Catastrophic drop in births in Japan

Posted by Guessedworker on March 04, 2006, 05:36 AM | #

Ah, a last, last word, then.

I think we are pretty well agreed that there are a variety of causes for the Western birth-rate phenomenon.  Number one, for me, is fairly obvious and actually underpins almost everything else in some way.  Without controlled fertility there would be a whole lot less recreational sex and a whole lot more procreational sex, intentionally or otherwise.  Without controlled fertility women would have to take their lives seriously instead of getting all swept away in their prime child-bearing years with lifestyle and careers.

Lower down the chain it’s much easier to have children.  The thick, forgetful, de-moralised “young mother” of the public-housed underclass scarcely gives it a thought.  She is, after all, supported in her “choices” by liberalism’s unctious priesthood - who, of course, are supported by the taxpayers.

Third World immigration is obviously similar in its action because it constitutes a phenomenal net demand on the indigenes resources - most notably in land seizure but also in jobs and welfare.  If other, “voluntary” economic pressures such as lifestyle expectations and housing costs influence national birth-rate, so too must “involuntary” costs incurred through immigration.

As for Japan, I don’t know whether life’s little struggles are fully comparable to those in the West.  They have the pill.  They have the cost of living and fancy expectations that people call prosperity.  But I don’t see why their set of factors should be the only ones which affect birth-rate.  It may be that, with their higher intelligence but lower testosterone production, East Asians are actually more sensitive to the aforementioned factors than we are.  They don’t need the costs of the Third Word around their necks to stop breeding.

If you want to prove that immigration has no effect on Western birth-rates you must do so within a Western context, surely.  If you can’t do that, just say so.

Posted by John S Bolton on March 04, 2006, 05:42 AM | #

Oddly enough, the lowest birth rates are found in countries with the fewest immigrants, among the richer countries. It is already well-established that years of female education is the main suppressor of birth rates. Thus government schools are now a dysgenic, genocidal doomsday machine for civilization. Everyone with loyalty to civilization now should vilify the government schools, and demand their privatization.
Women will major in subjects which have no job prospects; thus keeping in position a leftist professoriate which ought long ago to have been dismissed, and not replaced.
Japan is not facing such a ‘catastrophe’ as would lead them to consider importing third world retardate laborers, even on a chain.
And well they should not; as also since the medical benefits for such populations are an implicit insurance policy worth thousands per person a year.

Posted by slinker, sailer, toldya, sly on March 04, 2006, 06:43 AM | #

Ah, John Ray.  What would Majority Rights be without him? 

Let’s see how he has shifted the argument from one of race replacement to one of birthrates.  Whether or not immigration is absolutely required to lower native birthrates is irrelevant.

Look, OK, Japanese birthrates have decreased without immigration.  But the Japanese will NOT be race replaced as long as they admit no immigrants.  You will have a homogenous (OK, 95% Japanese with mostly a Korean minority and a few others) Japanese nation, just with fewer people.

If the Japanese population decline reverses itself, the Japanese people will find the room to expand in, their country NOT being filled with immigrants and the descendants of immigrants.  However, if they allow in Chinese, Indians, Filipinos and the like, then Japan - which is an overcrowded resource poor group of islands - will begin to become filled with those peoples.

JJR would then “advise” the Japanese to get involved in a “breeding contest” with these other peoples.  First, since JJR acknowledges racial and ethnic differences, not all groups are as r/k-selected as others in the same ecological niches.  The Japanese may simply be unable to outbreed Hindus. Second, if the Japanese can increase their breeding, why not do it now, without immigration?  Leading to, third, why bring the immigrants in to begin with?

Bringing in immigrants to “fix” a declining population does not solve the problem.  Banning immigration will put pressures on the native population to increase their birthrate when problems ensue due to an “aging population.”  Supply and demand, don’t you know.

Flooding the nation with young, fertile aliens is not a “solution” at all, but another problem.

Don’t expect Ray to understand any of this.  Every time he posts, he exposes the intellectual vacuity of “social science” to an ever-increasing degree.

Posted by onetwothree on March 04, 2006, 10:27 AM | #

Who is he refuting? (I won’t say “you” since I know he doesn’t read the comment boards.)

I mean, probably twenty people rebut him on his previous post, and then he goes off on some bizarre counterattack to nowhere. Please.

It’s clear the mindset is:

“I like the Hindus I meet down under, and therefore mass immigration must be defended everywhere, otherwise it might be limited where I live.”

Posted by labantall on March 07, 2006, 05:48 AM | #

It really doesn’t matter, because Japan will still be Japanese with a smaller population - which may well be a good thing.

The UK could certainly use 10m less people, but we’ve gone for a strategy of replacement instead. A mistake IMHO.

Posted by Chris on May 30, 2006, 09:02 PM | #

Well, I must say that what “guessedworker” said is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. East Asians do not have “higher intelligence” than Westerners. That is completely false. Asians are NOT smarter than other people, sorry. The West is still ahead of Asia (and Japan) in almost every possible way, from Nobel Prizes to tech patents to medical advancements. I am so tired of hearing how superior the Asians are.

Posted by Guessedworker on May 31, 2006, 02:31 AM | #

It is good, Chris, that you are tired of hearing this part of the race realist argument.  That means it’s getting through and, from our perspective, that’s a considerable positive.  The difference between ourselves and the Third World peoples flooding the West must be understood as widely as possible.

If you have heard that the mean average IQ of East Asians is higher than Europeans you have probably also heard that their respective bell curves differ, the EA one having a shorter top and tail - fewer in the basement but also fewer in the penthouse.

This is just what the testing reveals, Chris.  Make use of it.