You may eventually find that the normies dwindle and begin to die out, while the non-normies grow and spread and spread – those non-normies may eventually become the new normies
You may eventually find that the normies dwindle and begin to die out, while the non-normies grow and spread and spread – those non-normies may eventually become the new normies
They are outliers. One-offs. Selected out within generation. Where's the "normy-ism" in that?
It just don't even make sense.
If true, it would suggest a future where the world is much more religious, or a world that somehow deindustrialized.
This needs to be repeated early and repeated often no matter what non-abnormal ideology you subscribe to. In as many words.
If you consider yourself a kind, decent & some what enlightened person and you do not procreate, in all likelihood the unkind or less kind people will do the procreating on your behalf. Mind you I did not even use the word tolerant which implies some measure of altruism; I'm merely saying kind & decent.
I do not know why people much older than us do not repeat this mantra more often.
I do not understand what could belie such intransigence.
What is so offensive about saying that line?
Say it early say it often.
I don’t see this as meaning ultra-traditionalists are bound to inherit- I think it’s more likely the discourse would revert to the mean, aka the centrists.
But it also applies at the national level. If country A consistently makes having kids miserable, then in the long arc of time, the way of life in country B (which makes family life great) will win out.
Country C which simply reduces the ability for women to not have kids will win out over county B, since country B is extremely unlikely. Even the Scandinavian countries can’t come close to being country B with a sufficiently large total fertility rate that beats country C.
Counterpoint: Country C is presumably a totalitarian nightmare, which historically tend not to prosper.
By contrast, countries like the US and the UK at the same time, while no doubt there were injustices, unfairness, discrimination, even oppression (and they still haven’t completely put those things behind them)-the state never tried to exert total control over civil society or public criticism-which is why “totalitarian” isn’t the right word to describe them. And I don’t think whatever direction they might have been moving in makes a difference-if you aren’t “totalitarian”, you aren’t “totalitarian” regardless of whether you are moving “further away” from it or staying completely still.
In my grandparents’ generation, people often retired in their 50s and had another 30-40 years left to live. If you don’t stop working until more than half way through your 70s, you might only have another 10-15 years of life left to financially support instead of 30-40, which makes it more likely you’ll be able to do so with your own accumulated retirement savings instead of having to rely on the taxpayer
And his dad was a tax accountant, and he had “trouble fully retiring” too. He retired from his job at a mining company, then started an unpaid job doing accounting for a charity. Then he retired from that, but still did the accounting for his church for a few more years thereafter. Yes, he wasn’t getting paid, but that was his choice, I’m sure he could have done the same work for somebody else and gotten paid for it.
If I’m still alive and healthy in my 70s, I imagine I may well follow both my parents’ examples and still be working too-having a job can be good for your health