Elon Musk: "Give birth to children, otherwise we will die out!"

The head of SpaceX and Tesla, Elon Musk, made a splash with another statement that does not fit into current Western trends. Speaking on December 7 at the "CEO Council Summit" under the auspices of The Wall Street Journal, he said that one of the biggest risks to human civilisation is the rapidly falling birth rate.

"And yet, so many people, including smart people, think that there are too many people in the world and think that the population is growing out of control. It's completely the opposite,” he exclaimed. “Please look at the numbers. If people don't have more children, civilisation is going to crumble. Mark my words."

This statement of the father of six children is fundamentally different from the mantras of other Western "gurus". They love to exploit fears of an imminent shortage of resources due to the impending overpopulation of the Earth, implicitly urging the flock to "stop idling its life away”. But perhaps Musk is just looking a little further into the future — more precisely, into forecasts about the future, which global elites have been guided with for half a century.

And it is these forecasts that are worth remembering. The fact is that by today they have been reborn from the theorising of pundits into political imperatives forcing entire continents to live “differently", if in general it can be called a life.

Report for Rockefeller

Musk is a consistent person. Already back in 2019, he wrote on Twitter: "Real issue will an ageing & declining world population by 2050, *not* overpopulation.” And he added: "Randers estimate far more accurate than UN imo.”

Who is Randers? He is a Norwegian futurist born in 1945, one of the four co-authors of the famous 1972 report "The Limits to Growth", made on the basis of computer modelling in the bowels of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) commissioned by the Rockefeller Club of Rome.

The compilers of the report, after analysing 12 scenarios of the future, came to a disappointing conclusion: if the current trends of population growth, industrialisation and consumption on Earth remain the same, then planetary resources will be exhausted within a hundred years. After which, a sudden and uncontrolled decline in the number of earthlings will begin, and with it also production capacity.

It followed from the report that in order to avoid a catastrophe, humanity must move as soon as possible to "sustainable development", "environmental responsibility" and "birth control". In half a century, these wishes have transformed into more odious exhortations: from "stop leaving a carbon footprint" to "sterilise all women after 35."

It should be added that in relation to Russia and the rest of the non-"golden billion" states, the agenda of the Club of Rome promises the collapse of demographic policy, total deindustrialisation, mass impoverishment of the population and, as a result, the loss of geopolitical subjectivity.

To pay, repent and die out

Immediately after its release, the report "Limits to Growth" was criticised by many scientists and economists. They accused the authors of simplistic extrapolations and later repeatedly pointed out the inconsistency of their calculations with reality. However, today the politically biased opinion prevails in the West that the 1972 report, although it was wrong in details, was essentially correct. And even too optimistic.

For example, the same Jorgen Randers celebrated his entry into the Club of Rome nine years ago with another piece of work - "2052: A global forecast for the next forty years", which, apparently, was read by Elon Musk. In it, "hour X" is transferred to the life of our generation.  According to Randers’ calculations, universal mortality will exceed the birth rate already in 2038.

While the number of the world's population will reach a maximum of 8.1 billion people by 2040 and will begin to decline steadily.

In forty years, the Norwegian's approach to the problem has changed little, but the rhetoric has become more brutal. In his essay "Plus 2°C by 2052. What to do?" Randers gives discouraging recipes for "creating a better world for our grandchildren":

1. Give birth to fewer children, especially in rich countries.

2. Reduce the environmental footprint, primarily by slowing down the use of coal, oil and gas in rich countries.

3. Build a low-carbon energy system in a poor world, paid for by the rich.

4. Create institutions that resist short-term national egoism.

In other words: the population of rich countries (not all, of course, but only those that will fall under the power of "supranational institutions" - read: the world government) will have to not just "pay and repent", but also quickly pass away, "cleansing the planet". And this is not counting the cherries on the cake, like the prosperity of a civilisation of computers mentioned in Randers' book, considering people as an inferior form of life.

But what is the difference between these forecasts mentioned by Musk and those of the United Nations? It's rather in numbers, and not in approach. So, according to the calculations of the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs from 2019, the number of earthlings will reach the ceiling of 10.9 billion people only at the very end of the 21st century and only then will it begin to decline. And in 2040, it will amount to 9.2 billion —  a billion more than Randers predicted.

As follows from the calculations of the UN, the global fertility level will fall below the critically important threshold of 2.1 children per woman already in 2060, Europe will begin to die out no later than in 2022, and the population of Russia at the end of the century will be only 126.1 million people.

So, does it mean that neither our country nor humanity as a whole will soon have a chance to "breed and multiply "? And even the personal efforts of the prolific Mask will be wasted?

Not at all. It all depends on the approach.

Kapitsa: the resources are limitless

The fundamental disadvantage of the "Limits to Growth" is the artificial limitation of human development by the resources available on the planet. The problem is that today we are not able to calculate what will be considered valuable in a hundred years. It's approximately in this way that the visionaries of the late 19th century predicted the death of London in 50 years under a three-meter layer of manure due to the exorbitant number of horse-drawn carriages. But cars appeared, and the old problem began to cause only laughter.

Approximately the same thing was pointed out by our illustrious compatriot Sergey Kapitsa. Being a member of the Club of Rome himself, Kapitsa presented at it in 2006 his own report "Global demographic blow-up and after", challenging the principles and calculations of the "Limits to Growth".

"The demographic transition — a transition to a stabilised world population of some 14 billion in a foreseeable future — is a systemic singularity and is determined by the inherent pattern of growth of an open system, rather than by the lack of resources,” Kapitsa argued.

The Club of Rome mechanistic approach is unable to explain the current demographic indicators and is unable to predict the future, the Russian scientist explained. Humanity is not a simple sum of countries, but a single dynamic system in which the exchange of information is the determining factor. People have always had and will have sufficient resources for development, mastering them with increasing efficiency. Whereas any "growth problems" are explained by the improper allocation of resources, and not by their physical shortage, Kapitsa noted in another similar piece of work.

...In fact, the report "Limits to Growth" and other neo-Malthusian theories are not science and not even a belief. This is an organisational weapon with which global elites have been trying to transform the world for half a century. Their goal is not to take care of humanity at all, but their own domination, including through the erasure of states, the elimination of the "superfluous" population and the redistribution of resources for their own benefit.

There are different ways to counteract this, and one of the most reliable ways was named by Musk: give birth to more children! It does not hurt, of course, to arm yourself with accurate knowledge about the world in which you are going to live. And also about how the Neo-Malthusians are trying to change it.