[marginalia_nu]

Having children requires an element of hope, of faith in a bright the future. If you're convinced of nothing but dark days ahead, bringing children into the world would be a cruelty.

Media messaging, especially on social media, has gotten extremely dark and catastrophic. Looking at the screen you'd think the sky was falling several times every day. If global warming isn't doing us in, the nazis are literally back for real this time, or putin is hatching schemes, or there's the new Tau Ceti VI strain of Covid, or delayed side effect from the vaccines, or vikings on capitol hill, or race riots, or police brutality, or inflation, or deflation, or financial crisis, or public debt, or forever chemicals, or mass surveillance, or xi jinping, or killer bees, or vanishing bees, or microplastics, or actual space aliens. Et c.

[TheOtherHobbes]

Many people are living genuinely precarious lives. Some are well aware of it, others haven't quite realised it yet or are firmly in denial about it.

Humans don't breed when their own lives are precarious and it's rational and realistic to assume the lives of their kids will be even more so.

I see no mystery here.

[generic92034]

> Humans don't breed when their own lives are precarious and it's rational and realistic to assume the lives of their kids will be even more so.

I do not think this is a generally true notion. There are so many people living in precarious circumstances in large parts of Africa, Asia and South America. But the highest population growth is right there.

Maybe there is some truth to the notion in developed countries.

[tivert]

>> Humans don't breed when their own lives are precarious and it's rational and realistic to assume the lives of their kids will be even more so.

> I do not think this is a generally true notion. There are so many people living in precarious circumstances in large parts of Africa, Asia and South America. But the highest population growth is right there.

Yes, but wealthy technological society enables it, because modern birth control technology is what makes reproduction so much of a choice.

In earlier times and in less developed places, if you really wanted to be "child free" you'd have to take much more extreme actions, like adopting celibacy or being OK with infanticide.

[generic92034]

Birth control, yes, but also the existence of credible pension plans. If your survival in your old age solely depends on the family you probably tend to make sure there are several candidates for sustaining you.

[NalNezumi]

I'd say it's the other way around. For most of human history we've had to live in a precarious state, stability or "things not changing", static life have never been true. Even for a farmer never leaving his village he always had to be precarious of the element.

It's only maybe last two-three generation or so we've tricked ourselves to the escalator life with dissipation of risk through social programs.

[marginalia_nu]

Historically, people have been far less aware of the circumstances outside of their immediate area. Life appeared extremely stable, because on a local level, it has been. Not that people didn't die or anything, they absolutely did, but what was certain was that life would more or less go on the way it had since time immemorial.

You can't have the sort of uncertainty about the future we have today without the progress we've had until today. The society-scale anxiety essentially boils down to this question: Just what is it we're progressing toward?