Have you read The Son Also Rises? (No, not Hemmingway) Basically a whole book on this sort of question
I think you'd love it.
https://www.amazon.com/Son-Also-Rises-Surnames-Princeton/dp/0691168377
>Also if conservatism over time gets more and more dominant genetically then over human history, which is long, we'd see zero liberals today, but there are many liberals
Not really, it goes in cycles dictated by the environment. The general "liberal" mindset proliferates in times and places of relative material abundance and low mortality, and it lasts a couple of generations before either being bread out of existence, or outcompeted by neighboring tribes, due to its intrinsic lower biological fitness. Although this has happened before in history, it never happened at the present scale, due to the facilities permitted by the industrial revolution.
A sort of conservative demographic revolution is expected to hit in 50 years from now, as I have posted about here. If you are interested, check the book "The Past is a Future Country".
Hey folks, this topic of conservatives outbreeding liberals is talked about on a recent book: "The Past is a Future Country: The Coming Conservative Demographic Revolution", by Edward Dutton. I do recommend.
Those who do not have access can (legally) download a copy here.
There is zero evidence that the world is running out of people. Globally, we haven't even begun declining.
It's a nice bit of misdirection to bring up naïve extrapolation and wonder if I'm a gravity-denier.
It's ok for you to admit error. No one will think that this will invalidate everything you have to say in the future.
I am not sure if you mean some babies will not get born who would have got born, if Brexit had never happened, or, if the EU birth number simply is reduced because the UK births aren't counted any more as EU births.
Will Brexit actually decrease births?
Or just how they are counted?
It is probably impossible to predict.
The plain fact of the matter is women of childbearing years have been told they must produce something else besides children, whether they also produce children or they do not. They have been impressed into the paid and taxed labor pool.
That started out as optional and has of course become mandatory. Then there is "daycare" where the care of children is sub-contracted to OTHER women usually ALSO of childbearing age, whose children are also in daycare somewhere.... it's a hall of mirrors. At the end of the hall is somebody's unemployable relative, watching some daycare worker's children for free.
Granny. The elusive Granny in the Mist, the last stay at home mother. The last mother who is spared the requirement to labor as paid and taxed labor.
This piece might interest. I have not read it. It never, ever questions whether the human animal might not want to be raised by his actual mother instead of a kindly, skilled, trained complete stranger.
Cool book I found about Mexican and Belizian mennonites:
https://www.amazon.com/They-Sought-Country-Mennonite-Colonization/dp/0520017048
It answered a ton of my questions about their history and origins.
https://www.amazon.com.br/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/0060556579
Never heard of mgtow, what I've read is an evolutionary book about sex and evolution of human nature. Also, it's simple Bateman's principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bateman%27s_principle
Males compete for females because of the differences in investment of children. That's why men want power and women want beauty, there are exceptions of course.
Very good point.
Probably the only positive portayal of a large family, outside of a religious context, I've ever seen is this book: http://www.amazon.com/Seventeen-Little-Miracles-Success-Children/dp/0963159364/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447870084&sr=8-1&keywords=seventeen+little+miricals
We need more like that.