Birth rates have dropped 20% since 2007. I don’t think we ever came back from the '08 crash. It’s just been smoke and mirrors.

  • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    it’s really not catastrophic for humanity

    It’s already insufficient for maintaining population in half of the world and keeps falling further everywhere. Any socialist project would be forced to confront this issue or collapse in the long term. Capitalism is definitely choosing collapse.

    • hotcouchguy [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Do we even need to maintain current population? Especially in the “half of the world” where it’s declining? Not that I’m Malthusian, I think how society is organized is massively more important than its population, but a little gradual decrease in the “west” seems neutral to positive overall

      • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Demographic collapse in the West would be a net good, because it would destroy Western military capabilities, but overall - no. Society should be able to maintain stable population. Population decline is hard to stop at ‘optimal’ level, and once population have declined below some level, complex economic and societal organization becomes too hard to maintain.

        Also, another half of the world is going in the same direction, just several decades later. Iran, for example, has already birth rates below replacement rate. In fact, we can expect Earth’s population to start declining in 10-20 years, and this decline would be accelerating.

        • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          once population have declined below some level, complex economic and societal organization becomes too hard to maintain.

          Sure, but we could halve the population today (and not in the ~100+ years that would actually take through declining birth rates) and we’d still have a global population similar to what it was in the mid 70s.

          • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            If we manage to stabilise world population at mid 70s level, it would be a great success TBH. Birth rate decline is accelerating and majority of population would be old people, who are able to work much less and require a lot more care, so the raw labour power would be much smaller. I bet all of the West would introduce euthanasia to deal with it.

            Also, capitalism is working like shit, when the population is not growing, and if it begins to decline, it will crap itself much more than now, and it will accelerate decline even more, until this positive feedback results in either communism or agrarian traditionalism, and the latter currently seems more likely.

    • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s already insufficient for maintaining population in half of the world

      And the other half of the world is meeting the gap.

      Under current conditions, continual population growth will lead to collapse at some point.

      This is not in an ecofascist way, just the nature of compound growth. For example, projecting the 1995 global fertility rate out to 2150 results in a human population of ~250 billion.

      I think it’s an issue that would be addressed by socialism regardless.

      • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        And the other half of the world is meeting the gap.

        It wouldn’t for much longer, birth rates there decline too.

        Under current conditions, continual population growth will lead to collapse at some point.

        Yeah, but we are going to switch to population decline in 10-20 years.

        For example, projecting the 1995 global fertility rate out to 2150 results in a human population of ~250 billion.

        We already have smaller global fertility rate and it continues to decline. Linear extrapolation and its consequences and so on.

        I think it’s an issue that would be addressed by socialism regardless.

        Soviet Union and other socialist countries had only partial solution. In fact, we can look at Korea with DPRK having a 1.9 fertility rate (and this is already less than replacement rate) and RoK with 0.7 fertility rate (which is a complete disaster long term, and it keeps declining).