Friends, here's an interesting article about humanity's demographic future, which almost certainly involves a peak human population on the planet in the next 50 years, and then a precipitious decline, caused by crashing fertility rates and a general indifference to the biological imperative of procreation. There's a strong argument to be made that we should be meeting this challenge by implementing far more aggressive pro-natalist policies and reorienting our culture in a less materialist and more familial fashion. The irony, though, is that the global elite is so seduced by leftist nonsense that they regard homo sapiens as a plague infecting Mother Earth. They view people as the problem, and thus we're not likely to put up much of a fight as our species shrinks demographically to a vanishing point. Oh well. Humanity was fun while it lasted.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-next-centurys-big-demographic-mystery/ar-AATGPWi
The big story that this blog hasn't been covering as much as public interest warrants is INFLATION!!! Inflation is the elephant in the room that may well doom the Democrats in November pretty much regardless of all the other stories and narratives we may bandy about. Inflation insidiously eats away at the buying power of ordinary Americans. More to the point, it scares the financial crap out of them, which means the party in power has some major explaining to do! The fact that Biden and the Dems were initially dismissive of the problem won't help. And, as Lester Holt proved this week, if you remind Biden of his past statements on the issue, he gets mighty cranky. That is, he gets even crankier than usual.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inflation-consumer-price-index-january-2022/
https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-interview-nbc-lester-holt-wise-guy-probing-white-house-inflation
Good news! "President" Biden has declared that his Supreme Court nominee will have "mainstream" views on the Constitution and the law. How reassuring!
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/supreme-court-vacancy/2022/02/10/id/1056405/
Most of us have assumed that the purpose of the January 6th committee is straightforward: it exists to impugn the honor, the patriotism, and the law-abidingness of conservatives and Republicans, and thus to help Democrats win the midterm elections. All that's undoubtedly true, but could there be more to the story? Matt Gaetz claims that the agenda of the committee might be to produce a "finding" that Trump, and maybe a short list of other high profile Republicans, engaged in "insurrection" or "sedition". Such a finding could be used to exclude Trump, and these other Republicans, from the ballot in 2022, 2024, or in perpetuity, based on the provision in federal law that prohibits anyone who has been an insurrectionist from "holding any office". We've speculated on this possibility before. Would most states or local boards of election respect such a finding? Probably not, but what if some did? What if Trump really was barred from appearing on the ballot in enough places in 2024 that it was impossible for him to win? Would the federal courts, or the Supreme Court, step in to rescue him? Maybe they would, and maybe they wouldn't. These days, you can't rule anything out!
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383
Finally, many of you have been keeping track of the Freedom Convoy(s) in Canada, which are giving poor Justin Trudeau fits. Similar protests, characterized in part by civil disobedience, are cropping up elsewhere, including in -- of all places -- New Zealand! Many people believe that similar protests will soon snarl our highways too. On the other hand, many COVID restrictions are being terminated, seemingly at the very moment when the public's patience with them is running out. Quite a coincidence! It's almost like "the science" follows "the polls"... Hmmm.
Dr.Waddyfrom Jack: There is some consolation in being an early boomer and knowing I won't be around to fulminate at such powerful demographic nonsense! Of course it is my generation which has enabled the leftist dysfunction which it may manifest! Oh not all of us for sure but enough, enough: " aw ya don't balieve, we're ohn the eve a disstrucxteon! " That Ca 1965, the year of our celebrated debut! We were so very sure of ourselves and we have done such incalculable and ungrateful destruction. We aren't the "boomers" because the baby boom was a time of overwhelming optimism and confidence. We are the"BOOM!! " generation and I fear our baleful influence will long survive us,to vex succeeding generations!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: I have been trying in my mind to differentiate the material effects the Canadian convoy has had from those of the 2020 rioters. I find myself treading on dangerous "moral equivalence"ground. But significant differences do obtain: I know of no deaths due to the convoys; it has been roadways and not very neighborhoods themselves, which have been occupied; of course the truckers are motivated by casual decrees which have devastated their lives and livlihoods. But most of all, the Canadian truckers have received the unrelenting excoriation of a liberal, centrally concentrated in regions disdainful of the truckers , government,headed by a callow youth who displays open bias against the trucker's concerns and the truckers themselves AND their largely rural Western culture. That stands in stark contrast to the the practical endorsement of the 2020 Marxist cadre's onslaught by the leftist puppeteers who control the present US administration. I guess I just convinced meself!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: How joyful would be the seating of a Scotus justice with mainstream views! The last three have been so and their reverence for the rule of law has already shown.And how very certain that such CANNOT be expected of Biden and AOC. Oh yes, Pino Biden really does see such views as: the unimpeded convenient murder of fetuses or recent graduate fetuses; the disarmament of the law abiding public and the liberation of violent criminals, who are the true victims; the mandated division of our polity, culture and society into classes which determine from birth one's "rights" to opportunity, income, property, deference,access to legal protection and office. The poor dear, he is of little perception, guided as he is by his 1965 Kumbayaa campfire memories, of the totalitarian resolve of those who manipulate him. Why, to him, a guaranteed far leftist WOULD be "mainstream". He lies, but being conceptually , ehh, compromised, he may not be aware of this or at fault!
ReplyDeleteJack, there's something fitting (if also foul) about the fact that the Greatest Generation, which begat the Boomers, was the last to bestir itself to procreate in adequate numbers. Maybe it's time for civilzation, given its newfound zeal for self-destruction, to close up shop?
ReplyDeleteQuite right: the troublesome Truckers have erred in so many ways, but none more so than in their whiteness. I mean, civil disobedience is cute when Black people do it! (Note the capital "B", announcing my reverence!)
Sad, but true: the Left lurches further left all the time, but never senses that its views abandoned the "mainstream" long ago. I guess "mainstream" is all in the eye of the beholder, though. I mean, 51% of the voters chose (God help us!) Biden, so maybe his views really are...conventional? What a repellant thought!
Nick
DeleteAnd don't forget that so called "Greatest Generation" produced the "Hippie Generation". That's what you get when the best men in the gene pool get killed in combat. I suspect that's what happened all over Europe on an even greater scale.
And for Americans, those who went to college on the G.I. Bill had the "honor" of being indoctrinated by fleets of Leftist professors.
In any event, no worry about much reproduction from Whites in the future. Plenty of Gays and Transgender out there, and lots of yuppie couples who don't want kids. Not to worry Nick, not to worry!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I wonder how the redoubtable James Carville is gettin' on these many days. Remember, he helped us to Slick Willyand his man hating consort by wisely asserting "its the economy, stupid". Let us wish him relief from his recently expressed compulsion to punch the unvaccinated in the mouth so that he may once again motivate the Dems with that ageless warning. Why? Because there is nuthin' funnier, at least in the abstract,than seeing leftists fumbling with a well established economy. Why, "its the stupid, stupid!" And their inability to manage inflation, other than to exacerbate it, will certainly add to their snowballing load of deserved woes as their very public incompetence advances apace geometrically and inexorably.
ReplyDeleteRay from Jack: It may well be that those leftists crept out of their holes briefly and tried to ensnare the WWII vets with their America hatred. But I doubt those who had seen the very worst of human cruelty paid them much mind and the post war campus was a productive place ( aside from goldfish swallowing and phonebooth packing) I think it took the monumental ignorance and ingratitude of too much of my incalculably fortunate generation, a naivete easily perceived by the sociopathic left, which gave these misfits a place in a proven advanced civilization.
ReplyDeleteRay, I'm sure you're right that my call to action re: procreation will fall on deaf ears. C'est la vie. The only consolation is that, while the West may be ahead of the curve, every country, race, color, creed, etc. is following dutifully in our wake. It's simply humanity's destiny for populations to crash and to be dominated by the old. Luckily, we'll all soon be bionic anyway, and I imagine someday they'll manage to reverse the aging process altogether. So it will all sort itself out!
ReplyDeleteAgreed, Jack: the Left can't escape "ownership" of all our present crises, inflation very much included. The piper will be paid in November.
You're both right about the creeping advance of leftism on college campuses. It began long before the 60s and 70s, but it became normative only as the Boomers became the primary beneficiaries/victims of "higher ed".
Ray's suggestion that the gene pool may have taken a hit due to the massive bloodletting of two World Wars is by no means out of line. We're talking A LOT of casualties, after all. Then again, maybe the truly "evolved"/genetically superior among us know how to duck? Or better yet: how to shuffle paperwork in the home office, while others get torn to ribbons? I guess it all depends on what qualities we feel are noblest... Charging into a hail of bullets certainly is brave. It may not always be the optimum choice.
Dr.Waddy from Jack: The British officer corps consisted before WWI almost exclusively of "members" selected by regiments for their ability to privately afford an officer's NECESSARY lifestyle, even in the barracks or the field. Too, was sought the sophistication possible only from a comfortable upbringing. All this changed as the Great War degenerated into an unimaginable maelstrom! Losses of officers, many then consequently either from the ranks or the "commercial"classes were appalling, due in part to British standards of honor and leadership. I do not know about the French; for them it may also have been so. But the American army; I'll read more about it in a book I have in hand but if the Civil War was an example, far fewer American officers were from a higher class.And tactics then required that they stay behind the firing line except in a charge. So what to think? I'd suggest, we didn't lose enough men in WWI or even WWII to make a significent demographic difference. Where the American WWII vets did have a great impact, I suggest, was as post war survivors and bellwhethers of their forever glorious Depression and war seared generation! My generation wilts in their shadow, at least those who defaulted!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack. For the Brits (who after all stopped - or redirected - the Nazi tsunami in 1940) their WWI officer corps, represented in postwar government by such as Churchill, Eden, the major remaining officers and yes, Halifax, did not prevail in consideration of the renacent Boche threat in the '30's. Baldwin and Chamberlain, who had not served, prevailed. So did the cream of that Brit class trained from childhood to rule perish 1914-18?
ReplyDeleteFascinating analysis, Jack. I'm intrigued that Union officers were encouraged to hang back, whereas British (junior?) officers in WWI were honor-bound to fling themselves headlong at the enemy... I agree with you that American losses in the two world wars are hardly likely to have had much demographic significance, but your theory that the British ruling class hollowed itself out in the First World War is darn compelling. Say what you want about WWI, but it severely damaged Western Civilization as a whole...and arguably our culture never fully recovered. Our infrastructure, technology, wealth, etc. came back just fine, but those are different metrics.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy frm Jack: Though I maintain that much ofthe Union officer corps was derived from humble origins, my observation about their placement on the battle line was irrelevant.Both sides used the same fundamental tactic, part of the Napoleonic tradition which prevailed; march shoulder to shoulderto within approx. 75 yards of the foe,loose massed volleys and then charge. Officers, for obvious reasons could not stand in front of these massed firings. But they were expected to lead the charges which often completed the breaking of the enemy line. General Lee himself attempted to lead such an assault but was wisely restrained by his men.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: By the Great War, the choreographed shoulder to shoulder advance was passe; preliminary exchanges typically took place by artillery or by firing from protected positions (eg. trenches). But the charges, insanely reckless as they were, often against the murderous machine gun, were led,I believe in all armies, by field officers.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: Even the very regiment charged with the British monarch's protection was sent to the front in 1914, where it suffered apalling casualties ( German cruelty was certainly manifested in the Great War. The killing of the wounded enemy was routinely practiced by them, no matter the class of the object.) Perhaps an appreciable portion of the Brit prewar officer corps, members of the leadership class, were killed. "The old contempibles" was the term gloriously applied to those Brits who met the initial Boche onslaught and it included the officers.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: WWI?: Oh yes, of definitive importance to the history of the 20th century and of our time.
ReplyDeleteJack, I'm curious: have you seen casualty statistics for officers versus enlisted men in the Civil War? I'm wondering who took the brunt.
ReplyDeleteJack, I wonder how "insanely reckless" the charges across no-man's land truly were in WWI. Obviously, the casualty figures were horrific, but a lot of those men died from artillery fire, the exchange of which was routine. How many died in frontal assaults? And how many frontal assaults succeeded, at least marginally? I only ask because I'm a critical thinker, and the idea that officers would callously and unceasingly launch "insane" attacks is hard to swallow.
That's an interesting assertion that the Germans routinely killed the wounded. How do we know? From low numbers of prisoners taken/interned?
Dr.Waddy from Jack: Your concerns are well taken: in my cursory online search I have found this statistic: Union Generals'death rates - 8.7 % ; Confederate Generals 18.1%. Confederate Colonels 15.9% . Generals were known to lead charges but more often it was Colonels, as regimental commanders, who did so. A regiment was a very coordinated body of perhaps 250 to 1000 men which often was physically led by its commander in battle. I have not yet been able to find stats for enlisted rates of casualty. Given the close proximity of massed volleys, during which all officers had to be behind the firing line (they typically did not carry muskets) I would hazard that the enlisted percentage was higher. (there are accounts of entire firing lines going down!) I willlook for more info. on enlisted casalties. Some sites say it is scarce.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Too, I have not yet found any stats on officers below Colonel. My reenactment experiences suggest to me that officers of those ranks were mostly inthe very thick of it. As to German WWI killing of enemy wounded; I used the term "routine" recklessly. My reasons: A graphic account of the atrocity in, one of the early battles in, I believe, Tuchman's Guns of August or in another book the title of which I cannot recall; the documented ferocious resentment of German soldiers to the unexpected resistance of the Belgians,which triggered Boche vengeance; the obvious joy of peoples delivered from harsh Boche occupation; numerous accounts by allied soldiers of having witnessed such gratuitous post battlefield atrocity by the Krauts. Some cultures, I think, invest in their fighters a presumption that victory entitles them to vent understandably murderous emotions on the defeated. The Japanese were blatantly of this mind and I would guess something German also impelled too many of its soldiers to sadism. But none of these factors intellectuallyjustified my using the term "routine".
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: Added also to my belief but not adequate documentation, of Germamn WWI post battle savagery was a book , published after the Great War, which I inherited from my grandfather, a WWI vet of the Western Fron t trenches. It showed maces purported to have been used by the Boche to despatch the wounded (surely not their own). Nonetheless I still cannot say it was routine in a hellish maelstrom like that conflict!
DeleteThanks for the thoughtful replies, Jack. Here is some info on overall casualties in the Civil War:
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War#Casualties
Generally, I'd say the total death rate for soldiers who served is a pretty good proxy for the death rate of enlisted men, which here is 15% -- the same figure you cited for officers. Note that most died of disease, which would be a great leveler between ranks, one would think.
I don't doubt that there are some juicy anecdotes about German savagery in WWI, but unfortunately, as you know, one can prove anything with anecdotes. The mace strikes me as a standard weapon used in hand-to-hand combat in the trenches. Some nasty implements were wielded by the Allies too. Personally, I would be surprised if there was much difference in viciousness between the various armies of WWI...but I base that assertion on little more than a hunch. I just get the sense that none of the armies of that era went out of their way to be beastly, and most were similarly inclined to fight "honorably"...but not exactly fanatical about it. If I'm wrong, as always, I'm happy to be proven so, but that's a hard task, since so much about the conduct of any war remains murky.