Showing posts with label population control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label population control. Show all posts
Monday, May 1, 2017
Europeans Have Stopped Having Babies - Jakub Marian's Stark Fertility Map
The Czech mathematician and educator Jakub Marian put together a colored map showing fertility rates by European region. The data comes from Eurostat, administered by the EU. (This map was referenced, today, by Giulio Meotti at the Geller Report.)
In developed countries, 2.1 children per woman (or per woman who will live through the end of her reproductive life) is considered "replacement level" - the rate necessary to maintain a constant level of population, not counting migration.
As you can see, much of southern Europe - Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece - and some of Eastern Europe, have a fertility rate approaching only half of that. That the actual population of Europe is not shrinking more rapidly is due to two things - the fact that Europeans are now living long lives (delaying the shrinking effect but steadily raising the average age of the population), and immigration.
But things are actually much worse than the map implies.
Why are the French, Swedes and Brits having more babies? One might think that perhaps the French are romantic, the nights in Sweden are long and cold and the Brits, well, who knows, maybe pints of lager and sexy newspaper spreads make people more amorous or whatever.
But, in fact, the stats include all woman giving birth in the particular region, including, of course, the fast growing population of Muslim woman in, among other places, France, Sweden and Great Britain. By one estimate, at least 50% and perhaps as high as 70% of all babies born in the greater Paris area are now born to Muslim parents.
Though the statistical censors at the EU don't measure these things by race or religion, one suspects that if you only looked at the fertility rates of non-Muslim woman, many of the green areas would go purple, and many of the purple ones would turn eggplant.
Maybe the Italians and Greeks would like that.
Why European non-Muslims, or post-Christians or whatever you want to call them have basically stopped having children is a complex question. Obviously, if they were all traditionalist Catholics or Mormons or Wiccan fertility cultists, things would be different. But they're not. And neither were they in, say, the late 1960's, before birth rates suddenly started to mysteriously go south, so to speak.
Americanist ideologues such as myself are fond of saying that Europeans have a "death wish." But If you've recently met any of them, perhaps jaunting around your city, smiling with their cameras and travel bags, this is not obvious on the surface.
Perhaps we might say, instead, that Europeans have a life wish. They don't particularly want to create more lives, that's true. but they want to live their own current lives "to the fullest." You only go around once in this one, as Schlitz once said. Children and, yes, even marriage, often get in the way. Or so many believe.
Speaking completely selfishly, I'm glad we have kids. Their benefits (again, speaking selfishly) far outweigh their costs. We eagerly intend to have more kids (increasing our net benefit gain). My only regret is that I didn't have them sooner. (Although, the fact that if I had, I wouldn't have had them with the best wife and mother that I could imagine, means it's not really a regret.)
My own view, based somewhat on an economics book I read a few years ago, is that many people underestimate the value of children - not their intrinsic value, which is of course infinite, nor even their value to society or the world or whatever, but their value in terms of their benefits to the parents. And they also overestimate their costs - economic and otherwise - to the themselves. But if this is true, then why it is true, or more to the point, why it became true in Europe forty or so years ago, is also a mystery.
Ironically, it's the anti-population people who make the claim that it's Muslims who are living under a sort of false consciousness. They (the Muslims) are the ones having children because (implicitly, according to the anti-population people) they want to do their duty to Allah or (implicitly, according to the anti-population people), they're tapping into some sort of latent tribal memory that tells them they need to have enough offspring to work on the farm. Or whatever, etc.
Or maybe Muslims (implicitly and explicitly, according to right-wing people) just want to maximize their welfare benefits.
Or maybe, despite all the false and dangerous things that Muslims believe, they just never got the memo that having more than 1.1 child would ruin their lives.
Most Europeans have internalized that memo. And many, if not most Americans have bought into it as well.
Happy May Day.
Thursday, June 4, 2015
Smoke of Satan: Vatican Official Drops the "H" Word on Pro-Life Journalist
![]() |
| "Do you DENY digging those mass graves yourself, Mr. Gennarini?" |
Hate.
All of us have had that word or its variations used against us or have heard or seen it used against our Catholic brothers and sisters.
Hate speech. Hate group. Hate monger. Hate filled. Hater.
Of course, in the contemporary context, 95% its use is unintentionally self-referential. When they describe you as a "hater" because you refuse to renounce the teachings of Christ and His Church, you're not a hater. But guess what they are.
Indeed, if you want to find people who hate Christ and His Church, look and see who ascribes "hate" to faithful Catholics.
Now, here's the bad news. And apologies if this sort of stunned me. Perhaps many of you have seen so much recently that nothing surprises anymore.
The phenomenon has reached the Vatican.
The President of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences (PASS), appointed by Pope Francis in 2014, just publicly dropped the "H" word on a pro-life writer at First Things.
The full saga involves the First Things writer, Stefano Gennarini, the Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS), Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo and Margaret Archer, the president of PASS. It was in the context of initial criticism by Gennarini of the Vatican working closely with "population control" advocates Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs.
Lifesite News sums the whole thing up well here. But I wanted to excerpt (with a few annotations) some of the worst parts of the letter written by Ms. Archer. The letter is extremely nasty--completely out of proportion to Mr. Gennarini's initial calm criticisms--and often bizarrely off-subject, as when she accuses Mr. Gennarini of ignoring mass graves in Malaysia.
Keep in mind that this is a Vatican official appointed by the Pope, not some non-Catholic or squishy Catholic academic. And it was posted on an official Vatican website, not Salon or the Huffington Post:
Is your sole concern with human dignity confined to the period between conception and live-birth?...If so, this is a travesty of Catholic Social Teaching. [Gennarini of course never says anything of the kind, but this is a standard move.]
Why are you so totally uninterested in vicious practices, such as human trafficking that are an offence to the human dignity and right to life that you purport to defend? [Ditto.]
In the last two weeks of April in question, mass graves were found in Malaysia and Thailand of those killed by their intended traffickers; tens of thousands were set adrift at sea without food or water by those intending to traffic them before they feared for their own lives through the ‘civilized’ solution of a ‘blockade’. Is this of no concern to you? [Ditto again.]
Of course, your comments imply that you are a climate change denier... [Burn him!]
Why do you direct a hate message to Bishop Sánchez Sorondo alone? [There's that H-bomb.] Various Cardinals were present at different meetings. Instead, blame me, blame PAS. [Well, yeah, but Sorondo is the Chancellor.] We are respected academics who take full responsibility for our actions and have, according to our Statutes, the duty and privilege of advising the Church on matters of Social Doctrine and its application. I am appointed by the Pope and responsible directly to him. I’m afraid that leaves you and your cohort out in the cold. Moreover, we work pro bono and are therefore are (sic) self-supporting, which makes me wonder which lobbyists meet your salary bill? [You dare to disagree with us? Who's paying you?]
Why are we not allowed to speak to Jeffrey Sachs or the Secretary General of the UN? [It's a bit more than that.]...Well, that was not the attitude of Pope Francis who invited him to a private Audience, immediately prior to our joint PAS/PASS meeting on 28 April – to discuss climate change and human trafficking. Do you really have a higher moral standard than the Pope? Or is your own minimalistic version of the Creed, consisting of the single item: ‘’We believe in the ethical depravity of abortion’ considered to be an improvement? [Ditto for the third time.]
It seems as if abject poverty, malnutrition, no schooling, and the prospect of no employment are of little concern to you after (children) have been born. [Well, personally, I also deeply care about employment opportunities for the unborn. But that's just me.]
Who is Margaret Archer? As well as being the President of PASS, she is the Director of the "Centre for Social Ontology" at the University of Warwick.
More on Archer to follow...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

