Observations about the world, part eight

Photograph of the Atlas globe

Is there a demographic collapse?
Friday – November 7, 2025

There's been much talk and debate about the supposed population decline in certain countries and while it is true that some countries do have a declining population such as Japan and South Korea, it's still the case that the world population is trending upwards on a global scale. So I guess the term "demographic collapse" becomes contextual and I suppose that's true. After all, the use of the word demographic would seem to imply this. But again I just need to make it perfectly clear that the overall population in the entire world is not decreasing: it's continually increasing, the derivative is larger than zero, not less than zero. So while I can understand why some individuals may feel worried about the population trend in certain countries, especially so-called developed countries, I don't see much reason to worry about the supposed human extinction, at least not yet. I can see why people would assume that humanity would start to shrink in terms of numbers of humans and why this could lead to a world without any humans in the future, but that would be a future very much further afield, a very distant future. So yes, it could be the case that at some point we could see a demographic collapse and some have made the projection that between 2050 and 2100 the global population will peak, that is the derivative will equal zero, but again that's in the future but do remember that 2050 is only 25 short years away and 2100 is only 75 short years away. After humanity has peaked in terms of population, then yes I would start to worry, at least from a materialist point of view, but I also suspect that as humans become replaced by machines, something that I've briefly covered in my "Future series" that the economic impact will be lessened, but that would also require an economy that doesn't center around human consumption, and economy that can transcend beyond the human and what that economy would look like I don't know and it could perhaps conceivably be the case that machines would not require an economy in the same sense that humans require an economy to describe their material interactions and relationships. Again, this is of course all speculation and I'm completely dabbling in the material domain here, but yes it is interesting to try to figure out or really gain some insight into the future, but again I'm not in the business of predicting things about the material domain. The primary problem with a lower population overall will be economic, and that's because the economy relies on growth, often unlimited growth, and without people to go around, to consume and to work that'll be a hard thing to do, which means that the economy may enter into a terminal deflationary spiral and I suppose the statistical hysteria around a potential population decline could help trigger a depressed economy as well. I suspect that Africa, as I've also mentioned much in my Future Series will become the global "hotspot" for human capital in the future and I also suspect that the world will revolve around Africa, but I also suspect that there will be a lot of emigration away from Africa and those immigration streams could help some countries that seek newer members of society that could uphold the material order, but then again I do not believe that immigration is a sustainable alternative long term for the economy, not if you're fighting low birth rates, mostly since those immigration streams will run out eventually and they are also bound to create some if not a lot of tensions around the world. But these are of course all material problems and a sign of our times, the Kali Yuga. The reason why developed countries tend towards less than 2.1 children per woman is in my estimation caused by the fact of life that nowadays young people, especially women, have more of those things called options in life and they simply choose not to become mothers, for mainly material reasons but also because there are very few incentives for a woman, especially in the beastly form, to want to become a mother, even though one could make the case that her material standing is better than any women from any previous generation; it's clear that there are vast emotional and cultural problems in developed countries.

    Then there are also some countries such as Burkina Faso where the average woman has about 4 children and as I previously mentioned these countries seem to be mostly African, but there are some countries in Asia as well but their overall birthrate is really slowing down whereas the African birthrate seems to be rather more stable and that's mostly due to the fact, in my view, that many African countries, not all of them, are less developed and there are no incentives to not have children. But what are those pronatal incentives you may ask? Well, it seems pretty clear to me that most people that live in less well of material circumstances have many children for a couple of reasons: one could be that they simply need to rely on someone in old age; and a more far fetched reason could be that they hope that at least one of their children will become rich or at the very least a professional, which could also help them and the whole family in the future.

    Overall, the global birthrate is still above 2.1 child per woman and the world's population isn't shrinking, but the thing about issues of this nature is that they can and will likely rapidly change and by that point they can be much harder to turn around, but then again, I view this from a spiritual perspective beyond the material circumstances of myself on Earth and therefore I refuse to make this issue personal. If you want to live in peace then you must also leave the material domain behind, and indeed in my post about antinatalism I did make several comments indicating that I didn't see any moral problem in refusing to have children.

Reginald Drax – November 7, 2025.