(The Corbett Report) — I’m sure you’ve heard the news by now, but, in case not, let me give it to you straight: Japan is dying.
Specifically, Japan’s ongoing demographic collapse is not only continuing but accelerating. It’s so bad that even the articles documenting this collapse tend to make things sound better than they really are.
Take the recent ZeroHedge article, “Demographic Doom: Japan’s Birth Rate Falls To The Lowest In 125 Years,” for example. That headline might lead you to believe that the birth rate is equal to where it was 125 years ago, but that’s not the case. When you read further, you discover that the 720,998 babies born in the country last year represent the smallest number of newborns since Japan began keeping birth statistics in 1899.
READ: ‘We want to live!’: Gazans protest Hamas rule under Israeli bombing and starvation blockade
If this trend continues, Japan has already reached the point of no return. The country’s population is expected to be half its current size by the end of the century, and the Japanese race itself is forecast to go extinct when the last Japanese child is born 695 years from now. But, given that the baby bust is happening quicker than anyone predicted, even that 695-years-away estimate may be optimistic.
And here’s the even worse news. It isn’t just Japan. Birth rates are declining in country after country around the globe.
So, here’s the million-dollar question: why is this happening?
And here’s the trillion-dollar question: what can we do about it?
Let’s find out.
The baby bust is upon us
Despite what we’ve been propagandized to believe by Malthusian charlatans, pseudoscientists, and World Economic Forum-backed establishment mouthpieces for centuries now, the threat that humanity is facing is not a Soylent Green-style overpopulation crisis but its exact opposite: a baby bust that is leading us toward demographic winter.
There are any number of maps…
and graphs…
and infographics…
… that document this phenomenon, but the numbers speak for themselves.
In short: all things being equal, the population replacement rate – the number of babies each woman would need to have to maintain the population at current levels – is 2.1. By 2050, every region of the globe except Africa will be below that rate.
In fact, given that the replacement rate varies by country due to differences in child mortality and other variables, it is possible that even Africa will have slipped below replacement levels within 25 years.
None of this is in dispute. The doom-mongers clinging to their old Malthusian scare story aren’t even pretending that the decline isn’t happening. They merely quibble that falling fertility rates do not immediately translate to population decline. Or they argue that we’ve already exceeded the (mythical) “carrying capacity” of the Earth, so the depopulation slope we are about to start sliding down is not steep enough.
But the facts are the facts. We are facing a baby bust that is unprecedented in (recorded) human history.
That raises an important question.
Why is this happening?
So, why is fertility declining so rapidly in country after country? Why are birth rates falling to sub-replacement levels in nearly every nation on earth? Why have sperm counts around the world halved in the past 50 years, and why has the pace of that decline more than doubled since the turn of the century?
If you’re a Corbett Reporteer, you already know one of the answers to these questions: environmental toxins are poisoning us and hindering our ability to reproduce.
As I first reported in Know Your Toxins: BPA and further elaborated in reports on The Underpopulation Crisis and Meet Paul Ehrlich, Pseudoscience Charlatan, one of the likely culprits (among the myriad environmental toxins being introduced into our ecosystem and into our bodies by “the Bigs” – Big Oil, Big Agra, Big Food, and Big Pharma) is phthalates, a class of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDC) that is found in a wide array of modern, mass-produced products.
READ: Dutch euthanasia for mental illness surges 60%, including teen with autism
For those who are inclined to distrust James Corbett and instead “Trust The Science,” never fear: recent meta-analyses have confirmed that environmental toxins are indeed linked to declining male fertility worldwide. Even the European Chemicals Agency warns on their website that phthalates “may damage fertility or the unborn baby and interfere with our hormonal system,” particularly “affect[ing] the sexual development of boys which can lead to infertility in adults.”
One of the most harrowing accounts of this chemically induced fertility crisis, however, comes in Count Down: How Our Modern World Is Threatening Sperm Counts, Altering Male and Female Reproductive Development, and Imperiling the Future of the Human Race, by Shanna Swan, an environmental and reproductive epidemiologist who has been researching the subject for decades.
In Count Down, Dr. Swan marshals a raft of scientific evidence to show that EDCs and other chemical products are ravaging the human population, not only undermining our ability to reproduce but also contributing to the rise in “gender fluidity.” Swan’s account is harrowing not because it is sensational, but for precisely the opposite reason. It is a sober, clinical account of a very real threat to the viability of the human species itself.
As long-time followers of my work will also know, the fact that these EDCs have found their way into so many products is no mere accident. Instead, this is part of a coordinated global conspiracy whose adherents have articulated their plans for global depopulation time and time and time again.
As I documented in The Inbred Elite’s Million-Year Plan, the idea of using sterilizing agents to reduce the global population without the public’s knowledge or consent goes back at least to Charles Galton Darwin, grandson of the famed evolutionist and distant relative of Francis Galton, founder of the eugenics movement. In his 1952 screed The Next Million Years, Darwin mused that “hormones, or perhaps drugs” could be used to control the population by, for instance, “remov[ing] the urgency of sexual desire” and thus “reproduc[ing] in humanity the status of workers in a beehive.”
And this plan was forwarded by people like Paul and Anne Ehrlich and John P. Holdren, who, in their 1977 book Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, contemplated numerous coercive measures for reducing the global population, including adding sterilants to the water supply without the knowledge or consent of the public.
As I say, if you’ve followed my work over the years, you will already be familiar with these aspects of the population crisis.
But, as I have also noted before, the chemical assault on humanity is not the only reason for the fertility crisis. So, what else is at play here?
Engineering society for fun, profit, and extinction
Certainly, there are environmental factors at play that are contributing to the global fertility crisis. But equally as certain is that the problem is not solely that people are unable to have children due to declines in sperm counts or other reproductive health issues.
As Ryan James puts it in his thorough article on the subject, “Why is Global Fertility Crashing?“: “Maybe people just don’t want as many kids as they did before.”
I think most of my readers will know this to be true anecdotally. People today tend to want fewer children than did their parents’ generation, let alone their grandparents’ generation. But we don’t have to rely on anecdata. As James points out, there is plenty of hard evidence to back up this intuition.
Gallup polling indicates that the number of Americans who believe the ideal family includes three or more children has fallen nearly half from its post-WWII high:
EXCLUSIVE: Bishop Schneider says elites use mass migration to destroy Europe’s Christian identity
At the same time, a broader societal trend toward getting married later in life or not getting married at all has resulted in a larger percentage of the population remaining unmarried during their prime reproductive years. The percentage of Americans married by the age of 30, for example, has fallen off a cliff in the most recent cohort of 30-year-olds.
Are these phenomena – the baby bust and the marriage bust – related?
As it turns out: probably!
First, there is good reason to believe that the baby boom – a brief reversal in a centuries-long trend toward reduced fertility rates – was the direct result of a marriage boom. Although marital fertility rates did not uniformly increase in the West during the years of the baby boom, the fact that overall marriage rates rose led to more babies being born overall.
Connecting the dots between marriage rates and fertility rates isn’t difficult. After all, it should not be surprising to learn that women’s fertility rates vary by marital status:
Alright, so there is no doubt that there are broader socio/economic/cultural forces at play in the current fertility crisis. To some extent, the baby bust is a product of modern youths’ waning desire to have children and their inability to form long-term relationships.
So, assuming there is actually a cause underlying these societal phenomena, what could it be?
One guess.
Yes, you guessed right:
READ: Next gen for IVF is creating eggs from skin cells to allow a man to be father and mother to a child
Well, almost right.
No, staring at the visage of the demonic David Rockefeller isn’t itself the cause of the baby bust – although it can’t be denied that this act is an effective form of birth control. It’s that David and his co-conspirators – who, as we have already seen, have been openly lusting after global depopulation for generations – have been working to bring this fertility crisis about. They are not just engaged in the biochemical attack on our reproductive systems that has sent sperm counts worldwide plummeting. They are engaged in an attack on civilization itself.
There are many ways we can understand this attack on humanity.
For starters, there is a clear and well-documented connection between the women’s liberation movement of the 1960s, the invention of the birth control pill, the rise of the “free love” movement, and the subsequent dissolution of the family structure. This connection is not denied by proponents of these developments. Rather, they celebrate them as welcome attacks on “marital hegemony.”
That this attack on marital hegemony coincided with an era of record divorce rates and plummeting fertility rates is not mere happenstance. This association was predicted in advance by Ludwig von Mises, who, in his 1922 opus, Socialism: An Economic and Social Analysis, warned that the long-cherished socialist goal of “free love” (the “socialist’s radical solution for sexual problems”) would inevitably bring about the dissolution of the family. That trend, in turn, would lead to children being wards of the state and thus starved of the familial love “which enable [a boy or girl] to grow up into a healthy human being.”
Perhaps the Rockefellers were reading Mises’ description not as a warning but a blueprint. As the late Aaron Russo revealed in a 2009 interview, his close friendship with one of the members (?) of the Rockefeller clan revealed that the women’s liberation movement had, in fact, been sponsored and promoted by the Rockefeller Foundation as part of a plan to accomplish precisely what Mises had been warning about.
READ: Chelsea Clinton claims abortion is necessary for a healthy economy. She couldn’t be more wrong
Another aspect of the assault on the formation of families (and thus on the birth rate) is the digitization of social life, which is a signature element of the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” promoted by the likes of Klaus Schwab. It doesn’t take a statistician to surmise that there may be a link between the rise of dating apps and the rise in virginity and sexlessness in America over the past decade and a half … but you can get statistics on that phenomenon anyway.
Yes, as has been observed many times, the digitization of our social experience (and its commodification by dating apps) has ruined the “dating economy,” leading to a hookup culture that disproportionately rewards the most physically attractive and discourages long-term pair bonding in favour of “post-romantic love in digital societies.”
But perhaps the most insidious assault on the family comes from the intense depopulationist sentiment and anti-natalism that is at the core of the (eugenicist-founded, globalist-controlled, technocratic) modern environmental movement.
The idea that humans are a cancer on the earth and that the ideal, natural world does not involve people with their pesky “carbon footprints” is – as I have detailed many times in the past – a core message that has been inculcated into generations of children through public school indoctrination. It has been repeated as a mantra by well-meaning activists who genuinely do care about the environment.
This message has had its effect.
“Should We Be Having Kids In The Age Of Climate Change?” asks NPR.
“If climate change is impacting your desire to have kids, you’re not alone,” Popular Science reassures us.
“Climate Scientists Ponder: ‘Do I Really Want to Bring a Child Into This World?’” Mother Jones informs us.
“Young Americans Are Scared to Have Kids Because of Climate Change,” reports Gizmodo.
“Science proves kids are bad for Earth. Morality suggests we stop having them.” Or so say our good friends at NBC “News,” anyway.
I could go on. And on. And on. But you get the picture.
The most amazing accomplishment of the social engineers goes beyond polluting our environment with their EDCs and other toxins that prevent us from having kids.
It is that they’ve persuaded us to actively desire our own extinction. When we support their agenda, it makes the job of these depopulationists so much easier.
What is to be done?
Don’t worry, everyone, the Japanese government totally has a plan to tackle the population crisis! And that plan is…
… drum roll, please…
… to throw some more money at the problem and hope that fixes it!
Specifically, the government has earmarked 5.3 trillion yen (about $34 billion) to “help young families” by “extending child allowances and boosting childcare and education support.”
The problem with this plan, of course, is that it is the same plan that has been employed by every country facing population decline – and it has never worked for them. And, as we now know from today’s investigation, it will not work. Financial incentives in and of themselves, that is, do not solve the problem.
READ: ‘Assisted dying is not a health activity’: UK doctors slam proposed bill
Yes, here’s the bitter pill that statists and technocrats who are concerned about falling fertility rates and plummeting population stats have to swallow: there is no quick-fix governmental solution to the profound environmental and social problems that are causing this population crisis. No amount of stolen taxpayer funds will be enough to paper over the gigantic hole in the bottom of our family structures that is causing humanity to plummet off the demographic cliff.
No, in order to even begin addressing the problem, we would have to start taking the real environmental threats to human flourishing seriously. We would need to actually remove the toxins, endocrine-disrupting chemicals, GMO food monstrosities, and other reproductive threats from our homes and our lives.
Even more to the point, we would need to actually foster in today’s youth the desire to have children. This involves teaching them what has been known to every generation of our fore-fathers and fore-mothers throughout human history: that babies are not useless eaters to be measured out as carbon footprints and then reduced. They are beautiful, cherished bundles of joy whose very lives are evidence of the abundance all around us and the triumph of the human spirit.
Oh, sure, we could go over the statistics and data that demonstrate the inaccuracy of the Malthusian scare story about “too many people.”
We could explain that after 200 years of Malthus being proven wrong over and over (and over!) it is time to stop listening to the Chicken Littles who would have us refrain from having children to stop some hypothesized catastrophe that never actually arrives.
We could help others realize that we do not live on a fixed pie and that every new human is not simply another mouth to feed with that ever-shrinking resource.
We could teach them that The Ultimate Resource is not zinc or copper or iron or oil or any other chemical or compound but the human brain, capable as it is of transforming the world around us in myriad different ways.
We could argue that the culling of the future population by our decision not to have children deprives the world of the next genius who will come along to invent a solution to one of our many problems or the next great visionary who will inspire humanity to reach even greater equilibrium with the world around us.
READ: South Korea and Hungary show us the way out of our global population crisis
But perhaps to argue the point intellectually is to miss the point altogether.
Instead, let’s simply reject the death cult.
Go forth and multiply, friends.
I leave you today with my 2021 study of this very subject. Enjoy.
Reprinted with permission from The Corbett Report.