@Charlemagne knows me

ok

Not that I have to explain myself to you, prole 😉

People are malleable yes but genetics plays a role and I don't think propaganda would make someone who is predisposed to want to have lots of childre, have none instead

It's more like natalism and certain economic incentives were molding people who are antinatalist dead ends in our society to have children

Arguably even natalist propaganda doesn't work in a decadent society though

Looking at Hungary, Poland etc. and what measures they've taken it doesn't seem like birthrates have increased by a lot and to the degree they have it's probably for nothing again if you take away the incentives

In a way this (temporary) decline in birthrates is/was a painfull correction but since we're the first who undergo it we'll be the first to be through with it whilst the rest of the world is still goign to be stuck in that painfull process

It's a perfect opportunity waiting to happen

Resonant is alright

only alright???

I'm offended

@William bruh

What fag

Your pfp

yeah lmao

funny

looks autistic

It does

sorry daddy

Kek

It has been a while

Yeah dude hey

Uni life has me pinned down with work and socialising

@Mr. Nessel You can raise birthrates by taking away womens voting and working rights, but no-one does, so they dont. It does work in enclaves like with the amish or muslims but ideally these rules should be based in law. Of course now that women vote, they will vote against these changes because theyre women and dont think about whats good for society longterm, so you can never establish them through democratic means.

Amish don't have so many children because they're forced to lol

you dont think the amish keep their pimp hand strong?

People can just leave and do

Which is why it's working

Amish lost all the riff raff pretty much

its a tight-nit community, you can say they can just leave but obviously there is social pressure against that and women do respond to that

I think the point is that these smaller measures don’t make the population inherently more pro-natalist

And only natural selection can accomplish that

no

We actually have examples of policy failing at correctign birthrates

literally do feminism in reverse, thats all im saying

Birthrates were lower under N*zi Germany than Weimar Germany for example

Hungary's and Poland's natalist policies barely raised birthrates at all

women work in those countries

dont make me repeat myself

All you need to do is weather out the storm and see people who are genetic dead ends sort themselves out of the population

Birthrates were dropping since the beginning of industrialization, not feminism

Not that feminism is a good thing

But it's not the cause of the damage

Not being a peasant who requires their children as farmhands and needs to have 8 so 3 come through is unveiling people who are dead ends under these conditions

i disagree entirely

https://www.conservationinstitute.org/5-overpopulation-solutions/

"Sex education is paramount, but it goes hand-in-hand with overall education. The relationship between education and a lower fertility rate is especially evident in women, as statistics from both developed and developing countries prove.

Education opens the door to more opportunities and higher-paying jobs. More than anything, it shows an alternative future that’s independent of having children. In many developing countries, becoming a wife and mother is one of the only prospects young girls see. When they attend school, they begin to understand a way they can make a life form themselves independently."

Read articles on overpopulation, feminism almost always comes up

if you just phrase the things we see as problems as something positive, you will find many articles even by mainstream media about it

**When the winning forces in WW2, after it ended, forced the japanese to let their women vote, their birthrates immediately shit the bed**

If you can show me a study that takes kidnapped amish babies and lets them be raised by egalitarian average white ppl and then records how many children they go on to have over the course of their fertility window, and its significantly higher than the birthrate of average white ppl, then Im willing to consider your dead end theory as at least part of the explanation

fertility rate japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

While **women in Japan were recognized as having equal legal rights to men after World War II**, economic conditions for women remain unbalanced.[4] Modern policy initiatives to encourage motherhood and workplace participation have had mixed results.[5]

**Women in Japan obtained the right to vote in 1947**. While Japanese women's status has improved in the last decades, traditional expectations for married women and mothers are cited as a barrier to full economic equality.[6]

From the same article: "There is continuing debate about the role women's education plays in Japan's declining birthrate.[44] Japan's total fertility rate is 1.4 children born per woman (2015 estimate),[45] which is below the replacement rate of 2.1"

The funniest thing is that Japan is now trying to get more women into the workforce to replace the children theyre not having **because** theyre in the workforce

Its a divine comedy

The decline precedes WW2

It's prosperity in general

Looking at France though which had its decline as one of the first countries it's already starting to reverse (even accounting for muslims)

Do you mean that native french are having increasing birthrates? where do you even get that data, i thought in france they dont separate people by race in any statistics

They don't but immigration wasn't thing which caused the increase afaik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition I remember learning about this model in geography class and it pretty much holds up regardless of social norms/laws etc.

If you're going to have a prosperous society you'll experience rapid population growth at first, have it decline again and the model says it'll eventually balance out

But what actually happens is deadends die off

And birthrates eventually start rising again

Besides, is this not the model of liberal technochracy in which technological improvement makes the tearing down of rules and standards possible? That does not contradict my point, the industrialisation made tearing down of traditional gender roles possible and the birthrate decrease is the result. feminism did not start in the 20th century, it has been progressing for hundreds of years

You'd have to be pretty dense to suggest feminism did play that much of a role in France's early stage of decline

Just look at the behaviour coming out of countries like Bahrain with outright draconic laws on the books and still birthrates etc. are declining and degeneracy rising

That's despite those societies being traditionally polygamous

the highest birthrate is what you get with the equivalent of a puppy mill. we were closer to that 500 years ago than a hundred years ago

Which I think leads to a less bad impact given males are selected to have a lot of children

You're not going to create medieval birthrates without Malthusian conditions

i think looking at polygamous societies complicates things unnecessarily

I was just bringing up even they experience a decline

what are you telling me with your last line?

That the sort of children per woman birthrate is noit attainable through social engineering but poverty

People in prosperous societies do not feel the need to have children to have them be farmhands

Or if you want one child to have 8 so 1 survives

in poverty women have clearer roles than in decadence

Not necessarily

less freedom too

I remember seeing stats on how egalitarian societies like Norway are actually more unequal than third world shitholes

Because they had to help work or whatever, I don't remember exactly

thats about job choice, not family

jordan peterson likes to mention this

Anyway I'd like to bring up how the third Reich made women leave the workplace prewar and it still had a worse birthrate than Weimar

its about which job they choose

Im argueing for the general rule, i dont know what happened in that specific case

I didnt come up with it, there are a number of people making this point

The model of feminism caused birthrates to decline simply doesn't explain the declien of birthrates well enough

I don't like appeals to authority and I brought up a well respected model earlier

A model which isn't just talked about in articles but taught in schools

not that im in favor of it either but saying youre against appeals to authority and being a monarchist is ironic. And I dont really care what they teach in schools nowadays, how can you even make that argument..
If its math then ok, but for anything slightly political obviously dont rely on the education system

You know what an appeal to authority is right? It's blindly trusting an authority figure to tell you the truth, not supporting authority in the political context (Scienceman said x therefore x is true)
You brought up OPeds from Journos who also believe in the wage gap etc. as authoritative so I think a model being taught in school which isn't really political is a bit more trustworthy

It's like saying Algebra is taught in school therefore Algebra is marxist subversion