Topic: Population - page 4. (Read 850 times)

My observation are that maybe 2% of humans are 'born different' in a way that they feel uncomfortable being followers.  They might be viewed as 'freedom loving' so to speak.  In my experience, this rate seems very uniform across 'races'.

Culture certainly pressures the 'fat middle' of these types of people in one direction or the other.  I would say that Asian culture generally pushes that middle toward the 'follower' expression in life ways, and not always in a very gentle manner.  On the converse is my situation as an early gen-X'er from the West Coast of the U.S. were individuality was a virtue and there was not such a selection of pre-canned identities to choose from, more people kind of had to roll-their-own identity.  Basically if you take a sample of 1000 typical Chinese born in the late 1960's and 1000 with my life history, you would end up with, say 40 naturally born non-followers in each group.  Where 30 might end up non-followers at age 50 in my group, only 10 would remain so in the Chinese group.

But with 1,000,000,000 peeps, 0.5% is still a lot.  A lot more than the CCP would probably like to go up against so deftly integrating them into success or leadership positions, and/or encouraging them to leave the country, is probably the best option.

A complication is that Chinese culture (if not biological wiring) puts economic success at a much higher focus.  Striking out on one's own is very common even among Chinese who are naturally followers in a lot of cases for economic reasons alone.  We see that all over the world and especially in S.E. Asia.  A good friend of mine was in this category and he called the Chinese 'the Jews of Asia.'  He also was counciled by his father that good success is more likely in out-lying regions of the host country rather than in the larger trading centers.  It had to do with competition I believe, and dynastic family lock-in is pretty universal across almost all human societies.

Anyway, I do believe that there would be plenty of Chinese who have the various characteristics needed to make Africa workable.  S.E. Asia is not necessarily always super friendly to the Ethnic Chinese either.  Maybe in Africa they would tend to just drop the ethnic/cultural/intellectual supremacy baggage, focus on up-lifting everyone, and basically avoid some oft-repeated mistakes which lead to anticipatable personal dangers.  The last pogroms that I am aware of were in Malaysia in 1999 which isn't that long ago, and as far as I can tell the power dynamics between the 'native' oligarchical families and the Chinese tycoons are almost indistinguishable from country to country.

I don't believe that there have ever been flat-out anti-Chinese pogroms in The Philippines, but I would note that the Chinese seem a little more integrated and not as prone to focus on 'preserving their pure bloodlines' and that sort of thing.  Doing so is begging for trouble, and well deserved trouble in my humble opinion.  Beyond that, I'd suspect that in their heart-of-hearts, most Filipinos recognize that the 'native' politicians are at least 1/2 of whatever corruption is underway, and in the case of The Philippines especially, the U.S. and Globalist powers will pick up whatever 1/2 is dropped by the ethnic Chinese tycoons.

---

Edit:

I worked in Silicon Valley with a lot of Chinese, Indians, and generally smart people from all over the world.  It used to blow my mind that a government policy would allow a 1-in-a-million person from, say, India who had been educated at significant expense to just pack up, do great work for some ultra-fascist global entity in Si-Valley (e.g, ABC) for 20 years, get their now-American kids the best education money could buy in the new country (a LOT of money), then run out the clock in American opulence without a dime or any future benefits going to the home country.  At best they might buy their in-laws a home or something.

Now I understand!  Getting rid of 'the best and the brightest' in a home country is to the leadership of said home country, as I often say, 'not a bug; it's a feature.'  If these people would stay home or return home they are, to the leadership, a liability and a threat.  At least in a general way.

In trying to 'do my part' as an expat and as a dissident, I really do bend over backward to try to pick out local people who have some potential and focus my efforts on giving them the tools and opportunities to realize their potential.  It may not serve the current leadership of the country very well but I am confident that it will pay dividends to the society at large, and that is what I do care about more.

The population growth is truly exponential and if no law shall be made like a one, two, or three-child policy. The economy of a country will have to be adjusted as well unless they wouldn't care for the welfare of their people.

True, in Japan, they're hiring and attracting more young people to come to them so that they'll be able to replace that potential aging population that shall give them no more workforce.

India was supposed to be the next super power, except they can't even be bothered to fix their sanitation problem to stop open defecation. The strategy for China and India was to produce as many children as possible to raise their GDP, even if meant a large portion of their population was dying in poverty. Hopefully the rest of the developing nations don't follow their strategy.


The Chinese had started some infrastructure projects in the early 2000's after FOCAC formed. Looks to me like some of these partnerships failed because of the cultural incompatibilities but others might speculate differently as to why. Chinese males settling in parts of Africa would be a shock.

That is why the growth of national population can be only sustainable as long as the economy can grow as well and offer new jobs and opportunities for the incoming generations. As population grows, we could model it as an exponential rate (assuming it to be constant and there is not pandemics). However the economical growth of an economy is not possible to be exponential and constant.

There is always recession and bull markets, and those bad times are what could keep people from having children.

Even if Countries like Japan and Germany are suffering from aging population, they are still pretty good and stable places.

AFAIK, there's the two-child policy in China, and in this case, that's shown to control their population rate but then if India is going to be taking them over and they'll have more population in the midst of this year then that's record-breaking.
And as we know when the population rate is high, there can be a deficit in other things like consumables, employment rate, and other things that do heavily affected by the growing population of a nation.

You didn't seem to have paid much attention to the part that i just bold in your quote. It states that the Chinese population have been on a decline if I should recap.
The Chinese population already experienced an explosion and birth controls was put in place to make check its population which has been effective if you compare the population now with the last 10years.

While that of India might be a different story, we could applaud China on progress.

India's population is not the problem as far they are doing well as a country, then it's fine to me, though I know so many other person's might be struggling over there for survival, but if atleast 70% of the population is doing well(employed or are doing business) then it's okay and encouraging.
I see Nigeria there with  223.8 of population, first I might even say that estimation might not be correct because Nigerians don't even keep data of death and birth citizen in the country,
I'm just imagining the population of Nigeria is 223.8 and we are suffering this much, then think of it if we're populated like India, then it would have been worst....

The upside is that we are breeding a new flavor of mongrel goyim using the Chinese males sent over to Africa for construction projects who mate with African females.  It will be an intriguing experiment for us fans of Kalergi, and especially if some fraction of the Chinese decide to make Africa their home.  Of course the joys of social credit score technocratic totalitarianism are sure to draw most of the guys back to their motherland.

Population can never be distributed equitably over the earth. There are numerous reasons why this would not occur, even if people were aware of the consequences of overpopulation. Many people will relate the population effect to religious views.

Some religions believe and claim that the earth is a huge place intended for humans to live in, and that there will never be a day when the world will be so crowded that it is not conducive to live in. But this is about more than just a place to live; it is about having adequate access to resources needed for survival in abundance to support the world's population. I am hopeful that a long-term solution can be discovered shortly to basic amenities needed to live a sustainable life.

It is not nice that my country which has high level of unemployment in the country and high inflation rate and bad leadership is still having population growth day in day out. There should be some law to restrict countries who cannot take care of her citizens from increasing in their population. There should be some kind of sensitization to the rural dwellers that they don't need to be making babies that they cannot take care of and this falls in the hand of the government to implement.
Countries who provides for their citizens hardly appear in this list, yet countries that are not much organised are here with population increase.

if it is forced then there is nothing that can be done other than accepting citizens from other countries to be able to live and move there,
[1] https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/04/12/want-to-get-paid-to-move-to-spain-or-italy-here-are-all-the-towns-in-need-of-new-residents

Stable population growth is needed so that a country's economy can continue to run, and developed countries that are experiencing population reduction are very worried about the future of their country.

thanks for the article, great read

In several articles, the Chinese government has changed their policy and realized that what they were doing was wrong, they have started changing the one child policy to a 2 child policy and only retaining sons like they have to change too because girl are important too.

China's population has suffered greatly for a few reasons. One of the main ones has been the single child policy, which imposed large fines on couples who had a second child and even forced abortions in the countryside, sometimes of women 8 months pregnant and the like.

Apart from an abuse of human rights, the tendency was to kill any girl baby and keep a boy and thus there are many more boys than girls. An example of an inhumane, wrong and sadistic policy.

In case you are not aware, Chain's population growth rate has been on a decline, and they have been worries to an extent that they want to boost the reproduction rate once again.

This is the same country that some years back had to limit its citizens from giving birth to more than 1 child per family. Perhaps the effect of that 1 child policy has kicked in.

The population of the world can never be balanced because each nation has its territorial integrity and population policies. Except there is a bilateral agreement between two nations, no nation can be forced to accept immigrants to balance their population quota. Racism will be another reason why it might be difficult to facilitate the distribution of population among different nations. Most people will never want to see Africans in their neighborhood because they can't t afford to live around them.

But there is population distribution going on currently. Nations like Canada, the UK, and the US always open their boundaries to immigrants to help in contributing to the workforce of the nation. Most nations use immigrants to cover up areas that have shortage of labor. The only difference is that they usually attract the best brains, rich or skillful. While those that cannot afford this immigration process have no chance of moving to these nations.

But it will be ideal to have a world where there will not be restrictions on movement from one country to another. This will be possible if many nations achieve economic development.

Some of these overpopulated countries should seriously think about seasteading - https://www.seasteading.org/.

A re distribution of the population from countries with a huge density of people per unit of area would imply a huge demographic change in several countries around the world which many governments and populations would not be able to accept, for political reasons, religious reasons and even race questions.

Imagine how people from Japan, the United States, Brazil or the United Kingdom would react if their governments announced a special plan to offer permanent residence to anyone of India and China who would be willing to move in. Many would not be happy about it, I tell you.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-have-29-mln-more-people-than-china-by-mid-2023-un-estimate-shows-2023-04-19/
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-18/india-s-population-overtakes-china-to-become-world-s-biggest-analysts-estimate#xj4y7vzkg

when we see that several countries are experiencing population decline, China and India are competing to dominate the population in their countries, but i believe that in the future this needs to be regulated in such a way that the population distribution throughout the world is evenly distributed.