Skip to main content

The Rising Problem of Falling Birth Rates

  

There’s a slow-motion panic brewing around the declining birth rates of wealthy nations.

The replacement rate of a population — commonly understood to be a minimum of 2.1 children per woman — is indeed plummeting across the industrialized world.

It’s being felt most acutely in Asia, particularly in Japan, South Korea, and China, where the replacement rate hovers around 1.0, and where the respective governments are actively alarmed. All sorts of incentives are being tried to get couples to have more babies — generous childcare, parental leave, cash bonuses — but with little success.

There is some urgency. As a society gets older, its resources grow increasingly strained. The young have always subsidized the old, but when there are too many old and not enough young, the healthcare and pension systems get overused and underfunded. When there aren’t enough people to supply a workforce, industry moves elsewhere. Schools get shuttered, towns get hollowed out, investment money flees for greener pastures. It isn’t pretty.

Yes, the reasons for declining birth rates are many, and profusely documented. Career choices, reproductive choices, lifestyle choices, political instability, shifting cultural values — take your pick —all have contributed. You could even make the case that the wealth of these nations is, in itself, a cause of infertility.

But the most obvious reason birth rates are falling — again, this is all over the world — is that people of child-rearing age are taking a look around and saying “No thanks.” Adults living in their parents’ basements do not fancy themselves great candidates for parenthood. Even among the relatively secure, the world is looking unreasonably perilous, and the peril is not abating. This is not the ideal climate — in all senses of the word — for child-rearing.

This is an attitude that, consciously or not, has taken hold in virtually every wealthy country. It explains, at least partially, our own country’s replacement rate, which is a discouraging 1.6.

It also explains the recent rantings from the right about women and babies. Elon Musk has called low birth rates a “much bigger risk to civilization than global warming," and he’s not entirely wrong — at least about the problem.

But when RFK Jr. says 1.6 is a national security threat, when JD Vance talks about childless cat ladies, when Mehmet Oz says “one in three Americans are ‘under-babied,’” and when a war on contraception goes on under the radar, we know they’re all reading from the same playbook.

They’ve been called “pronatalists,” a word to watch. And what they’re selling is variations on the Great Replacement Theory.

GRT, if you recall, is the wingnut conspiracy theory that presumes the existence of an insidious cabal of liberals, communists, Democrats, and drag queens, all financed by George Soros, all dedicated to flooding America with hordes of rapists and murderers from what Trump charmingly calls “shithole countries.” This very woke cabal is supposedly engaged in replacing white Christians with a new race of mongrels, and using the extra votes to promote horrifying policies like drinkable water and affordable healthcare.

The racism isn’t even below the surface. When these loons talk about replacement rate, they’re quite clear about who is, and is not, an acceptable replacement.

During the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally in 2017, when the neo-Nazis chanted “Jews will not replace us,” they were understating their ambitions. What they really meant was that Blacks, Latinos, immigrants — or any of those other “others” — won’t replace them either.

This is where The Handmaid’s Tale starts to flirt with reality. Forced childbirth — a form of slave labor — is one of a very few societal models that might make a dent in the replacement rate, though at what cost? Don’t think this isn’t what Vance, Musk, and the tech bros have in mind. I doubt they’ll get us there, but they’ll certainly try.

Even more diabolical would be what we might call the RFK Jr model, in which widespread death becomes official policy. All of Kennedy’s actions so far have been in the service of the grim reaper. He seems to be culling the herd, deliberately shortening the lives of anyone with, say, a weak immune system. If he can kill off enough people, fewer replacements will ultimately be needed. So he’s teaching a whole generation of MAGA morons to forget vaccines, devalue science, ignore centuries of public health wisdom and, wherever possible, die. It’s the patriotic thing to do.

Of course, the most obvious answer to the replacement problem, is the one that will face the most ferocious headwinds: immigration.

When approached rationally, this is a no-brainer. Demographers, economists, and sociologists have long understood that the migration of people from high-birth-rate regions to low-birth-rate regions is a win-win for both regions. Societies have always been remade through the assimilation of immigrants, not least our own.

As virtually all Americans are descended, one way or another, from immigrants, you’d think this wouldn’t be a big intellectual leap, even for dimwits. Because ironically, the Great Replacement Theory is correct, in a way. White Christian society is indeed being subsumed — replaced, if you will — by a more blended culture. This has been going on for decades, even centuries, with a constant influx of new arrivals willing to work, settle, and procreate both inside and outside their communities, just as their forebears did.

Yes, the steady march of immigration has been set back by Stephen Miller and his ICE ghouls, but migration always finds a way. It’s driven by forces and impulses he can’t control.

And it’s not just in this country. Europe’s migration issues are more acute than ours, and their racism is at least as ugly. But in every case, the best chance of getting to a 2.1 replacement rate is Miller’s worst nightmare: a multi-ethnic society.

Science argues strongly for this. The cross-pollination of ethnicities — the “mixing of blood,” as the racists put it — is known to strengthen future generations in innumerable ways. This is basic evolutionary theory and should be common knowledge, but because the racism comes with so much received superstition and misinformation, we’re blocked from understanding what’s actually good for the survival of the species.

Immigration is a complex issue, and assimilation is never smooth. But there is little doubt that over time there’s a net benefit to society. There is even less doubt that pronatalists, white supremacists, and their Republican enablers will refuse to discuss it, ever.

Meanwhile, the declining birth rate is a ticking bomb, and it’ll keep ticking whether we discuss it or not. If the decades-long climate discussion is any indication, we’re in for a lot of denial, a lot of deflection, and a lot of kicking the bomb down the road.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Courtship of Abdul El-Sayed By, Uh, Fox?

   I understand that it’s hard to keep up with all the things Trump might be angry about on any given day, but it’s interesting to note that he’s now big mad at Fox News over their surprisingly hospitable treatment of Abdul El-Sayed. It’s not often that I say this, but he has a point. Based on two extended interviews — one was a month ago, the other last week — El-Sayed has quickly become Fox’s second favorite Democrat, after Pete Buttigieg. Fox and El-Sayed have been of conspicuous use to each other, and it’s hard to imagine stranger bedfellows. Each interview was over 20 minutes long, which is unusual for any news broadcast. But for a Democratic candidate — let alone for the Senate, let alone from a crucial swing state — that kind of one-on-one time on Fox is utterly unheard of. Trump heard of it, and he wasn’t happy. Both events were good television in their own way. I’ve often complained about the impermeability of the Fox media bubble, and there’s no ...

Suppose We Do Win Both House and Senate. Then What?

   My friend in Ontario is frustrated, as I can well imagine. As Trump continues to drive our country over a cliff — and drag his country over with it — he has asked me just what difference a blue takeover of Congress might actually make. A good question, in and of itself. But then he asks, “ Even if there is a change in Congress, what could that do if Trump goes around them anyway?” My answer to both was as glib as it was unhelpful: Who knows, I said, but we need to flip Congress anyway. Even if Democrats can capture both House and Senate, their ability to push back will be limited. They’ll be able to prevent things — crazy new laws, egregious appointments, corrupt funding — and that’s not nothing. But prevention isn’t cure, and given Trump’s personal chokehold on the world, a lot of curing will be desperately needed. Over the next two years the headwinds will be fierce. Even a strongly Democratic Congress will have little more than a larger platform fo...

Cult of Personality — A Sneak Preview

   Reading this again was a bit of a gut-punch. I wrote it in August 2020, as a reaction to the Republican Convention that nominated Trump to run against Biden. Trump didn’t get his four more years, at least not then, but it wasn’t for lack of trying. January 6 was a particularly nice try, but that came six months later. My observations at the time foreshadowed a dark future that has matured into the insanity we are now witnessing — no longer coming soon, but here now. The election I write about in this piece happened six years ago, but it might as well be today.   Donald Trump told a joke the other day. It was a real howler, sort of along the lines of “Russia, if you’re listening,” or “Slow the testing down,” or “I could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue.” You’ll recall that we didn’t know those were actually jokes at first. We thought they were at best verbal atrocities and at worst treason. But then his flunkies explained that it was but another exam...