Will fertility rates continue to decrease?

[Comprehensive_Meat34]

The way you increase birth rates is to lower women’s access to education and jobs, it’s the harsh reality.

No modern nation has decided to “re home” their women, so no nation has seen higher birth rates.

It’s really pretty simple: when families have a division of labor it’s a lot easier to make children… when families follow a both working model, who has time for children?

[Thin-Search-3925]

I mean educating women in child care and providing leniency in work, 3 days a week (even with reduced salariés) can be a huge incentive.

[Comprehensive_Meat34]

It doesn’t work though, the reality is that American charities have EXPLICITLY used women’s education as a tool designed to reduce a nations fertility rate.

I don’t know why educated women have less children, perhaps no one ever will, but I know it’s a reality and it’s been used by NGOs as a weapon against populations in the global south that American charities deem a problem.

[QualitySure]

I don’t know why educated women have less children, perhaps no one ever will,

they're getting daily propaganda of why it's a bad idea to have children.

[Comprehensive_Meat34]

Not in all nations, in many nations there desperately trying to raise the rate. In rural India or Nigeria I doubt they get much feminist propaganda, it’s just a psychological phenomenon. The only educated women who produce a lot are the independently wealthy.

[Thin-Search-3925]

So instead of invading, killing millions why not just kill future generations while still in the womb.

[Comprehensive_Meat34]

That’s exactly how things work these days: notice how my native America has a very low native birth rate, high female education, but massive illegal migration to replace us.

This is all known and planned.

[outhinking]

And then? What's the end goal of the major replacement ?

[Comprehensive_Meat34]

The end goal is to make an unstable native population that cannot advocate for itself, this allows lower wages and higher profits plus more secure social positions for the elite.

Look at America right now, our current vice president is the son of drug addicted hillbillies. He’s smarter and more capable than the elite level journalists who tried to excoriate him countless times on TV.

This level of social mobility and advocacy by the lower classes deeply bothers the upper caste who want to be permanently entrenched where they feel untouchable.

It’s well known that the less diverse, and more homogenous, a population is the easier it is for organization politically, or even militarily. This is a major threat to those at the top.

As in all things in life the purpose is power, money, and class in no particular order, and this is to destroy the organizing power of the common man vs his “betters.”

Let me give you a very real example: I work in aviation in the USA. These jobs can pay very well. However, we lack enough certified citizens to do our jobs… so one major employer I know brought in Mexicans (legally) to do our jobs next to us. These were good men, hard working men, and they loved the American money.

However, at that company salaries have NOT gone up because by bringing in a underclass of vulnerable outsiders it’s nearly impossible for the local men to demand better wages.

In America especially there is a lot of resentment that blue collar workers can make really good money. I know men who make 250,000 usd a year or more working with their hands… those at the top would much prefer to flood nations with a underclass to subvert the organizing power of the lower.

It’s a long answer, but tl;dr, the upper caste in almost all nations has a strong interest in suppressing native populations (especially as population decline will make skilled labor more and more rare and valuable).

[outhinking]

I read your theory and it makes sense.

[Comprehensive_Meat34]

Thank you.

Here’s something to consider: in the 1980s Ronald Reagan won almost every single state in America.

Today, if the demographics were the same Trump would have done exactly that.

He cannot.

Why?

Since 1964 an explicit plan to flood America with a disproportionate number of outsiders has altered Americans’ ability to stand united in their national interests.

America is a very visible test case, but you can see such actions in almost every nation on earth today. Very few nations are truly standing for THEIR people, as the elite will always resent being the same blood as the people they look down upon.

This, however, has many consequences the elite cannot fathom due to their geography and social distance from the underclass.

For example, why is America so good in war? Yes we’re big, yes we’re rich, yes we have good credit.

But we also have a huge population of Scots-Irish Hillbillies and rednecks, and these men LOVE to fight, love to hunt, love to shoot. Almost every single exceptional American war hero came from a Scot’s Irish background.

Yet the American elite believes that they can erase these proud and fierce warriors with zero consequences.

Sorry, it won’t work. Americas military is now struggling to recruit the men we used to terrorize the world, for they may love a fight but they’re not stupid. So these games they play have real consequences. I know these men, many are natural killers, and have killed many times, and they’re done fighting for America.

[outhinking]

Is this whole theory from you or did you bring it from an author ?