There is no indication that birth rates are going to stabilize, let alone recover, anywhere. Only Israel and Georgia (?) look like even half-way exceptions.
Unless they drastically and rapidly change, the 21st century will be the century of unbelievable aging and depopulation.
Based on these latest fertility numbers, we can expect the drop in new people in 100 years to be the following: USA (-47%), France (-46%), Russia (-65%), Germany (-68%), Italy (-78%), Japan (-81%), China (-88%), Thailand (-89%).
Turkey, UK, Mexico, etc. all similar.
People haven't really integrated what this means for our civilization, industrial society, and the progress of history because it's too big to wrap your head around.
I think what it means is that our civilization is about to collapse. Meaning sometime before 2200.
It is in every practical sense numerically *impossible* for immigration to fix this. You can't "make up the difference" with immigration when the difference is 50%+ of an entire generation. Especially not if you're China or the EU and your shortfall is in 100s of millions.
People still haven't updated on how rapidly fertility rates in the developing world are falling either. In 2022 already, Brazil was at 1.6, Mexico 1.8, India 2.0, Turkey 1.9, etc.
Numbers above say *Chile* is now at *0.88.* Thailand is at 0.95! What is happening!
The Danish population of Denmark hasn't changed a whit since 1980—44 years ago, or, you know, half a century.
The entire population growth in Denmark since 1980 has been immigrants. I bet this holds for many other countries too. Which means...
...the entire functioning of the quasi-redistributive quasi-capitalist system we have in Europe and North America has been subsidized by immigration for half a century already, while the previous population has stagnated and aged.
The system has been non-functional for decades.
There is no way to sustain the stack of institutions behind our version of modern industrial society when the next generations are collapsing by 50%+. It is as numerically impossible as throwing more immigrants at the problem. The math doesn't add up.
There is a strong psychological need to believe in utopian or apocalyptic visions of the near future, like AI doom/acc or imminent WW3 or ecological catastrophe, because the alternative is staring our incomprehensibly pathetic civilizational population collapse in the face.
I don't expect the dead players and bureaucrats to leap at opportunities for reform, but I think it's a catastrophic distraction for live players and independent thinkers, especially in tech, to forget that the straightforward solution is societal reform.
The solution isn't to hope we can build an AI who will solve all our problems for us or subsidize our incoherent, sociobiologically insolvent system with our wacky technology, the solution is coming up with a new, functional plan for organizing industrial societies.
People used to think that surely the low fertility rates of Asia would stabilize at, like, 1.1 at absolute minimum.
Nope. South Korea (population of 50 million) is now at 0.68. Others following. As @SamoBurja says, no reason not to expect 0.0 TFR societies in the near future.
If we fumble a much-needed reform of industrial society by 2100 or so, I think we miss our opportunity to establish permanent settlements in the Solar System and thus our chance at the stars down the line. It closes the book on that for us. Maybe in another 1000 years.
Everyone proposing to save the day with robots, AI, artificial wombs, longevity, or whatever other speculative wacky tech solution is proposing to do a great favor to the bad and broken system that brought us here.
The system needs reform, not more subsidy. Ideas, not tech.
The global economy and industrial/post-industrial standard of living, and all its attendant social norms, relies on a tremendous scale of population to be viable.
I don't think it's viable anymore when South Korea has 5 million people instead of 50 million.
I'm working on what I think will be a solution to industrial civilization's fertility problem. It's not a quick or easy problem. I published the first piece here in @palladiummag:
Also worth reading (and subscribing to!) @bismarckanlys Brief, which investigated India's rapidly falling fertility rates and near-future population stagnation here: brief.bismarckanalysis.com/p/fewer-than-o…
There is a personal upside to civilization-scale population collapse. If you are one of the few people to prioritize high fertility, your children and grandchildren will inherit a world:
Unfounded hope that fertility is a self-correcting problem, yet as @Empty_America is fond of pointing out, falling populations congregate in low-fertility cities even harder. They don't spread out to areas with cheap homes and fruitfully multiply!
If cheap homes attracted young people who automatically used them to be fecund according to some Malthusian logic, it would have happened already in places like rural America or Italy. The opposite is happening.
If you enjoyed these insights or wish to support further research on solving the problems raised herein, I warmly invite you to become a paid subscriber to @bismarckanlys Brief.
One underexplored aspect of the population collapse crisis is how many developing countries simply have fraudulent population numbers for various reasons.
Nigeria's population may be overstated by as much as double.
Every week, Bismarck Brief sends paid subscribers a new in-depth investigation of the strategy of a key institution, industry, or influential individual, from China to Silicon Valley.
Finding solutions to civilization-scale threats like the imminent demographic collapse is part of our daily work at @bismarckanlys. Make sure to follow our founder and president @SamoBurja and my colleagues @benlandautaylor and @RianCFFWhitton to stay up to date on our work!
Indeed. We could call the current demographic collapse trajectory "the Thanos Plan." Many think it will turn out very well, strangely enough. But maybe we shouldn't Thanos ourselves.
The purpose of dysfunctional migrants in every country is to create problems that justify bureaucratic budgets for upper-class college-educated white people to give themselves no-show e-mail jobs safe from market forces. Also those migrants vote for continuing the system.
The way to solve this problem would be to give upper-class college-educated white people no-show e-mail jobs safe from market forces by fiat. But there are too many people who want such jobs now. So the actual solution is to aggressively remove the status of no-show e-mail jobs.
The only conceivable way to aggressively remove the status of no-show e-mail jobs is to inspire our elites to want to expand across space and time rather than die comfortably alone after a lifetime of petty status games.
It seems like this is the actual plan of all governments in the developed world. No need to ask hard questions or commit to major reforms when you can just spam Indians until GDP is up 500% just from population growth and establishment parties get 99% of the vote.
There really seems to be no solving this without completely breaking out of the modern social-democratic post-industrial paradigm of governance. The fundamental driver of mass immigration is the same as that of money-printing and deindustrialization... civilizational laziness.
The reason nobody turns off the mass immigration is the same reason nobody stops printing money or selling off industry to China. Because everybody just wants to be a lazy retired Boomer going on cruises while somebody else does the hard work. Or a lazy Millennial on DoorDash.
The bear case for AI is that bringing 10x or 100x or 1000x more intelligence to America will not change anything because U.S. institutions are already designed to ignore or waste intelligence and have no idea what to do with any more of it. Unemployed AIs making video essays.
AI is not going to bring us post-scarcity, because we have had post-scarcity for a century. A world where nobody has to work is going to be a world where everyone can and will devote 100% of their time and energy to politics. It won't be peaceful.
There is no level of AI advancement that will make it possible for hard-working AIs to build more housing in California, until we are talking AIs smart enough to conquer and rule California, which is explicitly the thing every AI lab wants to prevent.
Europe is great because you can never find clear information about laws because we peasants are not intended to know them, and even if you do they are written in unclear, useless legalese, because the real law is just "whatever we don't like is illegal," which is "everything."
U.S. laws and regulations at least attempt to set clear, simple, and fair guidelines and punishments, but European laws are all deliberately written to be like "the fine can be between zero to one trillion euros" and "breathing in an unsanctioned manner can be an infraction."
I don't think the U.S. comes anywhere close to being as clear, simple, and fair as Americans would like, and that's not a minor problem to forgive, but it's edifying to see how Europeans just dispense with the illusion entirely and write themselves total discretion into the law.
Acquiring wealth may seem like a rational pursuit in the face of a system apparently too hopelessly broken to fix. But this is a catastrophic error because even if wealth is not confiscated or devalued, the things it could buy now or before will just disappear, at any price.
Eventually even the richest man in South Africa or Brazil or whichever parallel you may use will want nothing but for his grandchildren to be able to get a job designing space rockets, and this will be impossible, because there will be no space program and no money to build it.
The idea we can "out-grow" dysfunction like Elon Musk or other pro-AI people think is flat-out backwards, unless you think the AI will obsolete humanity in totality. The dysfunction literally lives off of growth! Growing the economy subsidizes it more and allows new injustices!
They aren't our rulers. Our rulers are career bureaucrats, journalists, nonprofit executives, activist jurists, university administrators, and progressive billionaire philanthropists. They are numerous, stay out of the spotlight, and don't bother commentating because it's weak.
To actually compete in any meaningful way with this vast organization of political coordination requires graduating from the diminishing returns of inflaming the emotions of the masses to organizing professional cadres financed by long-term-oriented philanthropy.
The real stumbling block seems to be the lack of any substantive vision or belief system that would motivate donors to coordinate with future cadres. There is literally no fleshed-out positive vision of governance and the destiny of our civilization to legitimize the activity.