John Maynard Keynes
Most people have never heard of John Maynard Keynes. He’s a renowned British economist who is used as a fig leaf excuse for chronic inflationary monetary policies across the whole world. Keynes advocated governmental spending in bad times and saving in good times. Most governments heed the first part of his advice but ignore the latter. His critics claimed that in the long run inflation is highly destructive for the economy, to which he famously and wittily replied, “In the long run, we are all dead.”
It’s an oft-repeated quote and is regularly used as the tongue-in-cheek answer to the critics of his monetary theory. However, more than anything it reveals a disturbing view of reality.
No children, no future
Whether Keynes was homosexual or bisexual, he remained a lifelong bachelor. He had no children, so to him, it was certainly true that there was no reason for him to think long term. Maybe his perspective would have changed if he had a family?
The story of Keynes is merely a symptom of a larger problem. Many of the policymakers of the world are childless, and perhaps the evidence suggests they do not care about children. Some of the childless leaders of the West include German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister Theresa May, French President Emmanuel Macron, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven to mention a few.
A left-right divide
The problems run far deeper than a childless political elite. There is a strong correlation between political persuasion and birth rate. Conservatives have as many as 41% more children than liberals, according to social scientist Arthur Brooks.
If actions speak louder than words, conservatives do care more about children. It could also explain why the right is the champion of long-term thinking. Why do conservatives care so much about balancing the budget and reducing the national debt? Because if they don’t it will be their children who pay the bill.
By contrast, it sometimes seems that the childless left cares more about the future of polar bears than of their own heritage. People on the right fight for the future of their children and grandchildren; people on the left fight for the right to abort them.
Paradoxically, an evolutionary solution exists for this demographic problem. There is evidence that political persuasion is highly heritable. For whatever reason, children tend to take on the ideology of their parents. Since the left is essentially driving themselves to extinction with catastrophically low birth rates, the future stock of the West should have higher birth rates that will tend to be conservatives.
Immigration?
Under normal circumstances, a childless left would mean that the birth rates would be back to normal again in two or three generations. There is one factor that upsets this dynamic: immigration. Normally this would not be a problem, except that immigrants generally vote for left-wing parties, according to reports. One study from the Center for Immigration Studies concluded:
“The enormous flow of legal immigrants into the country — 29.5 million from 1980 to 2012 — has remade and continues to remake the nation’s electorate in favor of the Democratic Party… As the immigrant population has grown, Republican electoral prospects have dimmed, even after controlling for alternative explanations of GOP performance.”
Only when their future pensions are at stake do leftists worry about falling birth rates. Their solution to their distaste for child rearing is to outsource it by simply importing new people to breed the next generation of taxpayers for them; third world families are known to have generally higher birthrates than those from Western or wealthy nations. However, this is the voice of a culture that has lost the will to live and history has been unkind to all civilizations that have given in to childless decadence.
If this influx of leftist voters is not curbed, the freedoms we take for granted will soon be a thing of the past. True, this will not happen in our lifetime, but it could very well be a reality for the next generation. For those who care about the future, it is necessary to act now because, in the long run, we may all be outvoted by socialists.
