When children are indoctrinated that humans are destroying the world and, per AOC, there are only 5 years left and everything is hopeless, they are more easily controlled and manipulated. That’s the left’s goal.
This is just going to get worse with 30% or so of younger people claiming they are not heterosexual and the Left pushing abortions and tricking women into thinking abortion is a women's issue when it is really playing into the hands of promiscuous men.
Perhaps that's why they are pushing gender reassignment at a very young age? If you basically sterilize a significant portion of the youth population, doesn't that help with their population control?
Anecdotal but ubiquitous: My (mostly single) much loved mom was a liberal elementary school teacher in Harlem with four sons in Greenwich Village, surrounded by leftist types. Three sons are conservative, her fourth was a socialist who talked the talk (yelled it actually), but repeatedly robbed the commune grocery where he worked, but also liquor stores ("nicked them licks" as he'd say while telling me capitalism is bogging me down) He killed himself on his last day of a 9 year prison sentence, socialism didn't make him happy and unfortunately (truly sad) he envied some of his brothers' success, all of whom tried to help. My point is... my mother was a liberal mother who worked hard, but she had a gift for ignoring feminists who told her feminism and a rejection of men was the only future women should pursue. Sometimes she'd say "You might wanna meet my four boys, you might add an asterisk".
well, I'm joking (sort of) since I'm a woman who thinks we have gotten the shaft since time began, but we are in this mess because we gave them (us) the vote. I'm mostly kidding but women are not logical. And they think life should be one peaceful noncompetitive metaphor -- a song, kum ba ya. (sp). They also think there is nothing worth standing up to--and that if we just love everybody, we'll have this utopia ever after. And they think to be fair we should pay for the sins of our fathers when we had nothing to with it I'm sure it's liberal women who swayed that statistic and not conservative ones (read married), but man it's frustrating.
So true. I'm a very pragmatic and realistic person, so it makes me CRAZY to speak with other women who are so emotion driven that they miss the forest through the trees. Doesn't matter if it's illogical---as long as it makes them "feel" good! UGHH!
Young (34), capable friend is logical, pragmatic, and selfish. She works hard and skis most weekends and bikes during the summer, embracing the active life. She recognizes that children are a lot of work and would cramp her feel good lifestyle. I fear it may be too late before she wakes up to the idea that children can contribute to a fulfilling and active life.
I was influenced by Taylor Caldwell as I began my writing life. They called her a "male chauvinist," but actually she was just concerned about the feminization of our culture, which included the liberal "do-gooder," who just took away peoples' dignities. She died in the 80's and she wrote about her childhood and how this idiot teacher made this big speech to the class about how they shouldn't discriminate against the black kids, the couple there, or HER, who had come from England. Taylor claimed nobody noticed a thing until she did that, and the black kids never came back. She hated the teacher with a passion. Liberals meddle in society and cause everything they claim to be against. And women have messed up the US with all this. Not than men are perfect--they do cause a lot of wars unnecessarily and comprise most of the serial killers on earth, but many of them seem to be getting smarter finally. Maybe. Would be nice to have a bit more peace and some logic, too. Gees.
The "prescient" ones were maybe those wanting to limit the vote to property owners! Anyone in this day and age bemoaning the 19th Amendment should go live under sharia law in some part of the world where virtually no one can pursue life, liberty, and happiness. Of course, bemoaning the 19th Amendment in this day and age is just an affectation for a few grumpy old farts. One occasionally runs across them on conservative websites. I speak as someone who is strongly pro-SAHMs, pro- free enterprise, pro-Christian morality and belief, and pro-liberty. No one is ever taking away my right to full participation in the body politic--nor would any of my family members stand for that!
There are many intelligent, logical, rational women. But, as a population, you're undoubtably correct.
Historically, the most intelligent women could probably gain political influence by influencing the men around them, whereas the hysterical idiots could not.
I agree completely. I tend to believe that any adult working and paying taxes in a society ought to have the right to vote; but that's about the only way I can justify it. From the view of the results it's brought about, women's suffrage has been a disaster.
Originally, property ownership was a requirement for voting in all the states. It was thought that people who had no financial stake would vote themselves the largesse of the government. Yep.
I keep thinking when they finally realize their families and their way of life is being threatened by their idiot ideology, they'll get the picture. So far, no. But there are a LOT of conservative women who do get it. Just not enough yet.
While imposing requirements for voting sounds like a good idea, everyone who has to obey the law should have a say in what the law is. The problem is, as Frederick Bastiat put it: “Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.”
As a fan of Ayn Rand, I don't think all women are irrational, illogical, etc. And the vote for women issue sailed in 1920. Conservatives need a way to appeal to female voters, maybe a good looking movie star - think Ronald Reagan, only younger - except there are few non-leftists in Hollywood and most of them are in the closet for fear of ruining their careers.
I'm a fan of Ayn Rand, and I never said all women are irrational. I said quite clearly if you read all my exchanges that many are. And I was joking, of course. Your solution is picking a movie star, so idiot women can be attracted to some person's physical characteristics? That sounds like good liberal tactics and unbelievably demeaning to women. I would still appeal to their intelligence and hope they get wiser.
ps. I WAS joking. I'm a woman so I do NOT want the vote taken away from me. But I was also serious that it's frustrating watching so many women operate on emotion only. (Not all of them, as I said). But I don't like that college educated (read brainwashed) white students, mostly women, are responsible for this woke post-colonial, post structural Marxist. Foucault nightmare. Frustrating. I was an adjunct professor and writer and cancelled for my objections to curricula and the censorship of conservatives on campus. But these kids, most of them, just take all this at face value, no discussion allowed. And I could tell you many stories and I taught at a small more conservative school. So even though I was joking, it is a travesty.
Well we had DeSantis, who is more attractive, intelligent and younger than Trump, and more importantly has a record astronomically better than Trump’s, but the republican cult chooses to worship Trump instead. Oh well, there’s still a decent chance Kennedy can win.
Third-party candidates have never done well in American Presidential elections. A year from now, either Biden or Trump will very likely be President. Lots of people don't like this choice, but here we are. I'm not voting for another four years of Biden or throwing my vote away on a third-party candidate but you do you.
So because something never happened in the past, therefore it can never happen in the future. That’s some great logic you got there. I’m not throwing my vote away on a narcissistic scumbag who spits in our faces every 5 minutes and claims his miracle jabs saved 100,000,000 lives which is laughably absurd because Covid was never that lethal anyway, but you do you.
When something has never happened in the past, there is only a very small chance of it happening in the future. Trump was President and you can judge his performance (and personality) against what we have had for the last three years. RFK, Jr. Is a bit harder to judge since he's never held any office. And I agree that the COVID vaccines were no salvation, and Trump's handling of the pandemic was a big factor in his loss in 2020. As you may recall, however, Biden said Trump was responsible for all COVID deaths when he was President but took no responsibility for the greater number of COVID deaths that occurred after he took office.
This is a course that will not be reversed any time soon, unfortunately. The "girl boss" focused on career as a point of personal fulfilment, during their peak period of fertility and ability to deal with the demands of raising children, is the default standard in the West.
But the social media dopamine feeds give them kudos for those choices.
We're in a feedback social feedback loop that is clearly set up to lower the number of people and promoting tendencies away from self-reliance.
Brad Wilcox informs us that liberal women are significantly less happy with life than their conservative counterparts. Indeed, according to Pew, the majority of young liberal women are mentally ill (!). And as one of my heroes, Nancy Pearcey, explains in her latest book, the highest rate of happiness among any group of American women is found in those married to regularly churchgoing men (more Pearcey: “Compared to secular men, devout Christian family men who attend church regularly are more loving husbands and more engaged fathers. They have the lowest rate of divorce. And astonishingly, they have the lowest rate of domestic violence of any major group in America”).
So, if climbing the greasy pole makes you anxious, depressed, unfulfilled, and outright miserable, you’re gonna warn the next generation to stay out of the Godless rat race and find one of those awesome devout Christian men to settle down with, right? Right? Well, about that…. Wilcox again:
“The problem facing liberals, then, is that too many of them have embraced the false narrative that the path to happiness runs counter to marriage and family life, not towards it. They think independence, freedom and work will make them happy, which is why significant portions of the popular media are filled these days with stories celebrating divorce and singleness. […] The secret to happiness, for most men and women, involves marriage and a life based around the family.”
In context she was being a bit sarcastic, she was responding to some junk studies that claimed Christians were *more* likely to be abusive, Handmaid’s Tale type caricatures
TY for clarifying. Goes to show how easily sarcasm can be misinterpreted...and how unnecessary and counterproductive a lot of the sarcasm we carelessly use is.
A good place for governments to start might be to *stop* scaring the crap out of young people with climate change nonsense. I bet that's partly why Democrats think declining population is a good thing.
That is, until they become old and realize there's nobody around to produce anything or care for them. Oops.
The Progressive left also believes that Gia (Mother Earth) has been abused and used by humans. And the fewer people, or no people at all actually, would be the best thing - for Gia.
Most Progressives I know, hate most other people. They actually yearn for the day that the Earth returns to perfect harmony, the animals all love one another, there is no more war, famine, hurricanes or storms. And of course, no more people.
When I was growing up and had to make decisions about family and career, in the 1970s I chose first to be able to support myself and then, when I married, a family. But now I wish I had emphasized family more. I have a two sons and a grandson who I see being denigrated by the media and the government all the time - I live in Canada. I find Western culture becoming anti male, despite continuing to depend on males for many of the hard jobs - the military, police, even garbage men. Men and women need each other. We need to get back to traditional families and values, but one of the challenges for large families is how to afford them.
When straight men are demonized by a huge segment of society, and women taught it's "noble" to do so, this is the result. I just shared these statistics with my 17- and 20-year-old children. The 20-year-olds college student's first response was, "this is just sad," and "what's supposed to be the most tolerant generation is actually the most intolerant." While my kids are different genders, they are both conservative thinking.... interestingly they BOTH regularly comment on a certain issue that they see as a big part of the problem as well....one that relates to so much of your writing, Alex....drug use by young men. So many are in the vaping/pot culture and not worthy or capable of being in healthy, fulfilling relationships.
Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent every year to churn out liberal, materialistic secular humanists, so the fact we reproduce as much as we do surprises me.
As we enter decade 5 of the junk science climate hoax, we’re seeing a third generation taught to hate the species. Kids are contributing to cLimaTe chANgE so can’t have kids, must consoom!
Doesn't bother me. This happened to Rome and ancient Greece. It happened to the Monguls and other great empires. Man/Women in these cultures have chosen to worship the self, put God second. And they will therefore in 50 years no longer exist as a generation. The world population will be much smaller but those that are left will most likely come from bigger families with traditional values, who ultimately put God before self. Because that is what children do, for the first time in most people adult lives they realize there is something way way more important to live for, their children. Usually that brings them closer to God.
I agree with your thesis that world population will contract. I think The Great Contraction is well underway. Where births are below replacement level-- AND in places where there's been a great imbalance due to a preference for boy babies--the population can't help but contract.
I'd LIKE to see the BEST of Western Civ continue and be passed down to future generations. I have a horror of civilization in the hands of the Big Tech Lizard Kings (and the Fascist Witches!) of the sort we see on Ted Talks in Aspen or at the World Economic Forum in Davos. They do not represent humanity's best--although they clearly believe that's what they are. Their ideas for the future amount to a quick-- and not very fun-- death trip for humanity in general (whereas they'd personally vote for lots of new life extension. . . for themselves).
There is so much arrogance and hubris afoot--especially on the part of the highly "educated".
My final thought is this: men and women make a great team--in the home, in the culture, and in raising the young. In some capacities, the sexes can overlap. In others, it makes total sense to have complementary roles that are not the same.
Meritocracy, or letting individuals do what they do best--and like to do best-- without lowering standards in the name of diversity, is what I believe in--along with married mothers mothering their children and being homemakers, without suffering any sort of putdown from those who don't want that lifestyle. And the meek shall inherit the Earth!
Exactly, my young, educated, well-employed friends are pursuing a totally self absorbed life. Some how missed the thought that lives of service to community (global and local) and family is self actualizing.
Good god, people, the answer is plain as day. If young women detest young men, we need BETTER MEN. Or, as the old joke has it, the beatings will continue until morale improves.
What do these young women consider "better", though? If they're liberal women, they probably want sniveling soy boy betas. We definitely DO NOT need more of those.
Believe me when I say, The men will be whatever they have to be to get the girl. Women rule the world in that way, they just don't wield the power they have wisely. Ladies, keep your knees together until the men shape up. It will happen quicker than you think.
As crudely as you have put it, there actually are precedents for this. Bishop John Hughes' example of focusing on the Irish Catholic women of New York's poorest communites during the mid 1800s - getting them out of a life of prostitution and into domestic work, and, back to schools and church and the sacraments - with help from the Sisters of Mercy - transformed the slums of New York in just a few generations. The bishop knew that the direction in which he led the women, the men would follow.
I don’t have to guess. I know exactly what the problem is. We have diminished and ridiculed men for the last 30 years. The women today of childbearing age are the daughters of the generation who embraced feminism and passed the anger and arrogance along to their daughters. Now they are confused, spiritually lost and clueless as to how it all happened. I am college educated and married to a wonderful man who has encouraged me to pursue my talents and dreams. I left nursing and became a real estate entrepreneur. We are blessed with five wonderful children and our two daughters have seven children combined. To these young women: go to church. Even if you are faithless, observe the young families you see there. Talk to the parents and ask questions. If the church is God-centered, they will welcome you. If you have a modicum of intelligence and are willing to be open-minded, you will figure it out.
One thing this reinforces - and it's not new, it's been known - wealthy countries have falling birth rates.
That puts the lie to the WEF's stated reason for the measures it advocates under the pretense of reducing world population. Almost all lead to people either remaining impoverished, or living poorer than they previously were.
If the WEF were sincere about reducing world population, it would be working to improve prosperity and lift more people out of poverty.
The WEF doesn't want to lift people out of poverty, they want to bring wealthy nations down so that everyone has the same standard of living. The WEF "stakeholders" are the only people allowed to live above the standard.
When children are indoctrinated that humans are destroying the world and, per AOC, there are only 5 years left and everything is hopeless, they are more easily controlled and manipulated. That’s the left’s goal.
So true! The voice of the indoctrinated -- ever so full of despair: https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/11/opinions/not-having-children-lee/index.html
And the author is a student at College of the Holy Cross, for heaven's sakes!
Agreed
This is just going to get worse with 30% or so of younger people claiming they are not heterosexual and the Left pushing abortions and tricking women into thinking abortion is a women's issue when it is really playing into the hands of promiscuous men.
Perhaps that's why they are pushing gender reassignment at a very young age? If you basically sterilize a significant portion of the youth population, doesn't that help with their population control?
Liberal women not having children is a very good sign for the future. It means thinning the liberal genepool, and a smaller population of liberals.
Anecdotal but ubiquitous: My (mostly single) much loved mom was a liberal elementary school teacher in Harlem with four sons in Greenwich Village, surrounded by leftist types. Three sons are conservative, her fourth was a socialist who talked the talk (yelled it actually), but repeatedly robbed the commune grocery where he worked, but also liquor stores ("nicked them licks" as he'd say while telling me capitalism is bogging me down) He killed himself on his last day of a 9 year prison sentence, socialism didn't make him happy and unfortunately (truly sad) he envied some of his brothers' success, all of whom tried to help. My point is... my mother was a liberal mother who worked hard, but she had a gift for ignoring feminists who told her feminism and a rejection of men was the only future women should pursue. Sometimes she'd say "You might wanna meet my four boys, you might add an asterisk".
Also means they have more time to teach the kids of parents that will send their kids to public schools to be taught by them.
Your kids become their kids.
Yes, unironically a very good point. Liberals with too much free time on their hands from not raising children can wreak a lot of damage.
On others’ children.
That is really not how this works. Political inclinations are not genetic 🤣
Maybe they aren’t genetic but they can definitely be radicalized in the home.
Whether it's nature or nurture, how does that affect this discussion point?
Silver lining then?
well, I'm joking (sort of) since I'm a woman who thinks we have gotten the shaft since time began, but we are in this mess because we gave them (us) the vote. I'm mostly kidding but women are not logical. And they think life should be one peaceful noncompetitive metaphor -- a song, kum ba ya. (sp). They also think there is nothing worth standing up to--and that if we just love everybody, we'll have this utopia ever after. And they think to be fair we should pay for the sins of our fathers when we had nothing to with it I'm sure it's liberal women who swayed that statistic and not conservative ones (read married), but man it's frustrating.
So true. I'm a very pragmatic and realistic person, so it makes me CRAZY to speak with other women who are so emotion driven that they miss the forest through the trees. Doesn't matter if it's illogical---as long as it makes them "feel" good! UGHH!
Young (34), capable friend is logical, pragmatic, and selfish. She works hard and skis most weekends and bikes during the summer, embracing the active life. She recognizes that children are a lot of work and would cramp her feel good lifestyle. I fear it may be too late before she wakes up to the idea that children can contribute to a fulfilling and active life.
Li- THIS exactly!!
I have long thought the same thing: at least some of the arguments against giving women the vote turned out to be quite prescient.
I was influenced by Taylor Caldwell as I began my writing life. They called her a "male chauvinist," but actually she was just concerned about the feminization of our culture, which included the liberal "do-gooder," who just took away peoples' dignities. She died in the 80's and she wrote about her childhood and how this idiot teacher made this big speech to the class about how they shouldn't discriminate against the black kids, the couple there, or HER, who had come from England. Taylor claimed nobody noticed a thing until she did that, and the black kids never came back. She hated the teacher with a passion. Liberals meddle in society and cause everything they claim to be against. And women have messed up the US with all this. Not than men are perfect--they do cause a lot of wars unnecessarily and comprise most of the serial killers on earth, but many of them seem to be getting smarter finally. Maybe. Would be nice to have a bit more peace and some logic, too. Gees.
The "prescient" ones were maybe those wanting to limit the vote to property owners! Anyone in this day and age bemoaning the 19th Amendment should go live under sharia law in some part of the world where virtually no one can pursue life, liberty, and happiness. Of course, bemoaning the 19th Amendment in this day and age is just an affectation for a few grumpy old farts. One occasionally runs across them on conservative websites. I speak as someone who is strongly pro-SAHMs, pro- free enterprise, pro-Christian morality and belief, and pro-liberty. No one is ever taking away my right to full participation in the body politic--nor would any of my family members stand for that!
There are many intelligent, logical, rational women. But, as a population, you're undoubtably correct.
Historically, the most intelligent women could probably gain political influence by influencing the men around them, whereas the hysterical idiots could not.
I agree completely. I tend to believe that any adult working and paying taxes in a society ought to have the right to vote; but that's about the only way I can justify it. From the view of the results it's brought about, women's suffrage has been a disaster.
Or, perhaps require ownership of real property in order to be eligible to vote?
Originally, property ownership was a requirement for voting in all the states. It was thought that people who had no financial stake would vote themselves the largesse of the government. Yep.
I keep thinking when they finally realize their families and their way of life is being threatened by their idiot ideology, they'll get the picture. So far, no. But there are a LOT of conservative women who do get it. Just not enough yet.
While imposing requirements for voting sounds like a good idea, everyone who has to obey the law should have a say in what the law is. The problem is, as Frederick Bastiat put it: “Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.”
As a fan of Ayn Rand, I don't think all women are irrational, illogical, etc. And the vote for women issue sailed in 1920. Conservatives need a way to appeal to female voters, maybe a good looking movie star - think Ronald Reagan, only younger - except there are few non-leftists in Hollywood and most of them are in the closet for fear of ruining their careers.
I'm a fan of Ayn Rand, and I never said all women are irrational. I said quite clearly if you read all my exchanges that many are. And I was joking, of course. Your solution is picking a movie star, so idiot women can be attracted to some person's physical characteristics? That sounds like good liberal tactics and unbelievably demeaning to women. I would still appeal to their intelligence and hope they get wiser.
Sorry if I misconstrued your posts. And my comment was a bit tongue in cheek.
ps. I WAS joking. I'm a woman so I do NOT want the vote taken away from me. But I was also serious that it's frustrating watching so many women operate on emotion only. (Not all of them, as I said). But I don't like that college educated (read brainwashed) white students, mostly women, are responsible for this woke post-colonial, post structural Marxist. Foucault nightmare. Frustrating. I was an adjunct professor and writer and cancelled for my objections to curricula and the censorship of conservatives on campus. But these kids, most of them, just take all this at face value, no discussion allowed. And I could tell you many stories and I taught at a small more conservative school. So even though I was joking, it is a travesty.
Ok then. :)
Well we had DeSantis, who is more attractive, intelligent and younger than Trump, and more importantly has a record astronomically better than Trump’s, but the republican cult chooses to worship Trump instead. Oh well, there’s still a decent chance Kennedy can win.
Third-party candidates have never done well in American Presidential elections. A year from now, either Biden or Trump will very likely be President. Lots of people don't like this choice, but here we are. I'm not voting for another four years of Biden or throwing my vote away on a third-party candidate but you do you.
So because something never happened in the past, therefore it can never happen in the future. That’s some great logic you got there. I’m not throwing my vote away on a narcissistic scumbag who spits in our faces every 5 minutes and claims his miracle jabs saved 100,000,000 lives which is laughably absurd because Covid was never that lethal anyway, but you do you.
When something has never happened in the past, there is only a very small chance of it happening in the future. Trump was President and you can judge his performance (and personality) against what we have had for the last three years. RFK, Jr. Is a bit harder to judge since he's never held any office. And I agree that the COVID vaccines were no salvation, and Trump's handling of the pandemic was a big factor in his loss in 2020. As you may recall, however, Biden said Trump was responsible for all COVID deaths when he was President but took no responsibility for the greater number of COVID deaths that occurred after he took office.
This is a course that will not be reversed any time soon, unfortunately. The "girl boss" focused on career as a point of personal fulfilment, during their peak period of fertility and ability to deal with the demands of raising children, is the default standard in the West.
But the social media dopamine feeds give them kudos for those choices.
We're in a feedback social feedback loop that is clearly set up to lower the number of people and promoting tendencies away from self-reliance.
This is the way the world is supposed to be. Brave New World and 1984 foreshadowed it: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/the-brave-new-world-of-1984-part -- or rather, gave the blueprint for the would be rulers to lower the population.
I think it gets reversed when college is free online
Just a matter of time. You'd be surprised at how many major university courses were online before Covid
Then there is no time-sensitive push to get your degree, less sororities & indoctrination...
Brad Wilcox informs us that liberal women are significantly less happy with life than their conservative counterparts. Indeed, according to Pew, the majority of young liberal women are mentally ill (!). And as one of my heroes, Nancy Pearcey, explains in her latest book, the highest rate of happiness among any group of American women is found in those married to regularly churchgoing men (more Pearcey: “Compared to secular men, devout Christian family men who attend church regularly are more loving husbands and more engaged fathers. They have the lowest rate of divorce. And astonishingly, they have the lowest rate of domestic violence of any major group in America”).
So, if climbing the greasy pole makes you anxious, depressed, unfulfilled, and outright miserable, you’re gonna warn the next generation to stay out of the Godless rat race and find one of those awesome devout Christian men to settle down with, right? Right? Well, about that…. Wilcox again:
“The problem facing liberals, then, is that too many of them have embraced the false narrative that the path to happiness runs counter to marriage and family life, not towards it. They think independence, freedom and work will make them happy, which is why significant portions of the popular media are filled these days with stories celebrating divorce and singleness. […] The secret to happiness, for most men and women, involves marriage and a life based around the family.”
More here:
https://gaty.substack.com/p/miss-havisham-modern-hero
“And astonishingly, they have the lowest rate of domestic violence of any major group in America” ... wondering why this is so *astonishing* to NP?
In context she was being a bit sarcastic, she was responding to some junk studies that claimed Christians were *more* likely to be abusive, Handmaid’s Tale type caricatures
TY for clarifying. Goes to show how easily sarcasm can be misinterpreted...and how unnecessary and counterproductive a lot of the sarcasm we carelessly use is.
The secret to happiness, for most men and women, involves marriage and a life based around the family."]
That may be, but if your belief structure dictates that married life is poison, they'll probably never find out.
Because they won't permit themselves to try it when prude and prejudice [the acceptable kind] collide.
And even if they suddenly do "get religion," they'll be too set in their ways to be tolerable to anyone at all.
Not even themselves.
A good place for governments to start might be to *stop* scaring the crap out of young people with climate change nonsense. I bet that's partly why Democrats think declining population is a good thing.
That is, until they become old and realize there's nobody around to produce anything or care for them. Oops.
The Progressive left also believes that Gia (Mother Earth) has been abused and used by humans. And the fewer people, or no people at all actually, would be the best thing - for Gia.
Most Progressives I know, hate most other people. They actually yearn for the day that the Earth returns to perfect harmony, the animals all love one another, there is no more war, famine, hurricanes or storms. And of course, no more people.
Remember the many TV shows not too long ago about life after people? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1433058/
The elites are importing their gardeners, nannies, caregivers. Look to the chaos at our southern border
I initially misread your comment to say, "the elites are impregnating their gardeners, nannies, caregivers".
That's probably true, too, now that I think about it.
The elites, both Dems and Republicans, HATE us normals. The less of us, the better
Tommy: "Oops" 👏
...South Korean women’s movement called the “four nos” - “no to dating, no to sex with men, no to marriage, and no to childbirth.” -OUCH!!
Straight out of an Aldous Huxley novel!
Nuns?
When I was growing up and had to make decisions about family and career, in the 1970s I chose first to be able to support myself and then, when I married, a family. But now I wish I had emphasized family more. I have a two sons and a grandson who I see being denigrated by the media and the government all the time - I live in Canada. I find Western culture becoming anti male, despite continuing to depend on males for many of the hard jobs - the military, police, even garbage men. Men and women need each other. We need to get back to traditional families and values, but one of the challenges for large families is how to afford them.
When straight men are demonized by a huge segment of society, and women taught it's "noble" to do so, this is the result. I just shared these statistics with my 17- and 20-year-old children. The 20-year-olds college student's first response was, "this is just sad," and "what's supposed to be the most tolerant generation is actually the most intolerant." While my kids are different genders, they are both conservative thinking.... interestingly they BOTH regularly comment on a certain issue that they see as a big part of the problem as well....one that relates to so much of your writing, Alex....drug use by young men. So many are in the vaping/pot culture and not worthy or capable of being in healthy, fulfilling relationships.
Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent every year to churn out liberal, materialistic secular humanists, so the fact we reproduce as much as we do surprises me.
As we enter decade 5 of the junk science climate hoax, we’re seeing a third generation taught to hate the species. Kids are contributing to cLimaTe chANgE so can’t have kids, must consoom!
Doesn't bother me. This happened to Rome and ancient Greece. It happened to the Monguls and other great empires. Man/Women in these cultures have chosen to worship the self, put God second. And they will therefore in 50 years no longer exist as a generation. The world population will be much smaller but those that are left will most likely come from bigger families with traditional values, who ultimately put God before self. Because that is what children do, for the first time in most people adult lives they realize there is something way way more important to live for, their children. Usually that brings them closer to God.
"Man/Women in these cultures have chosen to worship the self, put God second. And they will therefore in 50 years no longer exist as a generation."
And during that time, they will pat themselves on the back for the self perception of virute for having lived according to the age of enlightenment.
I agree with your thesis that world population will contract. I think The Great Contraction is well underway. Where births are below replacement level-- AND in places where there's been a great imbalance due to a preference for boy babies--the population can't help but contract.
I'd LIKE to see the BEST of Western Civ continue and be passed down to future generations. I have a horror of civilization in the hands of the Big Tech Lizard Kings (and the Fascist Witches!) of the sort we see on Ted Talks in Aspen or at the World Economic Forum in Davos. They do not represent humanity's best--although they clearly believe that's what they are. Their ideas for the future amount to a quick-- and not very fun-- death trip for humanity in general (whereas they'd personally vote for lots of new life extension. . . for themselves).
There is so much arrogance and hubris afoot--especially on the part of the highly "educated".
My final thought is this: men and women make a great team--in the home, in the culture, and in raising the young. In some capacities, the sexes can overlap. In others, it makes total sense to have complementary roles that are not the same.
Meritocracy, or letting individuals do what they do best--and like to do best-- without lowering standards in the name of diversity, is what I believe in--along with married mothers mothering their children and being homemakers, without suffering any sort of putdown from those who don't want that lifestyle. And the meek shall inherit the Earth!
A generation Left Out.
A generation spoiled and self absorbed.
Exactly, my young, educated, well-employed friends are pursuing a totally self absorbed life. Some how missed the thought that lives of service to community (global and local) and family is self actualizing.
Worse, its Self-Exclusion.
They can get back in at any time but have been propagandized into self-immolation.
Ooh I like that. So true
Good god, people, the answer is plain as day. If young women detest young men, we need BETTER MEN. Or, as the old joke has it, the beatings will continue until morale improves.
What do these young women consider "better", though? If they're liberal women, they probably want sniveling soy boy betas. We definitely DO NOT need more of those.
Believe me when I say, The men will be whatever they have to be to get the girl. Women rule the world in that way, they just don't wield the power they have wisely. Ladies, keep your knees together until the men shape up. It will happen quicker than you think.
As crudely as you have put it, there actually are precedents for this. Bishop John Hughes' example of focusing on the Irish Catholic women of New York's poorest communites during the mid 1800s - getting them out of a life of prostitution and into domestic work, and, back to schools and church and the sacraments - with help from the Sisters of Mercy - transformed the slums of New York in just a few generations. The bishop knew that the direction in which he led the women, the men would follow.
I don’t have to guess. I know exactly what the problem is. We have diminished and ridiculed men for the last 30 years. The women today of childbearing age are the daughters of the generation who embraced feminism and passed the anger and arrogance along to their daughters. Now they are confused, spiritually lost and clueless as to how it all happened. I am college educated and married to a wonderful man who has encouraged me to pursue my talents and dreams. I left nursing and became a real estate entrepreneur. We are blessed with five wonderful children and our two daughters have seven children combined. To these young women: go to church. Even if you are faithless, observe the young families you see there. Talk to the parents and ask questions. If the church is God-centered, they will welcome you. If you have a modicum of intelligence and are willing to be open-minded, you will figure it out.
One thing this reinforces - and it's not new, it's been known - wealthy countries have falling birth rates.
That puts the lie to the WEF's stated reason for the measures it advocates under the pretense of reducing world population. Almost all lead to people either remaining impoverished, or living poorer than they previously were.
If the WEF were sincere about reducing world population, it would be working to improve prosperity and lift more people out of poverty.
The WEF doesn't want to lift people out of poverty, they want to bring wealthy nations down so that everyone has the same standard of living. The WEF "stakeholders" are the only people allowed to live above the standard.
They want to return us to serfdom.