The civilized world does not make a lot of babies any more, because H. G. Wells fought a war of ideas against Christian norms of baby-making.
Wells’ side has a lot of luck and a lot of help and the massed power of the Frankfurt School. Wells side won the war of ideas. Civilized people make few babies.
Here’s the problem, as reported at the link below:
Japanese are having fewer children than before. In 1990, the country experienced what has been termed the “1.57 shock,” when the fertility rate dropped to its lowest level yet. Since then the fertility rate has fallen further, to around 1.4, well below the replacement rate of about 2.1 births per woman. There are few signs that this will improve.
Population is power. After the devastating defeat in World War II, Japan benefited from a “demographic bonus” that paved the way for the nation’s economic growth and reemergence on the world stage. Conversely, since the 1990s a “demographic onus” has intensified its financial plight. Japan’s population decline is both an indication and perpetrator of Japan’s lost decades of chronic deflation and stagnant growth. Despite Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s assertions that “Japan is back,” the lost decades are far from over.
The various pronatalist schemes have been largely unsuccessful, meeting with fierce opposition. First, the legacy of World War II is a key obstacle. Many Japanese still remember how pronatalist government policies were introduced during World War II to encourage women to give birth for the “nation’s sake.” It is therefore no surprise that a strong antipathy to what is perceived as government interference into the private lives of individuals still exists. Next, in a nation that imagines itself to be ethnically and culturally homogenous, immigration as a solution is still a politically sensitive topic. Likewise, when it comes to dealing with issues that are unpopular with the elderly electorate, such as reducing pensions, procrastination is a lower-risk option for those in power.
As a core feature of Abenomics 2.0 set forward in September 2015, the government pledged to raise the birthrate to the “publicly desired level” of 1.8 children per woman, and further advance structural reforms to ease the burden of child and elderly care for working generations.
Golly, that’s scary stuff. But in fact, we modern overcivilized humans are much like rats born in the final stages of a behavioral sink. We never developed natural human behaviors. It’s not our fault that we don’t breed.
Having lots of babies is great for the state. Those babies are new citizens. They can be slapped into the factories, marched onto the battlefields, and generally treated as expendable resources.
Having lots of babies is very painful and time-consuming for individuals and families. Having just one baby might be an exercise in narcissism – the proud parent can turn child-rearing into an exercise in ego-projection. But having more than one baby really cuts into one’s spare time, and it’s hard to be a narcissist when you can’t make enough time for your favorite person – yourself.
The solution is obvious. If the government of Japan wants Japan to survive, natalism is going to have to make a comeback, one way or another.
Right now, it seems impossible to imagine a modern, civilized country that pushes natalism. Japan, Europe, the Anglosphere countries, Hong Kong, Singapore – all of these nations are highly advanced, and all of them consume a lot of contraceptives. Natalism would be an unspeakable heresy in such countries.
One can imagine China leading the world back to natalism. China is confident enough to denounce feminists and Muslims who act in non-Chinese ways; China is subtle enough to claim that the Chinese Communist Party gets to define what feminism and religion mean, inside Chinese borders. The Chinese Communists understand how to play the “frame game”; that is, the party that frames the narrative gets to control the metaphors that everyone lives by.
Currently, the modern, civilized nations – from Hong Kong to Canada – are living by the metaphors preached by H. G. Wells and Cecil Rhodes and their ilk. China has already put out conflicting metaphors. The H. G. Wells theory is that women are equal to men, women are rational philosophers, women are free spirits, women are free to deviate from social norms. The Chinese Communist theory is that women must marry or become mistresses. The Chinese Communists say that a woman who is unmarried after 27 is a “leftover woman.”
For the moment, the USA looks more powerful than China. But the years keep sliding by. 2016 and 2017 might see enough poverty in the USA to make the Spurdoburgers question the H. G. Wells-ian orthodoxy.
If the world begins to warm up to the Chinese Communist metaphors and theories, then we will see a Chinese war of ideas just as dramatic as the war of ideas that H. G. Wells’ waged against Christian morals.
Patriarchy is not very fun, even for the patriarchs. But it is remarkably simple – it can even be enforced by illiterates. But the Chinese are not illiterates. They are embracing modern methods of propaganda. Here’s a sample of the future of the war for ideas: