Saturday, July 16, 2011
Scandinavian Feminism or Religious Obscurantism
There are two possible solutions to the childlessness that is slowly killing the West. One model is the Scandinavian liberalism where women are equal or superior and people stopped living in traditional family frameworks; the other model that is demographically succeeding is the Amish, Mormons, Haredi and Islamic on the other. The middle course is not working.
Japan is the first nation in modern history to tip over into outright demographic contraction, pioneering a path that will soon be followed by Italy, Germany, Spain, and most of Eastern Europe, with China close behind. The dynamics of decline are already contaminating every aspect of the economy. The trend rate of growth has dropped to 1.5%. Wages have fallen complicating the efforts to stave off deflation. In Japan here is no feminist movement to talk about and society has not created the framework where a woman may have a child without marrying.
Israel is changing fast. In Tel Aviv we have a Scandinavian type society, where gays marry and contract surrogates to have children, and the "New Family" is more or less an accepted and legal part of the scene. They have about zero growth, but are not dying off. In Jerusalem we have a compact, disciplined society of religious families, very successful in increasing their numbers. Soon society will be dominated by these two extremely oppposed social solutions. The Arab minority fall in with the large Jewish majority, and is becomeing westernized and therefore, demographically weak. I dont know if a country fractured into two so different societies is gobernable. Younger people will see (not me).
Addenda: A deeper examination of the figures shows that the Scandinavian model may not be viable. About 15% of the new born Swedes are not from old Swedish stock but Iraqis and Somalis. What the apparently healthy demographic statistics hide is population replacement. If so, there is only one viable model for continuity: religion.
Corollarium: Individuals and political parties that want to strengthen their nations should favour organized religion. Religious instruction should me made compulsive, Churches and synagogues should be subsidized by the State, married men with children should be favoured and promoted. I am against the dark side of a pro-family policy but has to be mentioned: repression of feminism, dissolution of family courts, and limitation of female civil rights (the vote).
The Ethnocentric Viewpoint: As a lifelong Zionist Jew, it is only natural (and unavoidable) that I pose the question if it is good or bad for the Jews. Western decay is absolutely bad for the Jews. First, contra antisemites, we are part of the Western world and cannot lift ourselves up from a decomposing society. On the contrary, as the elite of the West, we feel more acutely all its ills, and Jewish demography in the West is a tragic, ongoing, dramatic catastrophy. From 18 million Jews in 1900 we are now about 10 million at most and that is only partly because of the Holocaust. In Russia, once the five or six million strong reservoir of the Ashkenazic Jewry, there are only tens of thousand Jews left. Western Judaism is disappearing. Secondly, there are more "Jewish" genes among the European masses than concentrated in Jewish bodies. Thirdly, Western religion, once ferociously antisemite, has changed and it is friendly to us. In fact, the Catholic Church and Southern Protestants are strong allies of Israel. They are good for us. They changed, we should change too. The Enlightment movement of the nineteen century was a historic mistake and is killing us, in the twenty first century we Jews should reject liberal ideas and join the clerical (Christian and Jewish) reaction.