>>1609117>>1609108>>1609094>>1609087And yet in this magical world in which has been envisaged where the west manages to take the white mans burden upon themselves in terms of the environment by cutting all forms of fossil fuel use essentially deepening a large part of it's population into ever deepening poverty, the fact that they don't even consider nuclear energy a viable option shows just how disingenuous people like them and people like Greta actually are.
Finally the question of world population and their approach to it is the same way they treat factories in China.
Why do I say this, because demographics and education and intelligence are tied together. Westerners have the advantage in terms of smaller groups of children, higher parental investment, and there are much more likely to make good use of that parental investment and additionally get a better job and also have more investment in children.
However the current approach is to reduce western fertility further, despite the fact that feminism, women in the workplace, birth control, have already crippled western nations birth rates to below parity levels, this is not necessarily bad as it was an inevitable correction of the levels gained during the industrial revolution and post war boom.
IE smaller population with higher overall quality of life.
Instead the current zietgeist is encouraging the breakdown of western style families, later and even childless couples, and these absurd climate striker types.
The rest of the world outside of western style countries has no such problems with fertility, at least not yet. As China becomes more middle class, they too will see a net drop in population, outside of the already lopsided effects of the one child policy, outside of the rural Han peasants who farm, the majority of Chinese cities are experiencing birth rate declines, as people have less children and likewise focus their new middle class lifestyle resources on raising kids better.
