The youth are the future of any nation, but what happens when the youth are no more? That is something which the US is experiencing as one million fewer youth are alive today than ten years ago, most likely because people are not having children.
The United States has 1.14 million fewer young people going into 2020 than it did in 2010, according to an analysis of new Census data by the Brookings Institution’s William Frey.
Frey noted that while the adult population grew by 8.8 percent between 2010 and 2019, the youth population did not increase as it had in the three previous decades. The “under 18” population nosedived in a state of “absolute decline” in the past decade.
“The decade’s patterns reveal a nation with unprecedented growth stagnation, an absolute decline in its under-18 youth population,” the report states, adding a little later: “The 2010s was a decade of fewer births, more deaths, and uneven immigration.”
“One symptom of the aging population is the decade-wide loss in young people under age 18,” the report states. “Between 2010 and 2019, the nation sustained an absolute decline of 1.14 million youth. Some of this change can be attributed to lower fertility rates and the aging into adulthood of the last of the millennial population, though census projections show older populations—especially those over age 65—will display far higher rates of growth than youth.”
Moreover, current Census data revealed that under-18s made up 22 percent of the country’s total population in 2019, a drop from 28 percent in the 1980s, a figure reported by the Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics.
The trend of vanishing kids was most marked in Vermont, New Hampshire, and Connecticut, where the child and teen population dropped some 11 to 12 percent between 2010 and 2019.
“This isn’t the first decade of child population decline,” demographer Frey told Axios. “But it ushers in a period when adult growth will continue to dwarf child growth as the population ages and proportionately fewer women are in their child bearing ages.”
The situation is dire, warned Steve Mosher, president of the Virginia-based Population Research Institute.
“Children are the only future a family has. Indeed, they are the only future a nation has. And we are simply having too few children. We need to turn this around, and quickly,” he told LifeSiteNews.
“We need to offer positive encouragement to young couples to get married and have children. And we need to address the three things that stand in the way of this happening,” Mosher said. (source)
Let’s put this into the current discussion about refugees.
The total fertility rate has fallen to below 1.7 in the US. This includes all ethnicities and immigration. While fertility has declined for all groups, it is lowest for Asians and non-hispanic Whites, with Hispanics almost at replacement rate. America, like many nations in the Western world, is entering into a period of serious decline because of this, for a nation that does not have children will eventually be overrun and overtaken by those who have children. This is something that I have consistently warned about with regard to Russia, whose population is 43% of the US but is losing massive numbers of people, in particular the Slavic Russians, while the only groups whose populations are either stable or increasing are the Muslim Caucasian and Siberian Turkic peoples. Meanwhile, the nations of sub-saharan Africa and parts of the Middle East are where families are exploding in size.
Truly, there is an “African invasion” as well as one from other proportionately-younger and more fertile peoples in Asia and the Middle East not because of any sort of planned secret military operation with an inherently subversive purpose, but because of natural reasons.
Given a natural population increase, if one cannot secure work or economic means in one’s area, then people will naturally diffuse to other areas seeking work and opportunity. This is not particular to any single race or group, but to all cultures throughout history. Indeed, the Portuguese and Spanish did not populate the Americas, the Dutch for Southern Africa, or the French and Anglo-Saxons the globe, on a population deficit. Many times, the “undesirables” were exported, but so did many people leave of their own will to seek their fortunes. Other times, such as with the Irish and the great starvation by way of the Potato famine and British agricultural policies, or Poles living in Prussia during the years of the Kulturkampf, or Jews fleeing the Pale of Settlement regions, some people came because of real persecution.
It does not matter how people come because any group of people who settles into an area in large numbers changes it. One can debate the nature of the change, but the fact is that a group of people looking for work and a home will seek out areas that need workers and have homes available. These people will in turn change entire societies as a result of their movement.
I mention the issue of race here specifically to address the alt-right/neoconservative/new right mantra about refugees and “Africans” to note that any issues regarding population in the Western world are entirely self-inflicted. It is true that if people do not have children and a large group of a different kind of people moves in that an area will change, and change happens throughout history. However, if this were to take place on the level of a whole society, the whole society has the potential to change massively, and such changes do not often happen without serious internal issues.
The fact is that since the early part of the 20th century, a large number of people in the Western world stopped reproducing. There were periods of increase, but since the proliferation of birth control and other contraceptive means, many of which started in the Western World for eugenics, have had the greatest effects on the Western world.
It is not the fault of the Africans, Arabs, or the government for the European and American refusal to have children. This is purely an act of self-indulgence, as many would rather travel the world in luxury and live a life of comfort. Meanwhile, the poor Africans and other peoples, by having many children, have unintentionally created the replacements for the generations of willingly childless or child-deficient.
This is not to say that what is happening is good or not, but it is the acknowledgment of a simple reality that few wish to grasp, for while change always happens, massive and systemic change does not happen without a serious abdication of responsibility.
The “answer” to the issues is very simple, and could be solved arguably in a generation, with simply having children. Put away the fancy houses, yearly vacations, and other indulgent things, and have children. Lots of them- as many as one can have. The population problem would be fixed without a fight.
But this is not going to happen because most people in the Western world would rather choose indulgence. They want to live fancy and luxurious lives, and while a little luxury is the spice of life, it is the continual choices for opulence- even basic opulence -that makes for social decline if done too long.
For many years, people excoriated the poor Scot-Irish peoples of Appalachia for having “too many children,” but were they wrong for having children? Were they genuinely caring for those people, or were they afraid they might “take over”, and yet while the same people who encouraged their destruction also did not want to have children themselves? The same can be said of the American blacks, who also had many children once upon a time. Indeed, if neither group had accepted the eugenics promoted to them by the so-called “coastal elites,” it is likely that between those two and the immigrant populations they would have overtaken the nation naturally.
God said in the Book of Genesis to “be fruitful and multiply”. If a man does not want to reproduce, what he has naturally will pass to another person, to those who have heirs to receive it. This is what is happening with the Western world, for having rejected God and refused to have children, her heritage is passing from her to other peoples, and not because of the fault of the other peoples, but because she made a choice and now is being forced to receive the consequences yet still refuses to change her behavior.