Western World committing demographic sooeee-cide - Part 1

Posted On: Saturday - November 4th 2017 6:31PM MST
In Topics: 
  Immigration Stupidity  History  The Future

It's not like this is some new revelation, nor is the article linked to here unique or even recent. The decline in population of the civilized Western World and even the civilized Orient compared to the huge increases still going on in Africa and the Moslem world could have been and were forseen (by some) 3 decades of more back. It's just time to write about it here on Peak Stupidity, as this demographic suicide that is on-going is indeed the peak of stupidity. (This Zerohedge article is not an original, so here is the original source from the Gatestone Institute.

It isn't that the Globalist elites, the childless European leaders, the American political scum, and the Chinese and Japanese don't know this. Most. of them either don't care at all or even want this to happen. The only ones speaking up are the un-PC leaders in eastern Europe and alt-right guys like Geert Wilders (a Dutch outcast for his truthful habit), per the ZH article:
The Archbishop of Strasbourg Luc Ravel, nominated by Pope Francis in February, just declared that "Muslim believers know very well that their fertility is such today, that they call it... the Great Replacement. They tell you in a very calm, very positive way: One day all this, all this will be ours..."

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán just warned against a "Muslimized Europe". According to him, "the question of the upcoming decades is whether Europe will continue to belong to Europeans".

"In the coming 30 years, the number of Africans will grow by more than one billion people. That is twice the population of the entire European Union... The demographic pressure will be enormous. Last year, more than 180,000 people crossed in shabby boats from Libya. And this is just the beginning. According to EU Commissioner Avramopoulos, at this very moment, 3 million migrants are waiting to enter Europe". — Geert Wilders, MP, The Netherlands, and leader of the Party for Freedom and Democracy (PVV).
Now, I little bit of personal recollection of American history is in order here. The "Baby Boom" era is considered to be from the very end of WWII, summer 1945 until roughly 1963, but there was no abrupt end, but more of a gradual decline from rates of over 120 births/100 women yearly toward the lower 60's (same units) from the early 1960's to the early 1970's. Having experienced part of the era, I can give some decent speculation here on why the next generation did not have so many kids.

I can think of five factors:

1) Feminism played a large part in encouraging women to try to be like men, and not pop out bunches of kids. Even those who recovered from this stupidity did so at an age when their bodies told them that IT'S NOT NICE TO FOOL MOTHER NATURE!, and therefore could only realistically have 1 or 2 kids.

2) Even for those without the large doses of feminism, I believe the large number of kids that were around all the time gave the young parents (quite a bit younger on average than today's) the impression that things were always this way, and they didn't really put in much effort in encouraging their kids to procreate.

3) Along with this went all the hype during the era of "ecology" from the early 1970's on, with the stories of the "population bomb" (more on this shortly). All of this added reasons for parents NOT to encourage their kids to have the nice 3-5 kid families that they had (and going up to 11 or so for the Catholics, quite often!). There really were so many children around back then. I had to be taught the meaning of "only child" in grade school, as I may not have known any children without brothers or sisters until then.

4) The economic times, even though, family-formation-wise, were much better than today, were still seen as rough compared to the very prosperous times for America in the entire 1950's and most of the 1960's. However, when compared even to the depth of Great Depression 1.0 in the mid-1930's, with seriously bad times, the fertility number in the US was almost 20% higher than then it has been all the way since the mid-'70's!

5) Due to the lack of strong emphasis on family formation from both their parents and from media, the young adults of the 1970's learned to enjoy more wild times than the folks, and realized that having kids would interfere with this. This type of selfishness, I think, was even more prevalent in western Europe, and their birth rates declined well before Americans' did.

Now, expanding out even more, to the Orient, China's one-child policy, instituted in the late 1970's, after the death of Mao had an obvious 20 - 40 year (a generation to 2) consequence there. I don't know all the history of Japan's low fertility rates, but the country was and still is, pretty damn crowded, as is China.

None of this stuff would be a problem in itself though. It's all relative. During the time the developed world had the big declines in fertility, the undeveloped world was being given the ability, via Western medicine and Western agricultural advances, to increase their numbers as never before. Had the world on the same page, AND the globalist elites not hae been allowed to open the floodgates to the West, AND (at least in America) the welfare state not imposed by guys like this, the future could have become bright for all, as this old Peak Stupidity post on the effects of automation, excerpt here:
Back to the science-fiction story, the future told by optimistic stories, in the 70′s and 80′s, during my enjoyment of this literature, looked more like a sparsely-populated world (along with other worlds we we might want to hang out) where we got around in flying machines, lived in our hand-picked beautiful environments far away from our fellow man until we wanted a change, worked a few hours a day at the work we loved, and worked on cool intellectual projects of all kinds with our copious spare time (due to the automation). It sounded great to me, though I never thought that much of the automation would come in my lifetime. That was wrong on my part. What was wrong on the part of the science-fiction writers however, was one big assumption about the people in this future world.

The future people were all intelligent, and even 50 years ago, one might still rightly assume that the intelligent people would get ahead in the world and produce the bulk of the people of this bright future. Well, I should say “rightly” only if one didn’t see the welfare state and the degradation of the culture coming. This assumption was way, way off. The bulk of the population of this world is not the intelligent and well-educated crowd, we all know that by now.
Yeah, the educated people of the West, Japan believed the population bomb stuff and were virtuous enough (1 of the 5 points above) to do something about it. The uneducated 3rd world was left to procreate like mad and erase all of the improvement made in the West and moreso. (The Chinese were basically forced into low fertility by the strong Communist hand.)

This is the bind we are in, people. Among the destruction of serious borders by the elites, the creation of the welfare state, and the low fertility rates while helping the poor 3rd world to achieve high population growth, the West has indeed implemented a cultural suicide.

On a lighter note, the post title was taken from an old TV show called Green Acres, in which one of the stars, a pig named Arnold, was said to be contemplating soo-eee cide in one episode. I can't find that on youtube, so here's some other footage on Arnold Ziffel:

What a way to end the week, huh? Part 2 will have more on the reality of the demographic replacement-suicide and how it will go down (if not reversed very soon). This post focused on the low birth rate people in the West and Orient, while the 2nd will focus on the high-birth people in Africa and the Moslem world.

No comments

WHAT SAY YOU? : (PLEASE NOTE: You must type capital PS as the 1st TWO characters in your comment body - for spam avoidance - or the comment will be lost!)