All too often, we think in terms of the present culture when considering history or the future. We see evidence of this phenomenon when viewing how history is currently being taught in our schools. Text books have been written relevant to today's culture and "political correctness". I could argue that it is not fair nor reasonable to judge our forefathers in light of the current accepted morality. But that is not the issue of this blog.
In a few paragraphs I want to consider the future and how our current culture may be imprinting the demography of 2050. Our society has changed drastically in the past 20 years. I am not making a moral or practical judgement on these changes, but only want to consider a possibility of how the future may be impacted
Today America has two very strong and prevailing political and cultural viewpoints. Of course, there are various shades of difference among each group. But generally, we have Progressive Liberals and old-school Conservatives. By their very nature, Conservatives are not having a great impact on changing the present, but rather desire to hold to past values and standards. They resist change for the sake of maintaining culture as they have known it in the past.
The Progressive Liberal, on the other hand, entertains new, often controversial concepts. As these ideas become practiced by more and more people, they eventually become integrated into the culture. We see evidence of this in fashion. The way we dress has changed, the concepts of modesty have changed. Plunging necklines in women's clothing, along with skin-tight jeans would have shocked people 30 years ago. But now, even among Conservatives, little thought is given to revealing garments.
Openness regarding sexual practices seems to be part of our daily dialogue. Current common television programming would have been relegated to the R-rated movie only a few years ago. Even our pastors are finding a need to address these issues from the pulpit in a much more frank manner than anytime in the past.
Developing with the openness in dialogue and fashion has been a cavalier attitude toward sex and human reproduction. With the introduction of birth-control medications and legalization of elective abortion, sex has become more of a social activity, practiced by a large portion of the population with no intent of developing lasting relationships or producing offspring. The average age of marriage has gone up, many people not looking to settle down with one person until well into their thirties. Even then, children are not always in the plans for married couples, which in many cases are both career-oriented individuals, unwilling to make concessions to accommodate the interruption of career and lifestyle for the sake of a baby.
As a result in the change of attitude regarding procreation, America's birthrate is down. In fact, most of the industrialized world is experiencing declining birth rates. In China, where a one-child policy has been in effect for a number of years, government leaders are beginning to see the tip of a looming iceberg on the horizon. In the next 15 to 20 years there will not be enough workers entering the work force to fill vacated jobs. Although China has recently had the fastest-growing economy in the world, as their workforce declines so will their gross national product. Instead of having expanding dynamic growth they will go into decline. This is not a forecast based on some economic-speak or political maneuvering. It is just the facts as represented by the Chinese Population Demographic. Even if they reversed their one-child policy today, they could not avoid falling off of the growth-pedestal.
Another problem China is facing is declining tax revenue due to the retiring workers. Because of the one-child policy, the population has become top-heavy with older workers. Since China's Socialistic system provides for its population from cradle to grave, it must have continually increasing revenues. But at current birth rates the number of taxpayer is decreasing. Their system is rapidly becoming non-sustainable.
America's situation is similar to China, except that we have not had a one-child policy. But our birth rates are down because of the choices of women to postpone, or eliminate entirely, child-bearing. Our current culture has, in effect, imposed a limited birth policy. One result of our sexual "liberation" is the change in attitude of gays and lesbians. A few years ago, many of them would attempt to remain in the "closet", while appearing to lead heterosexual lives, often marrying and having children. But with societies' acceptance of the gay lifestyle, many homosexuals are announcing their sexual preference while still in high school. As a result, they are seeking same-sex relationships from the beginning of their adolescence. With many states recognizing same-sex marriages or civil unions, the stigma associated with the gay lifestyle is rapidly diminishing. Of course, these relationships do not produce children, except on occasions where a woman will decide to bear a child through artificial insemination.
It is estimated that about 9% of the population is gay. Combine this statistic with that of heterosexual women choosing to have one child, no children or seek abortions, the result is that a significant percentage of the population remains childless.
So, what effect does this have on our population demographics and how will the future be impacted? Consider that the largest growing population group in the United States is Hispanic. I am not talking about illegals, but resident American Hispanics. Primarily, they have larger families than their neighbors. Many of them come from a Catholic background, or are practicing Catholics. Since their faith prohibits the use of birth control and abortion, it is natural to expect larger families. While Democrat candidates seek and often receive the Hispanic vote, no political group can say they have the Spanish-speaking population "sewed up". The same issues that are important to Catholics are generally important to Hispanics.
Then consider the political persuasion of many career women, or the "liberated woman", and we find that a substantial percentage are Progressive Liberals. The number of children coming from the urban professional woman is much lower than her rural sisters. Farmers traditionally have had larger families and tend to be of a similar mindset to small businesspeople, since farming is indeed a business. Business owners are frequently more conservative than the rest of the population. In larger companies, often the company culture dictates that its executives be family people with children. They believe that the executive with family responsibilities tends to be more stable and have roots in the community.
The population growth in the United States, averaged across all groups, is 2.7 children per woman of reproductive age. It stands to reason that although 2.7 children barely produces a sustainable population, the reproductive results from Progressive Liberals could be much smaller. While not always the case, children tend to adopt the religious faith and political persuasions of their parents.
One or two things will have to happen if the Democrats want to retain their influence over our culture in the future. They are going to have to find a way to appeal to a wider demographic of the population as the numbers of Progressives diminish. Or the future could belong to the Conservatives, (provided they do not turn into Progressive Liberals!)
I am interested in your feedback. What I have written is an opinion of what I believe could be a dynamic in our society. I have attempted not to spin it in any political direction. So set aside your talking points and keep an open mind. Give me your impressions and thoughts.
Thanks!
