And no one sitting in a restaurant with the noisy product of damnable breeders sitting in the next booth can take the idea of demographic cooling seriously either.

Fair enough, Irenaeus, but can we agree that there are plenty of folks on the right who disagree with the global warming hypothesis simply because liberals embrace it?

Charles, I'm sorry we breeders upset your meal. I hope you will be able to feed yourself and change your diaper all alone in the future, or to pay, via taxes, for someone to do that. Maybe a robot will be around to wipe your poopy bottom.

Ah, Charles, if you live in a snow-laden climate no wonder you write like a hopeless curmudgeon. Move south, sir! I hear from family still in the Midwest at this time of year and smile; no amount of allergy-inducing winter Texas weather could make me crave the snow-draped scenery of my childhood.

As for your meal woes, here's a hint. Restaurants with booths cater to us breeders and our progeny. If you want to eat in the luxurious peace of the irascible adult gourmand, find a restaurant without them, preferably one with actual table linens and lighted candles on the tables--such things are anathema to families dining in toto, though you'll never know (however darkly you may suspect it) which of your companions at the place might secretly have offspring lurking in some alternate Crayola-colored world where they are being temporarily looked after by some underpaid au pair or gratis grandparent.

**Once we think of children as things we want or unwant, like toasters, automobiles, or vacations, we diminish ourselves, since we were all once children.**

Rod, using this quote by your comboxer Francis, let's clarify some things:

1. I've never doubted the importance of demographic change (in fact, in other contexts, I have HIGHLIGHTED the importance of demographic change); I just don't take the apocalyptic view of it that the rest of you do.

2. Just because the Nazis encouraged good Aryans to be breeders like racing champion horses does not mean I will tag the Quiverfullers on here with the National Socialist appellation.

3. Those statements said, I really don't understand the difference between the tautology above, to justify MANDATORY childbearing, and the one cited earlier that "Nazis encouraged large families, therefore anyone with a large family is a Nazi."

No, I don't deny demographic realities, Rod. What I deny are statements like Francis' and their import. Because if mandatory childbearing is what it takes to preserve our freedom against the Muslim hordes, our freedom is toast already.

"Handmaid's Tale" in a handbasket, here we come.

Francis; If we should not want or unwant children should we then have as many as possible? Is it legitimate to say one just cant afford (financially, timewise, healthwise) more children at some point? If e.g. I dont want children right now because I am in grad school and not able to give them adequate amounts of time or in the military being deployed am I then thinking of children as toasters? Just asking cause I like kids a lot and have always worked with them. Having children one is not prepared for seems irresponsible.

On a side note people are losing custody of children just because they are being deployed repeatedly overseas. Judges have noted that the parent losing custody was a good parent but wasnt meeting their parental obligations by be away so often.

Steve

While I think the Nation's argument is overstated, it does make important points. First, there is a "there aren't enough white people" element to the Demographic Winter hysteria. It's hard to ignore the sense that the panic is because there are fewer white people, not people in general. This is especially acute in the U.S. where the non-white people do have higher fertility rates, which makes the panic seem all the more suspect.

It is also inescapable that underlying the argument is the message "women are selfish and aren't having enough children." When religious people/culture warriors who are opposed to contraceptives and link being religious with having tons of children make the argument, there is that sense that they'd like nothing better than cut off access to contraceptives, which they constantly argue are the downfall of modern life.

Oh Rod. You're on quite the streak here the past two days.

First of all, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism are pretty tightly linked where I've seen them in "native" Europeans. I'd say the former has taken over for the latter, really, with the poison basically the same.

Secondly, Europe is overpopulated. You conservatives may live in denial, but that's not the case among the liberals and practical/pragmatic people there. If populations shrunk by a third to a half it would be a better place, not worse. There simply isn't enough work or cultural space for the size populations created during the late agrarian and early industrial age which have been maintained until now.

How about you spell out what you really mean with "a civilization cannot survive if it doesn't have enough children to carry out its purposes"? A "civilization" that selfdestructs (supposedly) when it falls under half a billion people in membership would be quite the novelty. And absurd in its demonstration of lack of actual substance at its core.

Personally, I find it wryly amusing to watching conservatives bellyache about civilization (or, rather, what they pretend it to be). Liberals are the people who've been civilization's lonely and embattled champions throughout history; the rest of the political spectrum has always been pretty quick to abandon it as terrible oppression when given the opportunity to behave inhumanely.

Why should this be bad news? Demographics is destiny. It's clear that religious conservatives are destined to become a majority in Europe some time in the future, whether muslim or Christian, since the birthrates of secular liberals are infinitesimal compared to the former. Let the atheists and agnostics that populate much of Europe die out, and Europe will be all the better for it.

Islamophobia and anti-Semitism are pretty tightly linked where I've seen them in "native" Europeans.

What does it mean, linked?

And your proof of this assertion is what?

"In the real life Europe will not become Islamic before millions will be dead in civil wars accross the continent."

The sooner the wars happen, the fewer Kafir casualties.

Jillian:

There are over 100 species of animals in the U.S. that are on the endengered species list. The U.S. is as a matter of Federal Policy doing whatever it can to preserve them. Perhaps we should go ahead and have them killed off and make room for the other animals. Ohhhh, but of course not, Liberals will, even if they are against the 2nd amendment, kill you to defend the diversity of species on Earth.

However, when Italians or other Europeans want to protect their cultural and history, they are branded "facist". As someone who is Catholic and whose ancestors came from Sicilia over 100 years ago, I amd glad to see that in Italy and other Europeand countries, people are seeing that Islam and muliculturalism are destroying Western Civilization and the secular left with its marxist deconstructionist ideas, is complicit in this. Funny thing Jillian is that Secular leftist like you will be the first to hear "allah akbar" while simultaneously feeling a sword severing your neck from your body.

Of course, it will be orthodox Christians of all confessions (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant), who haven't aborted as many children or euthansized others who will in the end be called on to bail your "secular leftist rear ends" out.

Pax Domine Christi

"Of course, it will be orthodox Christians of all confessions (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant), who haven't aborted as many children or euthansized others who will in the end be called on to bail your "secular leftist rear ends" out."

Except there's no data to support this. Catholics, the Orthodox, conservative Protestants do not have statistically significant fertility rates that are higher than on average. It's more myth than reality.

Franklin:

The culture of Sicily my friend was Greek and Roman, as many of the great Greek philosophers lived and wrote there. Sicily was the first province of the Roman empire, and has been part of Greco-Roman civilization henceforth. St. Paul himself preached on Siciliy, and Sicily has been part of the Catholic Tradition, both West and East since at times Sicily came under the jurisdiction of the Byzantine Churches in the East. In summary, Sicily is part of the Western Tradition and the best of Greco-Roman culture and tradition and the Christian faith are its core roots. Whether I have any Indian ancestry or not is quite frankly a mute point, ultimately Greco-Roman culture, the Judeo-Christian Tradition and the convergence of those two is what made Sicily, Italy, and Western Europe's heritage. I, unlike many of the secular left who sold their heritage out for deconstructionist and marxist view points that all cultures and value systems are equally valid, believe that Western Civilization is in fact superior to other traditions. That does not mean that there are not valid elements in all cultures, but to say that every tradition and culture, and thus every philosophical system and religion is equally valid would thus cause you to not be able to make a value judgement about, lets say for example, Nazism or Stalinist-Communism, which each were responsible for some 50 Million deaths in the last century. Because again, remember, you can't make a "value judgement" because again, we are secular progressives and again all value systems are equal. Correct, have I as a traditional orthodox Catholic got the pont correctly.

Of course, I don't suscribe to that view point as ultimately I am comfortable calling evil what it is, "which is evil" be it Nazism, Communism, practiced by Stalin, or Pol Pot, etc, or Islamic Jihadism. And for record, one of the beauties of the Christian Tradition and Western Civilization is that I can also acknowledge where individual Christians and Western Countries committed grave wrongs. It is called in the Catholic Tradition examining ones conscience and admitting ones sinfulness, either individually or collectively and it is what is called in the Western Tradition as being able to be "self critical" and recognize historic injustices.

In summary, I hope and pray that the Conservative Christian party's of Italy win the next round of elections and begin to reclaim and stand up to the Radical Jihadist and their Secular Marxist allies who can't allow themselves to be critical of Islam and Islamic ideology as that would be being "anti-mulicultural", and we can't have that can we, even if it gets many people killed. Well, I for one have long seen what is going on in terms of a 1300 year struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil and I am finally glad to see that there may still be some Charles Martel's, or the Spirit of Lepanto left in some areas of Europe.

Pax Domine Christi Sit Semper Vobiscum

What I deny are statements like Francis' and their import. Because if mandatory childbearing is what it takes to preserve our freedom against the Muslim hordes, our freedom is toast already. "Handmaid's Tale" in a handbasket, here we come.

Wow - talk about a straw man argument!

Who on this thread (or anywhere else in the world) is advocating "mandatory" childbearing?

BTW, The Handmaid's Tale is the kind of dreck produced when someone who neither engages the arguments of one's intellectual or political opponents nor makes an effort to imagine a worldview different from one's own attempts "literature." Pathetic.

"I clearly modified the term Christian with the word "orthodox","

And again, there's no data to support your point that "orthodox" Catholics have statisticially significant larger families. The plural of anecdote is not data.

And you will need to identify both (a) what is an "orthodox" Catholic, (b) how we determine who they are in the society and (c) are there enough of them to really have an impact given the total numbers we are talking about. If 10 million couples have two children and 75,000 couples have four children, those four-children families aren't having a dramatic impact on the total numbers. Their impact is negligible.

In addition, despite "the sky is falling on white people" hysteria, the reality is that white people are still having children, just not as many. While there is a demographic shift, it is a matter of fractional changes not massive changes.

Simon: Who on this thread (or anywhere else in the world) is advocating "mandatory" childbearing?

People who don't like the argument have to gin up hysteria like this (or like insisting people who are concerned about the birth dearth and the potential death of Western culture are racists) because it means they don't have to deal with the unpleasant and complex realities of the demographic crisis.

Rod, you have two contradicting arguments you've been making in this blog.

Western society is facing a demographic ruin due to low birthrates.

Western society will fall into ruin as we hit peak oil.

Have you considered that if peak oil is true, then it argues against having more children? You can't raise a Malthusian argument on one hand and then scold people for not having enough kids on the other. Otherwise you're telling them to have more kids to share the misery.

"There virtually are no Christian conservatives in Europe."

Ever been to Poland? Or Ireland? Or Croatia?

To Jonathan Smith:

Thanks for providing academic studies that supported my hypothesis. In theory, I thought it was true and now we do have academic studies that provide empirical evidence supporting my position.

Again, thanks for providing these cites.

So nonperson that not only does Rod not bother to cite my name, he also doesn't bother to cite my clarification before tearing into my original post.

Larry, get hold of yourself. We're all grown-ups here.

Rod, c'mon, you're a smart guy.

I actually LIKE my bugbear status :-)

I think that one of the hangups here is the idea of skin color. That is not what is at issue. What is at issue is the fact that on the one hand traditional nationalities are committing demographic suicide and on the other, the underdeveloped nations of the world are at risk of being emptied in a rob-peter-to-pay-paul scenario. The whole thing is bad all around. In the end, the numbers do not change. A birthrate of 1.1 or 1.2 is not a good thing since the actual population could still be increasing, due to increasing life expectancy and decreasing infant mortality, for a little while yet, which masks the problem. The fact of the matter remains that a few young people are going to be left in 30-50 years to care for a much larger elderly population, and they will not have the resources to do so.

Yes, backing off from a scenario of unrestrained geometric population growth is desirable. But when we reach the tipping point and begin to lose population globally, it is going to really hurt to have such a large chunk of society in the later stages of life.

" I dont want children right now because I am in grad school and not able to give them adequate amounts of time or in the military being deployed am I then thinking of children as toasters?"

Ahh grad school!

Please forgive! The "I am in grad school" one always makes me snicker a little. My sister feel for that one "I will be in grad school, I am in grad school, I need more grad school" for three years... Poor thing.

All appeal to her to ask him for an explination why full time grad school to pursue a rather non-lucrative career was essential went unheaded... Mostly because she knew the answer without asking. Grad School for Grad School's sake! - Plus he didn't want to get a real job... and grad school gives bragging rights - it is WAYYYY harder than working!

Rod, next time you are dining with your bishop gently suggest to him that +++ALEKSY'S recent re-iteration of the Orthodox teaching on ABC (however much it is up for grabs here in the US) might be something that should be talked about more in the OCA... and not just from the Humanae Vitae sed contra standpoint.

Russia is already hemoraging 700K a year in population (or roughly the population of Seville, Spain or San Francisco, CA!)... Russia will be smaller than Yemen (population wise) by 2050. But given that the growth of Islam as the majority will have taken place there by 2030, that won't be so bad for the Russian population - mail order Yemeni brides may prove popular!

Ian:

Glad to hear you're a nihilist.

You may just fit right in here.

Larry, consider this: "Imagine there no heaven", "no hell", "no countries", "Nothing to kill or die for", "no religion", "no possessions", "no need for greed or hunger, a brotherhood of man"... Those, as you've probably figured out, are lyrics from Lennon's (awful) "Imagine", an anthem for a certain part of humanity.

Liberalism, multiculturalism, Socialism - those, to me, are nihilism. The struggle of life is a good thing, I wasn't condemning it. If a bear ate me, it wouldn't mean that life is bad, and I wouldn't wish it indigestion.

No clue what kind of ism that is, but it's not nihilism.

Liberals are the people who've been civilization's lonely and embattled champions throughout history

You can tell yourself that, but the word "liberal" has no meaning prior to the Western Enlightenment. And even within the West, its meaning is slippery. The most conservative Republican today is in most respects more "liberal" than the most liberal 19th-century English MP. Your statement, then, is of limited utility.

Yet ours is called "liberal civilization" for some reason. And if the most recent cases- Nazi Germany and Communist Russia- are any measure, it was the liberals that stood up for the value of the ability to lead lives according to personal spiritual calling. You may persistently misconstrue the liberal core belief as being about individual material freedom, but the value of individual spiritual freedom- if only confined to what is called private life- is the deep root that has long historical tradition.

Anyway, if a civilization cannot mount an army to defend it from aggressors, or serve its economic needs (most especially farming), it runs the risk of collapse. Those are the two most basic ways, it seems to me.

Well, you have here shifted your argument to one about dominance or competitive parity rather existence. They may be linked notions to you, but not to me. You seem to work off the model of pagan Rome and the Mayas, for example, but those rules don't work for early Christianity (if you count that as a distinct civilization), the Jews while in Exile, probably Greece under Turkish rule, etc.

Sure, let's all see the documentary "Demographic Winter". And then we can all watch "Soylent Green". We'll make it a double feature.

Having looked through their websits I have to ask: are these people nuts? Is their ideal family really one with 10 or 12 kids? Well let's do the math shall we? If everyone had 12 kids (given that 2.1 kids per couple represents steady state demograpics with a growth multiplier of 1.00), this results in a growth multiplier of almost 6.00. Assuming that each succeeding generation achieves this ideal familiy size we can then apply the magic of compound interest.

Currently, the earth's population is about 6,600,000,000. Its land surface is about 57,500,000 sq mi (or nearly 1,600,000,000,000,000 sq ft, equal to almost 245,000 sq ft per person). Perform a compond interest formula, and determine how many generations before there is at least person for every square foot of ground. At the above stated growth rate, I get 7 generations, about 150 years. YMMV. But it shows what hapens when we take the pro-natal logic to its logical conclusions.

But that is silly and won't ever happen since war, famine and disease will keep the human population in check. But why is that a good thing? Why is it it holier to poison the planet and turn the world into a giant third world slum than to use sinful birth control. Are people in abject poverty living in slums somehow more saintly than those living comfotable lives in American suburbs? Why is turning the world into a giant version of Calcutta more Godly than wearing a condom? Why is the unavoidable complete extermination of entire species and collapse of nature's biodiviersity a good thing? What exacatly will we eat when every acre is built on and every species wiped out?

Oh yeah, we'll have Soylent Green.

Bon appetit.