[Pants-of-dog]

Eh... I don't agree. Babies and small children are not capable of loving their parents, in my opinion. Their "love" is shallow and self-serving. It's not at all something I would be interested in.

A child might grow up to become an adult who truly does love their parent(s) in a mutually reciprocal, selfless manner, but they won't necessarily, and have no obligation to do so either. Also, it wouldn't be easy for them to develop that kind of relationship with their parents, given the vast difference in age and life-experience between parent and child.

First of sll, I completely 100% support people who decide to remain childless.

Secondly, the love of a child is immediate, simple, tangible, and can not ever be reciprocated nor should it be.

By immediate, I mean that the child begins loving whomever is bearing then inside them as they grow in the womb and develop their capacity for love. By the time a child is born, they know and are comforted by the presence of the sounds, smells, touch, et cetera of the parents.

It is simple in that the love of children is not clouded by the baggage that we all bring to our adult relationships. It is the closest thing to unconditional love that we experience.

It is tangible in that this love is expressed in simple and visceral ways, since that is what the child understands. Hugs, cuddles, napping on you.

Most importantly, it should not be reciprocated. Ever. I am willing to die for my children, without hesitation. And I would absolutely never want my children to feel the same way about me. They should let me die. In this respect, children can never pay their parents back. Instead, every generation pays it forward: we give that sacrificing love to our children instead of reciprocating it to our parents. That makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, from a moral perspective,

Furthermore, having a child would inevitably get in the way of building and deepening my relationship with my SO. So why would I risk destroying or damaging such a great relationship for someone who may or may not return that type of love for another 20-30 years? It makes no sense.

This may be due to something particular to you, your SO, or your relationship. Again, there is nothing wrong with this. Many couples correctly identify that their very awesome relationship would be made worse by kids. Many other couples have no idea, and some know very well that having kids would make things better.

And to be clear about making this decision in the modern dating and marrying context, there are more situations where being childless is the rational choice than there are situations where having children makes more sense.

[Godstud]

@Tainari88 Thanks for the kind words. You are reasonably accurate.

@Truth To Power I have not devoured by 13 year old step-son... yet. I'll have to wait until he fills out a bit more. He's only 38 kg.

You should not have children unless you are in a committed relationship. If you can't commit to a marriage, then you cannot commit to the 18+ year commitment of having a child. I understand that some people are not having children, and if you're not going to do so in a committed relationship, then I should actually applaud that.

My wedding anniversary of 11 years is tomorrow. Wish me luck!

@Saeko You do you. If it makes you happy not to have kids, then do so. Don't assume that it's a harmful thing, or tell others that. That's objectively false.

It is simple in that the love of children is not clouded by the baggage that we all bring to our adult relationships. It is the closest thing to unconditional love that we experience.

QFT.

Most importantly, it should not be reciprocated. Ever. I am willing to die for my children, without hesitation. And I would absolutely never want my children to feel the same way about me. They should let me die. In this respect, children can never pay their parents back. Instead, every generation pays it forward: we give that sacrificing love to our children instead of reciprocating it to our parents. That makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, from a moral perspective,

QFT. I may disagree with you on a great many things, but you hit the nail on the head, here.

[Saeko]

It is simple in that the love of children is not clouded by the baggage that we all bring to our adult relationships. It is the closest thing to unconditional love that we experience.

I don't think that unconditional "love" is anything good or even desirable. You did a good job in describing the way a child "loves". You described it exactly the way I did, as shallow and self-serving, except you used prettier words.

To a child, a parent is nothing more than a collection of services. Children are not even capable of perceiving the real person that operates beneath the "parent" role, let alone loving them.

I am willing to die for my children, without hesitation. And I would absolutely never want my children to feel the same way about me. They should let me die. In this respect, children can never pay their parents back. Instead, every generation pays it forward: we give that sacrificing love to our children instead of reciprocating it to our parents. That makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, from a moral perspective,

@Saeko You do you. If it makes you happy not to have kids, then do so. Don't assume that it's a harmful thing, or tell others that. That's objectively false.

I'll have to disagree. A parent's decision to have kids is not a selfless act. From a moral perspective, to have children is to almost necessarily put them in harm's way. One should not put one's children in harm's way on purpose. Therefore, if one truly cares about the well-being of their children, then simply not having them is the best option.

[Godstud]

To a child, a parent is nothing more than a collection of services. Children are not even capable of perceiving the real person that operates beneath the "parent" role, let alone loving them.

Get help.

@Saeko WTF are you yapping about? Having children is not putting them in harm's way. It's the safest generation and time to have children, in the history of mankind. You are in no position to talk about a moral perspective, when you talk from such an anti-social position.

We need to have future generations, and our societies require it. It's how we pass on our culture and society.

[ingliz]

@Godstud

Why is it so difficult to let people live their own lives?

Are 8 billion people not enough? The world's population was 2.5 billion in 1950.

With effective contraception and abortion on demand, parenting is a choice.

So let them choose.

[Tainari88]

@Saeko you wrote something very interesting,

I'll have to disagree. A parent's decision to have kids is not a selfless act. From a moral perspective, to have children is to almost necessarily put them in harm's way. One should not put one's children in harm's way on purpose. Therefore, if one truly cares about the well-being of their children, then simply not having them is the best option.

Why do humans have sexual attractions, and the need to reproduce? It is part of our biology. Our nature. We eat, we sleep, we drink water, we walk around, and we also reproduce. Humans are kind of unique in that we may have sex at any time of the month or hour, or place. If our health permits it. Why? Because reproduction allows the continuation of the species. It is our species attempts to live on and keep evolving.

If we do not have any progeny we die off as a species. You are going against nature to simply choose not to have progeny. If everyone chose that? There would be extinction by our own choice. Not what nature intends. I happen to think nature is wiser than we are. When our time to call it quits as a species arrives she will choose the destiny for us as a species.

I observed a lot of nature here. Mexico has Chixculub. The place the meteor hit that killed off the dinosaurs approximately 65 million years ago. Did they die off completely really? No, Saeko, the ones who could fly did not die off. They kept surviving and they became our present day birds.

Our Neanderthal ancestors did not die off really. They compose a percentage of the DNA of Europeans and Asians.

The Taínos were considered wiped out by the Spaniards by the 1600s. Were they though? They exist in some form in about 60% of the DNA of modern Puerto Ricans. The culture in little bits is still there. Subtle and discreet. Like the genes.

Why is it that the message if you observe nature is really not extinction really. It is transformation. Transforming what exists to something that becomes a new way of expressing what came before...it makes you wonder about what we are all doing here eh?

I think it is about converting our unique human individual energy into something powerful within a group based evolution. It is potential. In everything. The potential for everything to become TRANSFORMED.

That very act of mating has a charge. like electricity, you get attracted to the partner, you bring forth a certain energy. You exchange it and you find an intense release of energy,. A type of transformation. That is if you feel it correctly.

It is telling you something about your body, mind and instinct.

We are meant to be here for a transformation.

Children are the result of attraction and energy and force. That vital force that spins us in its web, powerful, and perfect tying us to nature and energy.

Ingliz is right too. There are a lot of human beings on Earth. We are a species that could make a better society out of what we have now. We got to choose life though. Life has to be chosen Saeko.

Nature reserves the right to transform us. Nature is far more powerful than we are. Let us not take away the laws of nature. Not in ourselves or with our relationship to Mother Nature.

You choose what best suits you,. And others choose other choices about whether to have children or not.

There are enough humans to guarantee a future for us. But only if we respect what our nature including sexual natures say about what the role is for all of us. Struggle, and pain and sacrifice are a part of life Saeko. Not only for parents but for all of us. None of us live a risk-free life. That is the nature of Mother Nature eh? And science is about nature and natural laws observed.

We are programmed from birth for life.

And I disagree with you about children just seeing you as a service thing. Something about humans is about recognizing why we love so deeply. So deeply as to risk our existence to protect that which is endemically important to us. Our futures. That is what they represent you know....children formed from struggle and sacrifice are our futures.

That is where ancestor worship comes from in the Eastern religions. And in Western religions...it is about making sure there is a future.

[Fasces]

Many animals naturally stop breeding when living in dense or overpopulated conditions that may not support additional life. The low birth rate of modern humans doesn't have to be selfish, hedonistic, or suicidal - but may be a natural response to current material conditions and population density. We can't all sustainably live at these numbers and at a Western quality of life.

Who says that childless individuals are necessarily acting against biological impulse? It may be an epigenetic response to industrial living conditions that will allow the human species to thrive long term by not exceeding the sustainable carrying capacity of our environment.

[Rancid]

Penis

[Rancid]

The reason people like @Puffer Fish have such a (unfounded) concern about this, is that the decline in population is mostly happening among white affluent people. He and his ilk believe that only white people can carry forward the ideals of western civilization. That any brown people that are invited as "guests" into these western nations cannot be given any power, because they will ruin the project of western civilization.

What puffer gets so wrong about this white nationalist narrative, is that these non-white "guests" are very westernized in cultural outlook and cultural values. My guess is puffer is a very socially isolated person that bare gets real interaction with non-white people. I get he hasn't interacted much with non-white people that have education and money (i.e. power). If he did, he would quickly understand, that the ideals of the western project (so to speak) is very strong and instilled in these people. They will carry forward this western whatever the fuck he's concerned about. Brown people with education/money in America, are just as "white" as white people... that's basically what I'm saying.

This is a point I've talked about lot on here. A point white nationalist ignore, because it works counter to their shit goals. It renders their entire philosophy as a lie and tool for manipulation people like Puffer. This is the core of his racist "concerns".

Everybody needs to fuck everybody until we're all brown.

[Tainari88]

The reason people like @Puffer Fish have such a (unfounded) concern about this, is that the decline in population is mostly happening among white affluent people. He and his ilk believe that only white people can carry forward the ideals of western civilization. That any brown people that are invited as "guests" into these western nations cannot be given any power, because they will ruin the project of western civilization.

What puffer gets so wrong about this white nationalist narrative, is that these non-white "guests" are very westernized in cultural outlook and cultural values. My guess is puffer is a very socially isolated person that bare gets real interaction with non-white people. I get he hasn't interacted much with non-white people that have education and money (i.e. power). If he did, he would quickly understand, that the ideals of the western project (so to speak) is very strong and instilled in these people. They will carry forward this western whatever the fuck he's concerned about. Brown people with education/money in America, are just as "white" as white people... that's basically what I'm saying.

This is a point I've talked about lot on here. A point white nationalist ignore, because it works counter to their shit goals. It renders their entire philosophy as a lie and tool for manipulation people like Puffer. This is the core of his racist "concerns".

Everybody needs to fuck everybody until we're all brown.

That last line is the problem he has. Lol.

And I have a problem with assimilation Rancid. They tried that in Puerto Rico, with Native Americans, African Americans, and many others they have seen as the outsiders in their own minds. The ones damaging Western Civilization. The primitive inferiors. The ones with a bad culture. The DUMB ones. Lol.

Because that is the reason all these poor backward nations are. They are poor and backward because they have the wrong colored people populating them. And assimilation is the goal. They need to think like white people to know that they are not white and therefore could never be part of the inside group. The ones who have the truth, the way and the light.

I think the error is to discard the original culture Rancid. You keep the wonder and the beauty of the original culture. You keep speaking Spanish, or Nahuatl, or Mayan, or French, or Patois Creole, or Italian, or Gaelic, or Lota, etc. You get an EDUCATION that is deep and well rounded. You study human history and you see that the supposedly story they tell you in these pro white only racially distorted class systems full of shit thoughts are not really superior.

You then, realize that all humanity has potential and has power. And you look for exalting the ones who are told their entire lives that they are nothing and will always be nothing. They start believing in themselves and start respecting their own power. They then become world citizens who do want the best for everyone and who think class systems are stupid in the extreme.

After all, you start off as a Puerto Rican, a Haitian, a Dominican, a Mexican, a ______________, fill in every nationality you can think of, and if you read, write, learn, process, analyze and work hard on knowledge, skills and focus your efforts on improving your life on all fronts, you wind up knowing that class systems and racist systems are just control systems that power groups impose on the groups they want to exploit.

You see through the bullshit and you make sure your children do not believe in such nonsense.

Class systems are shit Rancid. Just like racist thoughts. They are related. They always have been.

The Latin Americans and the Africans are a threat. Lol.

All people want to be themselves. Assimilating and becoming a white person is about rejecting [i]rejecting who you already are, and adopting an identity that is not organic to you. I would never recommend that to anyone. Keeping your original identity in a racist, classist system is hard work. But highly valuable and highly meaningful. Adapting to a new culture is not the same as assimilating into one. I never have liked assimilation. I do like and love acculturation. There is a significant difference between the two.[/i]

[Truth To Power]

I don't think that unconditional "love" is anything good or even desirable. You did a good job in describing the way a child "loves". You described it exactly the way I did, as shallow and self-serving, except you used prettier words.

There is also such a thing as bonding between a child and their parent, especially their mother.

To a child, a parent is nothing more than a collection of services.

No, the "services" are necessary but not sufficient. In the 19th century, some orphanages tried to raise young children by just providing the services, but the children failed to thrive without affection, and ultimately died even though they were fed, housed, etc.

Children are not even capable of perceiving the real person that operates beneath the "parent" role, let alone loving them.

They love the part they can understand. I have to admit I never really understood my parents until I had children of my own.

From a moral perspective, to have children is to almost necessarily put them in harm's way.

Sure, but to exist at all is to be in harm's way. Pretty much the worst harm that can happen to a child is that they die, and no longer exist: when you have a child, your heart is hostage to fate. But non-existence also describes all the children that were never born.

One should not put one's children in harm's way on purpose.

There is no other way to exist but in harm's way. For our remote ancestors, there was a 50:50 chance their newborn child would not make it to age 5. Taking that chance was the only way they could survive. Maybe you just mean parents should not expose their children to unreasonable hazards?

Therefore, if one truly cares about the well-being of their children, then simply not having them is the best option.

That is terribly confused. There is no such thing as the well-being of what does not exist.

[Rancid]

That last line is the problem he has. Lol.

And I have a problem with assimilation Rancid. They tried that in Puerto Rico, with Native Americans, African Americans, and many others they have seen as the outsiders in their own minds. The ones damaging Western Civilization. The primitive inferiors. The ones with a bad culture. The DUMB ones. Lol.

Because that is the reason all these poor backward nations are. They are poor and backward because they have the wrong colored people populating them. And assimilation is the goal. They need to think like white people to know that they are not white and therefore could never be part of the inside group. The ones who have the truth, the way and the light.

I think the error is to discard the original culture Rancid. You keep the wonder and the beauty of the original culture. You keep speaking Spanish, or Nahuatl, or Mayan, or French, or Patois Creole, or Italian, or Gaelic, or Lota, etc. You get an EDUCATION that is deep and well rounded. You study human history and you see that the supposedly story they tell you in these pro white only racially distorted class systems full of shit thoughts are not really superior.

You then, realize that all humanity has potential and has power. And you look for exalting the ones who are told their entire lives that they are nothing and will always be nothing. They start believing in themselves and start respecting their own power. They then become world citizens who do want the best for everyone and who think class systems are stupid in the extreme.

After all, you start off as a Puerto Rican, a Haitian, a Dominican, a Mexican, a ______________, fill in every nationality you can think of, and if you read, write, learn, process, analyze and work hard on knowledge, skills and focus your efforts on improving your life on all fronts, you wind up knowing that class systems and racist systems are just control systems that power groups impose on the groups they want to exploit.

You see through the bullshit and you make sure your children do not believe in such nonsense.

Class systems are shit Rancid. Just like racist thoughts. They are related. They always have been.

The Latin Americans and the Africans are a threat. Lol.

All people want to be themselves. Assimilating and becoming a white person is about rejecting [i]rejecting who you already are, and adopting an identity that is not organic to you. I would never recommend that to anyone. Keeping your original identity in a racist, classist system is hard work. But highly valuable and highly meaningful. Adapting to a new culture is not the same as assimilating into one. I never have liked assimilation. I do like and love acculturation. There is a significant difference between the two.[/i]

There's forced assimilation, and then there's natural assimilation. I'm referring to natural assimilation. Obviously, forced assimilation is going to have all sorts of issues. There is a long history of abuses and failures there. Still, these days, a lot of the assimilation happens naturally. By just growing up in the US, you end up adopting many of the cultural ideas/values/etc. Of course, in that process, those from different cultural backgrounds will imprint/influence some "old country" cultural ideas/values onto American culture, which... is fine. Food in America is much better now than it was with that boring ass white people meat and potatos shit.... This is the stuff that scares the likes of Puffer. I say, let it happen.

This natural assimilation happens all the time. Look at me, I'm pretty fucking American, and I'm also pretty sure I wasn't forced into this assimilation (beyond just being born in the US anyway). After all, I grew up in Miami. You can live in that city and never speak a word of English and get along just fine. Hell, I was required to take Spanish in the schools there from k-12. It's different today. Stuff like that isn't banned like it was in the past. That is what scares the shit out of Puffer. My point to him is, he shouldn't fear this, and it will make America better and stronger. He's just unhappy that maybe a few non-white people will raise to have money, power and education. I'm sure be supports book burning.

In Texas, Spanish was banned in the older generations, but things change. The older brown folks in Texas are shocked when they hear my son is in a public school with dual language program. He takes science and social studies strictly in Spanish. This is what scares the likes of Puffer. Still, what he misses is that my son, and those Spanish as a first language kids in his school, are all, still pretty fucking Americanized. THey are not going to turn the US into a 3rd world country like he thinks. Like the white nationalist wackos tell him.

[Rancid]

@Tainari88

I'm going to ask my wife, if I can impregnate a white woman so that I can strike fear into @Puffer Fish

How do you think that's going to work for me?

I'll wait for Puffer to make some comment about out of marriage children or something.

[Tainari88]

There's forced assimilation, and then there's natural assimilation. I'm referring to natural assimilation. Obviously, forced assimilation is going to have all sorts of issues. There is a long history of abuses and failures there. Still, these days, a lot of the assimilation happens naturally. By just growing up in the US, you end up adopting many of the cultural ideas/values/etc. Of course, in that process, those from different cultural backgrounds will imprint/influence some "old country" cultural ideas/values onto American culture, which... is fine. Food in America is much better now than it was with that boring ass white people meat and potatos shit.... This is the stuff that scares the likes of Puffer. I say, let it happen.

This natural assimilation happens all the time. Look at me, I'm pretty fucking American, and I'm also pretty sure I wasn't forced into this assimilation (beyond just being born in the US anyway). After all, I grew up in Miami. You can live in that city and never speak a word of English and get along just fine. Hell, I was required to take Spanish in the schools there from k-12. It's different today. Stuff like that isn't banned like it was in the past. That is what scares the shit out of Puffer. My point to him is, he shouldn't fear this, and it will make America better and stronger. He's just unhappy that maybe a few non-white people will raise to have money, power and education. I'm sure be supports book burning.

In Texas, Spanish was banned in the older generations, but things change. The older brown folks in Texas are shocked when they hear my son is in a public school with dual language program. He takes science and social studies strictly in Spanish. This is what scares the likes of Puffer. Still, what he misses is that my son, and those Spanish as a first language kids in his school, are all, still pretty fucking Americanized. THey are not going to turn the US into a 3rd world country like he thinks. Like the white nationalist wackos tell him.

You think that Miami bilingual ed stuff happened on its own volition Rancid? My mother was working on bilingual ed programs for Miami for years and years. It used to be sink or swim. Her life's work was creating a space for people to be able to have a home culture and a school culture that builds towards multilingualism, critical thinking, dual language immersion and also not getting rid of English or a competing culture or language but integrating a lot of cultures into a mix. The Swedish teach English and many foreign languages in their public school system. They build on Swedish, then add English, Russian, Danish, German, French, Italian, Spanish, etc in order to have flexible people as adults. It is not a threat to anyone. It is an asset. That was my mother's life work. The reason you and others have that option. In her day it was about being beaten physically in Texas for speaking Spanish, Comanche, Navajo, Lakota, etc. Be ashamed of being African American. You are from slaves, ignorance, and inferiority. It is literally beaten into your flesh with that system. My mother when she first arrived in the USA she went to public schools in NYC. This is in 1947.

What happened back then? They would give you a test and if you could not pass that test you were placed in Special Education classes with Down Syndrome kids or kids with brain damage. They saw your inability ot pick up English instantly as a deficit. A permanent flaw and unfixable. They would segregate you. My mother was in the special education classroom for years. Some teacher thought she read well and decided to test her. Again. She passed the dumb test. Do you know what it was?

Fuzzy wuzzy was a bear, fuzzy wuzzy had no hair, fuzzy wuzzy wasn't fuzzy was he? Lol. Tongue twister for native speakers. Give that to a kid off a boat, or plane from some foreign nation who's mother tongue is not English and see if they can pass that shit? Lol. It was ridiculous.

But that was the American system of education in 1947. It has changed. But it required work and fights from hell. I remember all of them she participated in Rancid. It required organization and fights. Government mentalities with racist people in charge of education departments like that Betsy De Voss asshole, have those old fashioned beliefs based on class privileges and tunnel vision about what being a real American is. They think it is about some Anglo values and Anglo history and speaking English only at home and at school, and being Christian, and being straight, and being wealthy, and being Protestant and who knows what other bullshit she believes.

They shape bad policy. That does not work for immigrant children or children who are not like her and her progeny. Most kids are not wealthy or privileged. They have working parents. They have another set of life experiences. You fail to validate those experiences in the curriculum you provide them? You alienate them completely. Who the hell is inspired in a school where your entire life's experiences are seen as inferior, something to be ashamed of, and you need to dump who you are in order to be a real American? It is ridiculous.

Assimilation is you denying who your parents were. Denying your experiences of listening to Wilfrido Vargas in your house, your grandparents raising you, your entire background and history and you change your first and last name, you adopt some Anglo name like John Baker. You refuse to think anything in Spanish or speak it. You feel deeply ashamed of it all. You drop the entire thing completely to be an idea of a real American. It is fucking INSANE.

Many Latinos I know who do that. They are ashamed of their roots. They have been taught that being Latin American is synonymous with sweat shop labor, dishwashers, toilet scrubbing low wage people who are mentally inferior, educationally lacking, and in terms of class they are the lowest on the totem pole in American class systems. Why? Because the USA has a long history of using Latin American labor for the hardest and lowest paid work in the USA. Hotel maids, restaurant short order cooks, dishwashers, landscape workers, office cleaners, crop pickers, etc. Low rung jobs. Nannies, etc. Who in the class system we live in are all the ones no one respects.

Class systems exist in all societies practically. A high status Mexican family will have live in maids and gardeners, etc. They do not associate themselves with Mexican equals inferior drug dealers and or toilet scrubbers. The Gringo system DOES DO THAT. Why? Because it has to justify exploitation. It has to.

Really thinking all people in every nationality and racial category are untapped human potential and really investing in PEOPLE in a fair and just way so that all have equal access to the resources that fit that individual's potential and giving them the tools needed and the encouragement needed to be as open to development as humanly possible is being AGAINST CLASS SYSTEMS. And we can not have that. It is communism, socialism, and the red scare. Lies. Kill them all. How dare they challenge such a great class based stupid ass waste of humanity system? Fuck all those socialist rabble.

Lol.

No, Rancid. I know exactly why they hate me so much and all of us who despise class systems. And the system is not about equality. The ones who support capitalist class systems are in every nation, every creed and every economic market system. It is a mentality and value system. A rotten one. And hard to eradicate. But if we do not work on challenging it? It will waste a lot of people. And waste a lot of resources keeping progress from happening.

They are fucked anyway. The majority of the young people who will be workers in the USA are going to come from Africa and Asia and Latin America. The European kids are not enough, and are stable economically. They do not want to come and waste time in the USA trying to go for a dream that they have attained in Europe already.

@Rancid what is being Americanized? Being good consumers, and believing in the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights?

If the US Congress took that shit seriously they would not be doing what they do to Puerto Rico and all the US unincorporated territories at all. No. But, the truth is they do not believe in it. That is why you got the issues you have now on the hill Rancid. If you allow a betrayal of the foundations of the US Constitution to stand for a long time? You allow a space for the ones who never believed in inclusion in a democratic republic to gain ground, power and influence. You undermine your own society.

That has happened to every Empire in human history. They all undermine themselves by betraying the principles that initially worked to convince others to give their labor and support to building their empire. The Mayan Empire used the religious worship of nature symbolized by Tlaloc, and other gods in the Mayan pantheon of gods to justify human sacrifice and charging taxes via food and resources from the less powerful groups in their surrounding areas of influence. As long as they had believers contributing and convinced that the sun would not rise without human lives being sacrificed, the system worked. Once the system broke down due to too many wars, too many people being resentful and the corruption of the leadership being extreme? The Spanish challenging a system they thought of as vulnerable and mistaken...they made their move. The Spanish were only 400 plus men and some horses. Muskets at the time were not that accurate. The Aztec and Mayan Empires were vast.

The system collapsed due to three factors. Disease of which the Europeans had brought and the Indian civvies had no immunity to combat against. The hatred of their oppressive practices created many internal and external enemies. And resources wasted on unnecessary wars and not being able to adapt to changing conditions in time. It led to a massive collapse.

You think in 2023 somehow the modern societies are immune from such human defective thinking ways eh? No, they are not Rancid.

Too many people thinking the American system is justified in their useless wars, their useless over consumption ideas, and their love of competing with others whom they use to boost their profits. Get all those desperate immigrants in here. Pay them low wages, make America great again. The native workers resent all that naked exploitation. The problem is that the USA needs a bit of international thinking and class solidarity. Not over patriotic jingoistic chauvinism.

That is due to badly educated people too.

[Tainari88]

@Tainari88

I'm going to ask my wife, if I can impregnate a white woman so that I can strike fear into @Puffer Fish

How do you think that's going to work for me?

I'll wait for Puffer to make some comment about out of marriage children or something.

Well, if you want this to happen to you at home? You are welcome to do so?

Rancid did you fuck that white woman who is pregnant?

Yes, I did. I had to make Puffer Fish upset. Pollute the purity of the white race by fucking and impregnating some Texas blonde redneck woman. Do my duty to racial mixing.

Oh really? It was to piss off some racist, rapist ideational delusional man on some random political website?

Yes, I think that is a rational course of action.

You do? Well I am going to go Bruce Lee on you? See if you are as good at defending white man shit as Chuck Norris in Return of the Dragon eh?

[Rancid]

You think that Miami bilingual ed stuff happened on its own volition Rancid?

You wrote a lot there. I'll just say. no, of course not. Many people before me suffered the brunt of forces assimilation, abuse, slavery, etc. etc. Something we should all appreciate and understand.

Things didn't improve for free. I understand that. People had to fight for this. That is not lost on me.

[Istanbuller]

As far as I know, African Muslims have the highest fertility rate right now across the globe. Muslims in Pakistan and İndia are just behind them.

[Tainari88]

Many animals naturally stop breeding when living in dense or overpopulated conditions that may not support additional life. The low birth rate of modern humans doesn't have to be selfish, hedonistic, or suicidal - but may be a natural response to current material conditions and population density. We can't all sustainably live at these numbers and at a Western quality of life.

Who says that childless individuals are necessarily acting against biological impulse? It may be an epigenetic response to industrial living conditions that will allow the human species to thrive long term by not exceeding the sustainable carrying capacity of our environment.

Yes that is true. But it is also true that hoarding resources generated by billions of workers who work and do not receive their just value in work and labor, and being squeezed a lot to the point of being forced out of their native lands and on boats, trains, automobiles and planes....to land in the first world countries with better economies is not a sustainable model over the long haul Fasces.

Creating stability in many nations and avoiding nuclear war, waste of resources, like clean water and efficient green energy policies, and housing that is affordable, and arable land to grow nutritious and high quality food on...is what will assure our survival into the future.

Thinking China might need to be bombed, Cuba invaded, Mexico drained of its young professional and educated people, and thinking the world needs to consume like some upper middle class American suburbanite on a world wide scale is highly unrealistic and not attainable.

Right now, the PRC has issues with young men of marriageable ages, wanting to be married to eligible Chinese women. They killed off a lot of female fetuses. They enforced the one child policy for all Han Chinese families until 2015. They have closed the pool of available women for many millions of Chinese men. Men who are not married and can't have sex, families and stability and responsibilities soon become problematic in the society as a whole.

They are going outside China looking for women.

Anything done artificially in a society based on prejudice, fears and lack of compassion and meeting human needs is not going to be balanced in this world.

All choices have consequences.

Killing off babies due to being female is one of them. Throws everything off balance. Trying to play catchup is hard.

That is true in many bad policies adopted by governments Fasces.

If Latin American nations develop enough to stem the tide of immigration? What is the US going to do then if it continues to have deficits of workers and immigrants? Want the world to continue to live in desperate circumstances?

No, you got to have worldwide policies that work to make a better country, society for everyone. In all levels of society. Class based systems with haves and have nots will never get that balance. Never. It is based on predatory crap. Predatory crap is not about balance it is about suicidal stuff.

Thus the mess we have today. Pollution. Storms. Deficits. Lacks, people fleeing en masse many nations for many reasons. Violence, deprivation, lack of opportunities, poverty, not having educations that are good, and not having basic needs met.

And people just continue to think not giving a fuck about the Third World is ok.

I do not know how to put it more simply.

You are part of them and they are a part of you. Neglect them and you neglect yourself.

It is about that. Always. Every choice has consequences. Bad policy in government programs give you bad results. Good policy gives you great results. It is about political will.

You either care or you don't. Be engaged or be indifferent. Let it go and it goes to shit, or be involved and it gets resolved.

[Puffer Fish]

Having children is an absolute SHIT deal for women (regardless of economic circumstances) and more and more of us are figuring it out. The list of reasons NOT to have kids is almost endless. Your move, boys.

The reasons why birth rates go down have to do with high costs of living, combined with (relatively) attractive job opportunities (outside the home) for women.

Also, I think, when the differential between male and female pay narrows, women have less children. When men can earn a lot more than women, then usually the man will work and the woman will take care of the home.

It has to do with "opportunity costs", or trade-offs.
Consider a case where the rent is 2500 a month but the woman can earn 5000 a month (if she works full time), versus a case where rent is only 900 a month but the woman can only earn 1800 a month (if she works full time). In the second case, the woman will be more likely to not work so much, even if that will mean she lives in poverty. Notice how the ratio of housing expenses to potential income still remains the same in both cases. In the second case, the woman will only need enough money to pay the small amount of rent (and basic living expenses), but then is not very incentivized to earn more money than that. In the first case, the woman could not even afford to live there if she only worked half-time.
Assuming that both women are earning (or provided with) enough to pay for their basic housing and living expenses, the woman who earns more money has more to gain by working more hours. (Or rather it could be said that the woman earning less has less to lose by working less hours)

[MistyTiger]

Did anyone mention infertility in men and women? Environmental hazards such as processed foods and drinks, sedentary lifestyles, pollution caused by lawn chemicals can lead to infertility. Energy drinks and processed foods have also been shown to play a factor in men going bald in their 20s and 30s, used to happen in just the 40s and 50s. I noticed the early balding and receding hair lines at my old job.

Environment plays such a huge factor.