I had long wondered why so many men, especially the elites, are terrified that our overall population is (gasp!) aging. It is not just because they fear that their economic Ponzi scheme of necrotic growth for the sake of growth will unravel, though that is clearly part of it as well. No, I think that their real fear is that the Crones (i.e. Women over age 50 or so) will have an *unprecedented* level of power due to relative strength in numbers, and thus so will Women in general. That is because Women are living longer than ever before, as well as having fewer kids. And the men are getting scared. Hence the recent push to whittle away Women's reproductive rights, eventually including most if not all birth control as well.
Additionally, with birthrates declining over time, and each new generation thus slightly smaller than then previous one, that effectively means that there will be fewer younger Women relative to slightly older men, giving younger Women that much more bargaining power in the dating market despite an overall surplus of Women in general. Thus by the 2030s, Women will get the best of both worlds, and be even more empowered as a result of such demographic trends.(Note that this also means that statistically more younger men will be "mentored" by older Women in that regard as per the laws of supply and demand, which would also help further accelerate the transition to Matriarchy as well.)
Ah, you say, but what about the supposedly legitimate economic fears of an aging (and eventually shrinking) population? Well, a recent study came out that found that such fears are essentially overblown. In fact, moderately low fertility (i.e. between 1.5-2.0 children per Woman) and a shrinking population would actually maximize living standards for the general population. Another recent study found that there is essentially no robust correlation between population aging and economic growth, contrary to what many people seem to believe. Not to say that an aging population will not pose some challenges, but on balance the benefits would outweigh such drawbacks. And our Monetarily Sovereign federal government can easily absorb the fiscal costs of aging such as pensions and healthcare.
Oh, and by the way, there is that elephant in the room--make that the elephant in the Volkswagen--OVERPOPULATION. Left unchecked, it will destroy the very planet that gives us life. While technology (and Monetary Sovereignty) can largely solve the foreseeable economic challenges of aging and declining populations, the same cannot really be said of the intractable ecological problems of overpopulation. And the only ethical way to do this is to voluntarily have fewer children, i.e. well below the "replacement rate" of 2.1 or so. According to the best evidence, the best ways to accomplish this is 1) female empowerment and 2) poverty reduction, since after all, the number one cause of overpopulation is the MEN who force, coerce, deceive, and/or brainwash Women into having kids that they otherwise would not have (or much sooner and closer-spaced than otherwise). Seriously.
Sorry fellas, but the truth hurts.
So what about countries like Japan, Italy, Greece, Spain, etc. with so-called "lowest-low" total fertility rates below 1.5? Yes, it is likely that they will hit a sort of short-to-medium-term "pothole" on the road to sustainability if they stay below 1.5 for too long. Their populations' aging and decline will be significantly more rapid than for countries with TFRs between 1.5-2.0, and may be more difficult to adjust to from an economic perspective. Well, the answer to that, again, is increased Female empowerment. We see that European countries with greater Female empowerment and more generous social safety nets for Mothers and children tend to have higher fertility than those with less female empowerment and stingier safety nets such as Spain, Italy, and Greece. Even though all of those countries have TFRs below replacement, Northern and Western Europe are generally around 1.6-2.0 while Southern and Eastern Europe are generally significantly below 1.5 children per Woman.
And now the USA, thanks in part to the pandemic and the lockdowns, and likely the jabs as well, birthrates have REALLY crashed through the basement. The estimated TFR for the USA in 2020 is as low as 1.64, a record low. And no sign of reversal anytime soon.
The proof is clearly in the pudding.
The proof is clearly in the pudding.
(Recently, there was a reactionary right-wing article that actually said the quiet part out loud about what the right-wing reactionaries and sexual counterrevolutionaries really want to do, if you have the stomach to read such disgusting verbal defecation. TL;DR version: when Women are forced or coerced to mate in captivity, and/or otherwise forced or coerced to be utterly dependent on men, their birthrates are way higher than when they are not, go figure. In other news, water is wet and the sun rises in the east.)
Make no mistake, if Women were to take over the world tomorrow, the global TFR would plummet to 1.5 or lower almost overnight. But it would not stay below 1.5 for very long, as it would gradually rise back up to around 1.5-1.9 where it will remain for at least a generation or two, and eventually rise to around the replacement rate of 2.1 after the population shrinks significantly over time. And honestly, it can't happen soon enough. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. We must leave room for Nature, lest Nature not leave room for us. We have been warned, decades ago in fact.
As the great Marianne Williamson once said, at this juncture of history we are now at the "menopause" of humanity, in which what we really need is fewer babies, and more wisdom.
In other words, VIVE LA FEMME! Let the planetary healing begin!
Make no mistake, if Women were to take over the world tomorrow, the global TFR would plummet to 1.5 or lower almost overnight. But it would not stay below 1.5 for very long, as it would gradually rise back up to around 1.5-1.9 where it will remain for at least a generation or two, and eventually rise to around the replacement rate of 2.1 after the population shrinks significantly over time. And honestly, it can't happen soon enough. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. We must leave room for Nature, lest Nature not leave room for us. We have been warned, decades ago in fact.
As the great Marianne Williamson once said, at this juncture of history we are now at the "menopause" of humanity, in which what we really need is fewer babies, and more wisdom.
In other words, VIVE LA FEMME! Let the planetary healing begin!
