The white plague.

[____no5]

Couples in less developed countries, on the other hand, have adopted a reproductive strategy which is a little different. Because babies are more likely to die there, they feel that they need to have many of them....

it's bit silly this thing....
this "strategy" as you call it is much more natural than you think.....Everywhere in the animals the strong animal make fewer babies than less strong (lion -rabbit)

in the plants, the same (a ganja tree with a lot of seeds is worst than another with a few)

c'mon it's not a strategy, it's more natural than consious

 

[SinisterMinisterX]

Duke's terminology is correct, no5. "Reproductive strategy" is what biologists call it when discussing evolution. It is not meant to imply that the strategy was chosen consciously by the reproducing being; rather, it was "chosen" by evolution. Granted, the term can be misleading, given the usual meaning of "strategy". However, in the language of biology, the Duke is correct.

 

[Onhell]

Not to mention humans are hypothetically thinking beings so to some this is a thought out strategy...

 

[Urizen]

We could examine this from an evolutionary perspective:
It could be that people in developed countries (i.e. White countries plus Japan) are having fewer children in order to take car eof them better. A couple in the West and Japan can have one baby and be reasonably sure that their genes will be passed on with little to no chance of that baby dying. Therefore, they can devote much greater resources to that single kid (or perhaps even two kids), ensuring that it has a much, much greater quality of life.

Couples in less developed countries, on the other hand, have adopted a reproductive strategy which is a little different. Because babies are more likely to die there, they feel that they need to have many of them. Therefore, they can devote fewer resources and less energy to each individual offspring, but with so many of them the chances are that at least one will surrvive into adulthood.

When people from third-world countries move to the first world, it takes a few generations for them to be fully integrated into the adoptive society, ergo they maintain their third-world reproductive strategy. Human beings are, after all, just another critter which operates under the same evolutionary rules as all critters. We may build up powerful social structures because we're smarter than most animals, but in the end we're just hairless chimpanzees.

Yes, I see what you mean, I've already stated 'the less of them you have the more you can offer them' way of thinking as a reason for lower birth rates.
But what you say about couples in less developed countries having more babies is questionable. I know my country, and in Serbia the population is shrinking and yet we are considered as a less developed country. The same, if we talk about the life standards when regarding the development of a country, could be said for Russia who loses as I said 500 000- 1000 000 citizens every year. This is because in these countries(Serbia, Russia) that are not considered by any means to be third world and also not for example like Sweden or the U.S., finances(low average salary) are often cited by couples as a reason for not having more children.

And in my personal opinion and from experience, couples in high life standards countries of the West and Japan should rethink their decisions of having just one child to which they would offer full attention and resources, because it can lead to a spoiled child or one not tough enough due to all the attention it got. It can make the child less knowledgeable of taking care for itself in the future- this is at least what I saw happening in Serbia at least sometimes. I'm not sure how it is in the other countries. And the couples who opt for just one child as to ensure the passing of their one genes should think of the saying "One is for God and the other for the parents"- this is an old saying of course, but it serves as a warning that if you have only one child something can happen to it when it's say, 19 and then you'll probably be too old to have another one.

Ha, I just remembered of something which could be related to this thread I've read in a novel about a Serbian family in the 19th century: When a granddaughter asked her grandma about giving birth, she said 'well, we Serbian women always had 4 or 5 children, two or three would be cut down by Turkish blades and the rest would continue the household and the family name'.

 

[Natalie]

Wow, this thread got heated back there. Anyway, as I said earlier, I can understand why Urizen is addressing this subject because in Europe it is an issue. I will be bold now and say that it is not due to racism so much as a feeling of national pride (in my opinion). I know from listening to many Austrians and from seeing the political campaigns of the far-right party here (Austria) that many people are concerned with increasing immigration and a decreasing population of 'pure' Austrians. By pure I mean non-immigrants, white, and not workers from the East. The Europeans (I think) are afraid of becoming out-numbered at home. Since I like to be 'nice' I will say that this discomfort could be simply because everyone wants to belong to a group, and if the group you belong to is becoming smaller and smaller, you start to panic. Then again, you could also contribute this discomfort to over-weaning national pride, and yes, racism. Many Austrians (I have observed) consider immigrants to be undesirable and less good than themselves. However, this does not change the fact that the decreasing population in Europe is a problem, because it is a problem in the sense that it is an issue with which the Europeans are very concerned. Whether they are concerned with it because of racism, or because it deserves to be an issue (as opposed to AIDS in Africa which is no doubt a problem), is another matter. There, my opinion for one and all.

Disclaimer: I do not support either Onhell or Urizen. I am unaffiliated with any political party. I am capable of having an own opinion. I am short. I am Swedish. This last statement may explain anything confusing in my post.

 

[Urizen]

Anyway, as I said earlier, I can understand why Urizen is addressing this subject because in Europe it is an issue. I will be bold now and say that it is not due to racism so much as a feeling of national pride (in my opinion). The Europeans (I think) are afraid of becoming out-numbered at home. Since I like to be 'nice' I will say that this discomfort could be simply because everyone wants to belong to a group, and if the group you belong to is becoming smaller and smaller, you start to panic.

I think you are right about this. The shrinkenining of a group to which one belongs causes concern, and it is only natural that it does.

 

[Forostar]

"White" plague, "White" countries, "white" races.

I live in a very multicultural country: The Netherlands. One of its cities (Rotterdam) contains 160(!) different nationalities.

I don't see the point of talking about white "whatever" when the subject is actually concerning our whole country. There's no necessity to split it up in different races, cultures, colours or whatever.

People are people. And there are a hell of a lot of different ones in one country.

This is what's going on and there's no word about different races, colours or whatever white crap involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_ageing

 

[____no5]

"White" plague, "White" countries, "white" races.

I live in a very multicultural country: The Netherlands. One of its cities (Rotterdam) contains 160(!) different nationalities.

very nice all these, just a question : how many of these 160 nationalities have representation to the goverment ?
don't be a child, you see black officers in Netherlands but I don't remember any black president in European histopry

 

[Forostar]

very nice all these,

Indeed, isn't it?

just a question : how many of these 160 nationalities have representation to the goverment ?
don't be a child, you see black officers in Netherlands but I don't remember any black president in European histopry

Before I might go deeper into this:
What are you trying to prove or say?

 

[Genghis Khan]

Genghis you finally have a decent avatar to go with your nickname.

Eh!  I've had that one lying about for a while.  I finally got over my Arizona nostalgia and decided to remove the vacation photographs. 

Anyway, back to the point.

Not to mention humans are hypothetically thinking beings so to some this is a thought out strategy...

"Hypothetically" as in "they're supposed to be". 

Even though I agree with Duke's point, I think Onhell has a better answer.  Our evolutionary past is definitely tied to that of the chimpanzees, but our instincts alone are not enough for survival.  Our societies have developed so much in complexity and the only way to survive is to think with our large brains.  Unfortunately, many humans do not do that.  If instincts was all it took to survive, human cultures would not vary so much.  After all, despite many cultural differences, all humans are one species.

Yes, I see what you mean, I've already stated 'the less of them you have the more you can offer them' way of thinking as a reason for lower birth rates.
But what you say about couples in less developed countries having more babies is questionable. I know my country, and in Serbia the population is shrinking and yet we are considered as a less developed country. The same, if we talk about the life standards when regarding the development of a country, could be said for Russia who loses as I said 500 000- 1000 000 citizens every year. This is because in these countries(Serbia, Russia) that are not considered by any means to be third world and also not for example like Sweden or the U.S., finances(low average salary) are often cited by couples as a reason for not having more children.

That is a good point.  Culture itself plays a role.

And in my personal opinion and from experience, couples in high life standards countries of the West and Japan should rethink their decisions of having just one child to which they would offer full attention and resources, because it can lead to a spoiled child or one not tough enough due to all the attention it got. It can make the child less knowledgeable of taking care for itself in the future- this is at least what I saw happening in Serbia at least sometimes. I'm not sure how it is in the other countries. And the couples who opt for just one child as to ensure the passing of their one genes should think of the saying "One is for God and the other for the parents"- this is an old saying of course, but it serves as a warning that if you have only one child something can happen to it when it's say, 19 and then you'll probably be too old to have another one.

I'm going to get intimate here.  Sorry.  My girlfriend and I were talking about kids last night.  She was of the opinion that having one child would be detrimental to the only-child because s/he would not learn proper socialization.  This is similar to what you're saying.

Wow, this thread got heated back there. Anyway, as I said earlier, I can understand why Urizen is addressing this subject because in Europe it is an issue. I will be bold now and say that it is not due to racism so much as a feeling of national pride (in my opinion). I know from listening to many Austrians and from seeing the political campaigns of the far-right party here (Austria) that many people are concerned with increasing immigration and a decreasing population of 'pure' Austrians. By pure I mean non-immigrants, white, and not workers from the East. The Europeans (I think) are afraid of becoming out-numbered at home. Since I like to be 'nice' I will say that this discomfort could be simply because everyone wants to belong to a group, and if the group you belong to is becoming smaller and smaller, you start to panic. Then again, you could also contribute this discomfort to over-weaning national pride, and yes, racism. Many Austrians (I have observed) consider immigrants to be undesirable and less good than themselves. However, this does not change the fact that the decreasing population in Europe is a problem, because it is a problem in the sense that it is an issue with which the Europeans are very concerned. Whether they are concerned with it because of racism, or because it deserves to be an issue (as opposed to AIDS in Africa which is no doubt a problem), is another matter. There, my opinion for one and all.

Disclaimer: I do not support either Onhell or Urizen. I am unaffiliated with any political party. I am capable of having an own opinion. I am short. I am Swedish. This last statement may explain anything confusing in my post.

I do not relate to this "belonging to a national/ethnic group" feeling.  I have always sought out people whose ideas about the world are akin to mine, regardless of their ethnicity or cultural background.  I was born in Croatia, but I do not relate to the big "Croatian feeling" that many Croatians in southern Ontario clearly feel.  I have had many Croatian friends as a teenager mostly because we met through our parents, but now, I must say, I'm not close to any of them because we have very little in common.  I realize that I'm probably in the minority in this regard.

Also, my father has always pressured me to hang out more with the Croatian crowd because my best friend who is Polish would "eventually forget me and start hanging out with Polish people".  That's sad.    Being the stubborn guy I am, I ignored him every time. 



A question for everybody:
The articles provided by Perun and Marcus discuss that many women still feel they live in a sexist society, where their dual roles as a mother and a career women are viewed as inimical or irreconcilable by society at large.  Onhell also brought this up in a more specific example.  This discernible contradiction in the west and Japan is apparently, at least partially, responsible for declining fertility rates.

What do the rest of you think of this conclusion?  In your experience, are women unjustifiably forced to choose family over work or vice versa?  Well, we all now know that this is not the case in Sweden (thanks to Anomica), but what about the rest of the countries? 

I did some digging for Japan on the internet and found this.  That is a clear case of sexism and the article recapitulates everything I know about Japan's social system.

 

[____no5]

Before I might go deeper into this:
What are you trying to prove or say?

that "White" plague, "White" countries, "white" races exists even in societies like Rotterdam's ...
....this "multi population" there are the workers,
some of them (2nd and 3rd generations usualy) adopt the "white" culture
but in fact they still living in their lost countries....that's all for the moment

to be faire to your country I recognize that its hospitality conditions are of the best globaly

-but Holland is a white country ....still

 

[Onhell]

And in my personal opinion and from experience, couples in high life standards countries of the West and Japan should rethink their decisions of having just one child to which they would offer full attention and resources, because it can lead to a spoiled child or one not tough enough due to all the attention it got. It can make the child less knowledgeable of taking care for itself in the future- this is at least what I saw happening in Serbia at least sometimes. I'm not sure how it is in the other countries. And the couples who opt for just one child as to ensure the passing of their one genes should think of the saying "One is for God and the other for the parents"- this is an old saying of course, but it serves as a warning that if you have only one child something can happen to it when it's say, 19 and then you'll probably be too old to have another one.

Personal experiance is hardly an objective way to view an issue, while it helps and at times can be correct, for the most part it doesn't yield generalities. Spoiled children can be only children or in a family of 17 (I too have personal examples), and this idea that it would be detrimental to them (the only-children) is rather ridiculous. They still go to school, clubs (as in extracurricular activities, not night clubs, but those too.) In other words children are socialized not only by the parents, but by the community as well. If the community encourages this "spoiled" behavior, the person will never learn. Paris Hilton anyone?

 

[Anomica]

A question for everybody:
The articles provided by Perun and Marcus discuss that many women still feel they live in a sexist society, where their dual roles as a mother and a career women are viewed as inimical or irreconcilable by society at large.  Onhell also brought this up in a more specific example.  This discernible contradiction in the west and Japan is apparently, at least partially, responsible for declining fertility rates.

What do the rest of you think of this conclusion?  In your experience, are women unjustifiably forced to choose family over work or vice versa?  Well, we all now know that this is not the case in Sweden (thanks to Anomica), but what about the rest of the countries? 

I did some digging for Japan on the internet and found this.  That is a clear case of sexism and the article recapitulates everything I know about Japan's social system.

Sweden too is a sexist society. Just because some things are being taken care of doesn't mean that there aren't other problem areas. Maternity leave vs. paternity leave...can anybody guess who takes the longer time off work? Right, the mother of course. Why, is it because the father is incapable of taking care of his child? No way i hell! As long as breast feeding is done, there is nothing that shows that the mother is the better care taker, except when scientists who, knowingly or naively are running the errands of some political agenda. It's all about making women feel ashamed about being egotists and wanting a career when they have small children at home. If women are made to feel ashamed about this, they'll stop their career voluntarily and stay at home with the kids. Great, huh? This is similar all over Europe and North America, I believe. Sweden hasn't come very far when it comes to equal opportunities, not between the sexes, and not between people of different ethnic/cultural backgrounds. Few women in the board rooms, few people of colour there as well. Mostly, it's middle-aged (50-60s), middle class, white men - no women, no immigrants regardless of how long they've been in the country. White, middle-aged, middle class men.

Don't give us credit where it isn't due. In many ways, Sweden is a very progressive country but that doesn't mean that everything is good. Most things are headed in the right direction, though...but Canada or Holland are way ahead of us when it comes to racial bigotry, and USA have come further when it comes to equality in the workplace in many matters.

 

[Forostar]

that "White" plague, "White" countries, "white" races exists even in societies like Rotterdam's ...
....this "multi population" there are the workers,
some of them (2nd and 3rd generations usualy) adopt the "white" culture
but in fact they still living in their lost countries....that's all for the moment

-but Holland is a white country ....still

I disagree with these bold statements but that's because I know more of my own country than you do. I watch TV, follow debates and in all layers of our society I see a mix of people, coming from varous countries and cultures.
This mix can be seen in a lot of political parties as well !

It’s true that natives (we call it ‘autochtone’ people’) are relatively higher educated than allochtone people ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allochtoon ), but this has more to do with adaption, (parental) education, acceptance, tolerance, integration, polarization, segregation and discrimination.

I have to admit that discrimination plays a role in job applications. It’s hard to prove but when people want a job and use their e.g. Maroccan or Turkish (a Muslim) name, it might be the case that there won’t be a serious interest for this person. A solution for this discrimination could be the following: Companies should accept anonymous writings and things should be controlled more often.

However, if people think that skin colour influences intelligence or wisdom, that would be a very pure racist thought.

That’s why I prefer more subtle terms such as education, integration, polarization, segregation and discrimination, instead of skin colours.

 

[Urizen]

I've heard there is a political party in Holland whose sole goal is to make pedophilia legal.

"White" plague, "White" countries, "white" races.

I live in a very multicultural country: The Netherlands. One of its cities (Rotterdam) contains 160(!) different nationalities.

I don't see the point of talking about white "whatever" when the subject is actually concerning our whole country. There's no necessity to split it up in different races, cultures, colours or whatever.

You mean your whole country, right? There is need to talk about white people because as I have several times explained, they are the ones most affected by low birth rates, that is why it's called 'white plague'. Now I guess ethnic minorities in where you live are also experiencing low birth rates? Or maybe ethnic minorities in whole Europe are faced with this? I'm not sure, but if anyone knows about this, he should post it, and we'll discuss it.

To Genghis: In what part of Croatia were you born, 'cause my father is a Dalmatian (not the dog race , it's a coastline region).

 

[Forostar]

I've heard there is a political party in Holland whose sole goal is to make pedophilia legal.

Old news. The party doesn't exist anymore and besides that: it was never chosen in any parlament.

You mean your whole country, right? There is need to talk about white people because as I have several times explained, they are the ones most affected by low birth rates. Now I guess ethnic minorities in where you live are also experiencing low birth rates? Or maybe ethnic minorities in whole Europe are faced with this? I'm not sure, but if anyone knows about this, he should post it, and we'll discuss it.

I don't find the matter interesting enough to bring it up. Skin colour shouldn't be brought up toomuch in these matters imo. It's not scientific. I haven't seen a word of proof either, from your side.

Do your best yourself and perhaps I'll react ;-)

 

[Urizen]

You mean proof for the low birth rates, and how they affect mostly whites and Japanese? It's well known, just look at Perun's links in his post on the first page of this thread, or if you want see for yourself, type 'white plague' or 'population decline' on Google search.

 

[____no5]

I disagree with these bold statements but that's because I know more of my own country than you do. I watch TV, follow debates and in all layers of our society I see a mix of people, coming from varous countries and cultures.
This mix can be seen in a lot of political parties as well !

It’s true that natives (we call it ‘autochtone’ people’) are relatively higher educated than allochtone people ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allochtoon ), but this has more to do with adaption, (parental) education, acceptance, tolerance, integration, polarization, segregation and discrimination.

I have to admit that discrimination plays a role in job applications. It’s hard to prove but when people want a job and use their e.g. Maroccan or Turkish (a Muslim) name, it might be the case that there won’t be a serious interest for this person. A solution for this discrimination could be the following: Companies should accept anonymous writings and things should be controlled more often.

However, if people think that skin colour influences intelligence or wisdom, that would be a very pure racist thought.

That’s why I prefer more subtle terms such as education, integration, polarization, segregation and discrimination, instead of skin colours.

they are not so bold my sayings, they come from dissapointment
Holland she was a symbol to me -with a very good sense- so much that I started to learn Dutch
and tried to move there

Now, I don't have illusions, I accept it's good -considering and comparing the situation in global basis- there
but not so good as people like you with apparently good heart
and humanist visions want to believe

....yes, the yound Dutch people are very interesting maybe the most interesting thing in this country
but the Dutch that hold the keys, the employers, not so
the final result of this to the eyes and the heart of a stranger is not so encouraging

 

[Forostar]

You mean proof for the low birth rates, and how they affect mostly whites and Japanese? It's well known, just look at Perun's links in his post on the first page of this thread, or if you want see for yourself, type 'white plague' or 'population decline' on Google search.

Checked Perun's pages and searched for the word "white". As expected: ZERO results.

 

[Urizen]

Who do you think lives in Russia, Italy, Germany, Sweden... Guess what? Whites, mostly.