TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Is liberalism digging its own demographic grave? (2022)

23 点作者 neverminder将近 2 年前

18 条评论

api将近 2 年前
Illiberal societies like Russia, Iran, and China also have low birth rates, and falling.<p>The correlation is with economic development and education, which suppresses birth rates across all cultures and systems of governance. The only places in the world with very high birth rates are poor with high levels of illiteracy. As they develop their birth rates are starting to fall too.<p>It’s funny… I remember the overpopulation panic. If we’d kept reproducing like that we may well be facing a “Soylent Green” future, but it didn’t happen. Instead of celebrating the fact that humans seem able to self regulate our birth rates to avoid Malthusian catastrophes we are now panicking about that instead.
评论 #36296355 未加载
shp0ngle将近 2 年前
The problem solves itself; the societies that are pro-natal will survive and the ones thay are not will die out.
评论 #36293997 未加载
评论 #36294037 未加载
评论 #36294701 未加载
评论 #36294040 未加载
Georgelemental将近 2 年前
Israel is the one shining example of a country with a TFR well above replacement (around 3.0, and stable) despite being economically modern. They have lessons to teach the rest of us.
评论 #36295126 未加载
评论 #36294287 未加载
评论 #36294521 未加载
评论 #36294323 未加载
评论 #36299963 未加载
photochemsyn将近 2 年前
The thesis that liberal societies are not replacing themselves seems incorrect. UK population was 60 million in 2000, and is 67.5 million today. The demographics are somewhat interesting in that &#x27;white native British&#x27; has dropped from 99% or so of the population in the 1950s to about 82% today. In comparison the USA population is also steadily rising from ~280 million in 2000 to ~330 million in 2020. Now if the concern is that the relative ratios of different race-ethnic-religious groups is changing, why is that an issue? Children tend to adopt the societal norms they&#x27;re surrounded by, even if this upsets their traditional-minded parents. That&#x27;s certainly been the case in the USA, it&#x27;s an assimilative process.<p>As far as birth rate data, as women acquire more rights and wealth they tend to choose to have fewer children later in life, and as medical care and knowledge improves, those children tend to survive to adulthood at rates unheard of a few centuries ago. Thus, while birth rates may indeed be falling, the population is stable or even growing due to the other factor the author seems to ignore, i.e. lower childhood death rates.
评论 #36295054 未加载
评论 #36294916 未加载
twic将近 2 年前
The phenomenon of fertility falling as societies get more advanced is called &quot;demographic transition&quot;.<p>But societies don&#x27;t keep getting more advanced! Once a society has become a modern post-industrial, &quot;liberal&quot; society, the demographic transition effect stops. After that, other factors continue to act on fertility.<p>And there is evidence that fertility is heritable, and positively selected for (almost by definition, i think). So we might expect to see fertility slowly rise after demographic transitions are complete. If that is the case, the current situation of declining and ageing populations is only a transient state.<p>I read some stuff on this a while ago, didn&#x27;t save the links, and now can&#x27;t find it. But digging around now, i think these papers are relevant:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;royalsocietypublishing.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1098&#x2F;rspb.2013.2561" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;royalsocietypublishing.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1098&#x2F;rspb.2013.256...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;royalsocietypublishing.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1098&#x2F;rstb.2015.0157" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;royalsocietypublishing.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1098&#x2F;rstb.2015.015...</a>
评论 #36296949 未加载
JasserInicide将近 2 年前
One thing the article doesn&#x27;t mention: how education levels impact this. Those with more education have fewer kids. I&#x27;m always reminded of the opening Idiocracy skit where the smart couple is worried about the financials of having a kid, and the white trash family just does it with reckless abandon.
dash2将近 2 年前
Damn, that&#x27;s not just some random substacker - that&#x27;s Paul Morland who wrote Tomorrow&#x27;s People.<p>TBH that book was rather bland and milquetoast. The same argument he makes here is made at book length by Eric Kaufmann in &quot;Shall The Religious Inherit The Earth&quot;, which is very good.
hunglee2将近 2 年前
&quot;A clear pattern is emerging; liberal societies are not reproducing themselves&quot;<p>Probably not to do with liberalism as illiberal societies are also suffering from the same phenomenon. The issue can be isolated to economic development, which itself is a result of female education and subsequent participation in the formal labour market. Turns out being a wage earner &#x2F; consumer is in tension with being a parent, especially a mother. Interestingly, remote work seems to have an effect of increasing birth rate, we might be able to solve this by redesigning work around family making, rather than treating workers as atomic individuals with no social relations outside of the market
评论 #36293516 未加载
Georgelemental将近 2 年前
Israel is the one shining example of a country with a TFR well above replacement (around 3.0, and stable) despite being economically modern. They have lessons to teach us
ed25519FUUU将近 2 年前
I think this[1] is an interesting graph: income level vs children.<p>The group with the lowest TFR? White couples who make between $200k and $250k. Clearly it&#x27;s not just about income because the uber poor and uber rich have about the same amount of children.<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;pbs.twimg.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;FyYwPsBXoAEK1ur?format=png" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;pbs.twimg.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;FyYwPsBXoAEK1ur?format=png</a>
cmh89将近 2 年前
The author was struggling along to make a point and then dropped &#x27;wokeness&#x27; to completely lose credibility.<p>The author seemed to completely miss the point that, regardless of liberal or illiberal, when women have access to birth control, birth rates go down.
评论 #36294959 未加载
gaoshan将近 2 年前
Isn&#x27;t human population already too high for the planet (or at least headed that way)? I would think that a trend in the other direction is good, on the whole and over the long run.
mbfg将近 2 年前
People largely worry about being able to afford children. Most people especially without children, don&#x27;t care if the society in the future survives. I don&#x27;t see how this is hard to understand.<p>If there are people who care about civilization surviving into the the future, making it economically advantageous to have children would be a good plan.
评论 #36299384 未加载
anovikov将近 2 年前
It has nothing to do with liberalism, birth rates are plummeting everywhere and especially hard in places like China which are anything but liberal.<p>Don&#x27;t look for scapegoats: people are not having children because they can. They never wished to procreate enough to sustain population, they only did because they had no way around it. It&#x27;s incredibly stupid to portray achievement of progress as some kind of curse or even moral failure.
评论 #36294243 未加载
incomingpain将近 2 年前
Please read the <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;United_Nations_Population_Fund" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;United_Nations_Population_Fund</a><p>They have for many decades been working toward reducing the world population. Many policies are intentionally designed around reducing world population. This has been working effectively on the former 1st world countries.<p>What was discovered was the conservatives&#x2F;republicans&#x2F;whatever realized what was happening and decided on a unique strategy never normally used in politics. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wikipedia:Give_&#x27;em_enough_rope" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wikipedia:Give_&#x27;em_enough_rope</a><p>Left wing politicians feel unopposed, and without opposition they roll ahead with terrible decisions. Often feeling enabled to implement policies which are going to hang themselves. Absolutely what&#x27;s happening and they don&#x27;t realize it.
bell-cot将近 2 年前
Perhaps &#x27;s&#x2F;liberalism&#x2F;modern capitalism&#x2F;g&#x27;? Outside of a few ultra-religious niches, family sizes for modern conservatives are also plunging. Today&#x27;s all-noses-to-the-grindstones short term economic &quot;maximization&quot; is squeezing ~every voluntary but not-quickly-monetized human activity out of existence. And it has long since figured out that a couple having <i>one</i> kid - whose &quot;normal&quot; birth runs up $100,000+ in medical expenses, and whose college education will cost $500,000+ - is a far better outcome for Wall Street than anyone being able to dream of having 4 or 5 kids in a fairly sane 1950&#x27;s-style society and economy.
评论 #36294130 未加载
评论 #36294024 未加载
AndrewKemendo将近 2 年前
It&#x27;s as simple as inequality - fix that and all this goes away<p>We&#x27;ve seen this over and over and it&#x27;s blatantly obvious what the problem is - too few people control the wealth of the world and that wealth is used to buy control and power in ways that continue to erode the power and comfort of the working class.<p>President Teddy Roosevelt, who died a socialist who wanted to live like his porters [1], led America at the turn of the century by attacking the robber barons, breaking the trusts, and generally crushing unethical business across the nation, leading the way for a revitalized society (he wasn&#x27;t perfect but we&#x27;re looking at the issue of oligarchies here).<p>I&#x27;m not sure that&#x27;s possible anymore like that, and I think peaceful revolution inside the system is possible. We do it by building mutual voluntary employee owned cooperatives that create products and services and DENY the capital class the ability to continue to accrete wealth and power.<p>[1]<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.politico.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;magazine&#x2F;2023&#x2F;03&#x2F;10&#x2F;east-african-kingdom-theodore-roosevelt-00085962" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.politico.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;magazine&#x2F;2023&#x2F;03&#x2F;10&#x2F;east-afric...</a>
评论 #36294278 未加载
PaulHoule将近 2 年前
Note that the first step of human reproduction is you feel lonely, then you seek out a lover, next you have more people.<p>When it is too crowded people don’t have the instinct to make more people. Places like the UK and Japan are way too crowded and of course people don’t want to have kids, it is entirely exacerbated by the problems with housing.<p>The problem will take care of itself if the population drops enough, if you want to be proactive the important thing is to reduce the perception of crowding which could be some combination of (a) dispersion (just tax people 200% of the median income if they want to dogpile into London or Tokyo and if rich folk complain there are no service workers they’re going to have to pay them more), (b) better housing and (c) psychological tricks that reduce the perception of crowding.
评论 #36293943 未加载
评论 #36294003 未加载
评论 #36294041 未加载