I am the eldest of nine, and most of them I would say have been a positive contribution to the world. I had five of my own, however due to serious mistakes I made early in life I was not able to raise them according to my own values and share whatever wisdom I have been blessed to gain due to the trials and experiences that came to change how I experience the world. A little late in life now to correct that situation, however I do believe we are eternal beings and there will be a time for all that seemed to be lost.
Nine and five—that is terrific. Thank you for adding so much to the world. In addition to those new humans, they will make more new humans, and so on and so on, and who knows what good things they might do!
Being the youngest of a family of 9 kids I decided at a very early age that I had no desire to have children of my own. With 21 nieces and nephews I have always figured my family line was very much intact without any help from me. I knew I wanted to pursue a life of art and I was always pretty solitary and not very attracted to the idea of marriage and kids anyways.
That being said, I take no offense at all to the ideas you are putting forward here, I think they are completely valid. One of the main reasons I didn't pursue marriage and children is because of the deep responsibility and lifetime commitment involved, that is not something I was willing to take on because my commitment was to the creative urge as opposed to the 'procreative urge". That is just me, that was my choice, but I completely respect and admire anyone who is willing to take on the responsibilities of raising a family.
As someone in that category to which you directed your apology -- and I thank you for that, because the rise in awareness of the low birth rates of advanced civilizations has led my caste to be increasingly marginalized in the alternative sphere -- I just keep asking, "Why?"
As a biologist, I find my own subset of the population fascinating. I never once desired to raise children. Ever. This goes against my biological imperative, and I'm clearly not alone, so I keep scratching my head as to *why* this shift away from what is, let's face it, the most basal and natural desire of a living animal. Most on the right seem to be arguing that it is a top-down phenomenon, that the WEF-crowd has pushed anti-baby propaganda that has resulted in this downward trend, but ... That doesn't "feel" correct to in my particular case. My lack of desire to procreate has always felt intuitive, biological even, but that goes against nature.
I don't have an answer. I do, however, find the issue to be quite fascinating.
It's difficult to argue, I think, that we are at a global inflection point. Whether you want to call it a "fourth turning" or a Kali Yuga or a prophecy foretold in the Book of Revelation, it truly does seems as though *something* is happening. That said, I don't think it's necessarily going to be a bad something. I can't help wondering, however, if the awareness of this mysterious and monumentous something -- on a subconscious level -- is a major driver in suppressing the birthrate of certain populations. Again, though, that still doesn't entirely answer the question of WHY.
One explanation that, if I understand correctly, is fairly well broadly accepted is that as economies industrialize and then modernize, birth rates fall. The fall in birth rates does fairly well track with the economic modernization that has taken place over the last 100 years, and acutely in the "developing" world over the last 25.
Could that be the bulk of it? (Even if it is not fully explanatory in your, or every, case?)
Perhaps that explains some of it, but I think there is more to it than that. Something intangible, related somehow to whatever global shift is in the process of occurring.
I am reminded of the mystery of so-called Colony Collapse Disorder in honeybees. I wonder if this phenomenon, and that of declining human birthrates, could share a common or related etiology.
"Society = a group of people united by some cohering factor (geography, ethnicity, culture, etc.)."
this right here is the most concise definition of society I have seen! perfectly stated, imo.
there is an old teaching that I took to heart when my children came and that was my children were not my own. they were a gift entrusted to me to learn from and to impart to what i learned. to guide them and release them on each step of the way as the time came as an arrow from a bow on their path knowing that life had them as it had always had me.
i have real issue with the terminology of "highly social". we are interdependent which is a word i don't see used often and I prefer. i think "ultra social & highly social" are being perpetuated purposely in the last few years and creating misunderstanding, mental dis-ease and confusion especially in our youth.
many comments point to a lot of us being solitary yet we do depend on others and like having the choice & right to determine our own need and help desired as well as what we choose & can offer to others consistently.
thoughts?
the greatest gift I tried to impart was the trusting of themselves and confidence to walk their own path even when different
not trying to divert from your topic here with my issues but life always finds a way but at what cost? many times extermination & obliteration has been attempted yet has never totally succeeded. i think it is important to recognize the reality of our species, our kind as human beings, and that we are not all "highly or ultra social" yet the chemical truth of like attracts like does apply. we need each other and are interdependent. what we need each other for is highly determinant and subjective as well as objective/goal oriented.
I got the term “ultra-social” primarily from comparative psychologist Michael Tomasello—specifically from work he was doing comparing toddlers and chimpanzees in research (while at the University of Leipzig, IIRC). He demonstrated that even human toddlers demonstrate far more social understanding and behavior than adult chimpanzees. Humans cooperate, communicate, have an understanding of fairness, etc. in ways that are completely foreign even to our closest genetic relatives. We choose to live in groups, and are wired to do so.
“Interdependent” is certainly also an excellent term for our relationships to one another. I guess I am a little fuzzy on what your issue is with terms like “ultra social” or “highly social.” Can you further clarify your concern?
i have seen this terminology used in various arenas from education, ngo's, govt, to philosophy etc. it is incorporated into teaching documents & classes regarding behaviour modification, group interaction, etc. as far as I can tell it coincides with definition changes that occurred with such words as humanity, culture, community, society a number of years back by the UN, WEF and associated groups for the international community. It seems to be s tool of collectivism, hive mind programming/teaching. We as a whole are not an ultra nor highly social species as is being perpetuated.
most community is built out of perceived necessity or self expediency. within that community there is different societies which often overlap, such as religious, ethnic, service, etc. there will always be on the edges those who build who are dependent on the services & structure of the larger community yet don't want to be immersed as well as those who choose to live more isolated.
If looked at from the lens of the chimpanzee example you mentioned i cannot at this moment think of any species that is not social in that way (can you?) yet also supports, encourages, & forces expansion of other community expansion & sub specie development...like other dominant males moving on while some males remain.
the use of the term has some people questioning, defending, fighting natural inclination & preference which is especially concerning to me because of the youth being taught what i think is twisted and broadly erroneous in generalization.
regarding the chimpazee...which I find to be a selective disparaging to human beings choice especially since now rats & mice are used for genetic purposes...
If his point was inate traits that case was made regarding domestication and programming by dogs & other species. of the apes, gorillas demonstrate both the best & the failings of human beings as societal. even rats & mice do, although some would profess to esteem ants & bees kinds colonies as aspirational. i kind of like badgers, wolverines, whales, prairie dogs & pit vipers
there have been many such studies all interpreted and reported for the benefit of the initiating group to use for influence & sway...whether sociologist, medical or philosophist...for religions, special interests, blah blah. such as the 100 monkey which demonstrates clearly my point about the use of such terms & how they originate & spread gaining broad acceptance & common usage without proper understanding of its overstanding, nuance or real distinctions being addressed in our "whole of society" world being created. no, we cannot save the world but we can build one based not on the past but on the wisdom the weakness of our kind has taught us.
I think I get what you are saying overall. I have not followed specific redefinitions of words, but nothing surprises me from our wicked would-be overlords. (And yes, we are not ants or bees, nor should we aspire to that level of totalitarian collectivism!)
Tomasello's experiments were interesting and added to a body of data that I think offers very good news from a classical-liberal standpoint. The way I interpret this body of data is as evidence that rights really are natural. That an understanding of rights is built into the human species, and manifests at very early ages.
In favorite experiment (not one of Tomasello's), extremely young children are told that teacher has lifted the rule against eating in class. So they begin eating in class. Then they are told that teacher has lifted the rule against hitting their fellow students. But they do not start hitting their fellow students. Instead, the scold the teacher quite vehemently.
We need to form groups to specialize, trade, procreate, etc., and we choose to do so even though we are free to choose otherwise. Plus, even the nastiest of criminals tend to go nutty in solitary confinement.
It is stuff like all of the above that I am referring to when I describe us as a social species. But I will keep my eyes and ears open for misuses of the terms!
lol. ty. in confinement they were denied anything but the screams of their neighbors & their own mind. now, rarely are they alone but usually have a cellmate & some property. now they are beginning to allow them their tablets.
i spent my life around children. work & home & animals. i was a solitary in the midst of crowds. lol. i have spent over a decade focussed on how the 60 plus years of manipulative propaganda has been applied. it is one thing to know the steps & tactics but i needed to know how these pursuasion techniques were applied to destroy us even whilst supposedly with intent to do good. one thing i have found is that most of the time we are talking past each other thinking we are talking about the same thing, agreeing and then when you get into it find out not even talking about the same thing. you are very concise and seem to take time to achieve clarity & understanding. "highly social" is more an abstract??
lord, writing this stuff is not my chosen profession! for a time discussing it was. i miss that.
I think what you point out—the difficulties of communication in general—is why it is so good to remain calm, civil, friendly, etc., and to take the time to try to understand. Most everyone here at the Freedom Scale has been really good about that.
What would you say would be the best way to avoid the propaganda? Just do the obvious and avoid most mass-media?
I was a young adult in my mid twenties. I was having a conversation with my best friends brother about starting a family. It was a popular topic then because of the feminine revolution. I mentioned motherhood might not fit into my future lifestyle as a traveling entertainer. His response shocked me and woke me up when he said if we don’t continue procreation our Caucasian race would be greatly reduced. Much of feminism propaganda back then was directed towards Caucasians.
It could be argued, I suppose, that feminism was primarily a phenomenon in Caucasian-founded countries/cultures, so Caucasians might have just been the de facto target because of that. Then again, you do hear a fair amount of targeted rhetoric as well. It’s all gross.
Directed at the take your bra-off-white-gals! Lol! That’s what I noticed back in those days and I lived in a multi cultural community where Mexican gals preened themselves each day focusing on their grooming and beauty while us white gals were trained to stop shaving and throw our make up away. A certain amount of men-hate came along with it. Aaron Russo has some good videos exposing this psyop operation — if you can find them.
I managed to have My first and only child 12 days before My 46th birthday. Went into menopause even while breastfeeding. I have an article about what happened with My blessed daughter:
I am the eldest of nine, and most of them I would say have been a positive contribution to the world. I had five of my own, however due to serious mistakes I made early in life I was not able to raise them according to my own values and share whatever wisdom I have been blessed to gain due to the trials and experiences that came to change how I experience the world. A little late in life now to correct that situation, however I do believe we are eternal beings and there will be a time for all that seemed to be lost.
Nine and five—that is terrific. Thank you for adding so much to the world. In addition to those new humans, they will make more new humans, and so on and so on, and who knows what good things they might do!
Being the youngest of a family of 9 kids I decided at a very early age that I had no desire to have children of my own. With 21 nieces and nephews I have always figured my family line was very much intact without any help from me. I knew I wanted to pursue a life of art and I was always pretty solitary and not very attracted to the idea of marriage and kids anyways.
That being said, I take no offense at all to the ideas you are putting forward here, I think they are completely valid. One of the main reasons I didn't pursue marriage and children is because of the deep responsibility and lifetime commitment involved, that is not something I was willing to take on because my commitment was to the creative urge as opposed to the 'procreative urge". That is just me, that was my choice, but I completely respect and admire anyone who is willing to take on the responsibilities of raising a family.
As someone in that category to which you directed your apology -- and I thank you for that, because the rise in awareness of the low birth rates of advanced civilizations has led my caste to be increasingly marginalized in the alternative sphere -- I just keep asking, "Why?"
As a biologist, I find my own subset of the population fascinating. I never once desired to raise children. Ever. This goes against my biological imperative, and I'm clearly not alone, so I keep scratching my head as to *why* this shift away from what is, let's face it, the most basal and natural desire of a living animal. Most on the right seem to be arguing that it is a top-down phenomenon, that the WEF-crowd has pushed anti-baby propaganda that has resulted in this downward trend, but ... That doesn't "feel" correct to in my particular case. My lack of desire to procreate has always felt intuitive, biological even, but that goes against nature.
I don't have an answer. I do, however, find the issue to be quite fascinating.
It's difficult to argue, I think, that we are at a global inflection point. Whether you want to call it a "fourth turning" or a Kali Yuga or a prophecy foretold in the Book of Revelation, it truly does seems as though *something* is happening. That said, I don't think it's necessarily going to be a bad something. I can't help wondering, however, if the awareness of this mysterious and monumentous something -- on a subconscious level -- is a major driver in suppressing the birthrate of certain populations. Again, though, that still doesn't entirely answer the question of WHY.
One explanation that, if I understand correctly, is fairly well broadly accepted is that as economies industrialize and then modernize, birth rates fall. The fall in birth rates does fairly well track with the economic modernization that has taken place over the last 100 years, and acutely in the "developing" world over the last 25.
Could that be the bulk of it? (Even if it is not fully explanatory in your, or every, case?)
Perhaps that explains some of it, but I think there is more to it than that. Something intangible, related somehow to whatever global shift is in the process of occurring.
I am reminded of the mystery of so-called Colony Collapse Disorder in honeybees. I wonder if this phenomenon, and that of declining human birthrates, could share a common or related etiology.
If that is the case with humans, then I believe it is cyclical—and that when the time comes when we once again need higher fertility, it will happen!
I have absolute faith that this is the case. The Human is one resilient species!
Right on. My son and his sons will save us.
"Society = a group of people united by some cohering factor (geography, ethnicity, culture, etc.)."
this right here is the most concise definition of society I have seen! perfectly stated, imo.
there is an old teaching that I took to heart when my children came and that was my children were not my own. they were a gift entrusted to me to learn from and to impart to what i learned. to guide them and release them on each step of the way as the time came as an arrow from a bow on their path knowing that life had them as it had always had me.
i have real issue with the terminology of "highly social". we are interdependent which is a word i don't see used often and I prefer. i think "ultra social & highly social" are being perpetuated purposely in the last few years and creating misunderstanding, mental dis-ease and confusion especially in our youth.
many comments point to a lot of us being solitary yet we do depend on others and like having the choice & right to determine our own need and help desired as well as what we choose & can offer to others consistently.
thoughts?
the greatest gift I tried to impart was the trusting of themselves and confidence to walk their own path even when different
not trying to divert from your topic here with my issues but life always finds a way but at what cost? many times extermination & obliteration has been attempted yet has never totally succeeded. i think it is important to recognize the reality of our species, our kind as human beings, and that we are not all "highly or ultra social" yet the chemical truth of like attracts like does apply. we need each other and are interdependent. what we need each other for is highly determinant and subjective as well as objective/goal oriented.
I got the term “ultra-social” primarily from comparative psychologist Michael Tomasello—specifically from work he was doing comparing toddlers and chimpanzees in research (while at the University of Leipzig, IIRC). He demonstrated that even human toddlers demonstrate far more social understanding and behavior than adult chimpanzees. Humans cooperate, communicate, have an understanding of fairness, etc. in ways that are completely foreign even to our closest genetic relatives. We choose to live in groups, and are wired to do so.
“Interdependent” is certainly also an excellent term for our relationships to one another. I guess I am a little fuzzy on what your issue is with terms like “ultra social” or “highly social.” Can you further clarify your concern?
i have seen this terminology used in various arenas from education, ngo's, govt, to philosophy etc. it is incorporated into teaching documents & classes regarding behaviour modification, group interaction, etc. as far as I can tell it coincides with definition changes that occurred with such words as humanity, culture, community, society a number of years back by the UN, WEF and associated groups for the international community. It seems to be s tool of collectivism, hive mind programming/teaching. We as a whole are not an ultra nor highly social species as is being perpetuated.
most community is built out of perceived necessity or self expediency. within that community there is different societies which often overlap, such as religious, ethnic, service, etc. there will always be on the edges those who build who are dependent on the services & structure of the larger community yet don't want to be immersed as well as those who choose to live more isolated.
If looked at from the lens of the chimpanzee example you mentioned i cannot at this moment think of any species that is not social in that way (can you?) yet also supports, encourages, & forces expansion of other community expansion & sub specie development...like other dominant males moving on while some males remain.
the use of the term has some people questioning, defending, fighting natural inclination & preference which is especially concerning to me because of the youth being taught what i think is twisted and broadly erroneous in generalization.
regarding the chimpazee...which I find to be a selective disparaging to human beings choice especially since now rats & mice are used for genetic purposes...
If his point was inate traits that case was made regarding domestication and programming by dogs & other species. of the apes, gorillas demonstrate both the best & the failings of human beings as societal. even rats & mice do, although some would profess to esteem ants & bees kinds colonies as aspirational. i kind of like badgers, wolverines, whales, prairie dogs & pit vipers
there have been many such studies all interpreted and reported for the benefit of the initiating group to use for influence & sway...whether sociologist, medical or philosophist...for religions, special interests, blah blah. such as the 100 monkey which demonstrates clearly my point about the use of such terms & how they originate & spread gaining broad acceptance & common usage without proper understanding of its overstanding, nuance or real distinctions being addressed in our "whole of society" world being created. no, we cannot save the world but we can build one based not on the past but on the wisdom the weakness of our kind has taught us.
I think I get what you are saying overall. I have not followed specific redefinitions of words, but nothing surprises me from our wicked would-be overlords. (And yes, we are not ants or bees, nor should we aspire to that level of totalitarian collectivism!)
Tomasello's experiments were interesting and added to a body of data that I think offers very good news from a classical-liberal standpoint. The way I interpret this body of data is as evidence that rights really are natural. That an understanding of rights is built into the human species, and manifests at very early ages.
In favorite experiment (not one of Tomasello's), extremely young children are told that teacher has lifted the rule against eating in class. So they begin eating in class. Then they are told that teacher has lifted the rule against hitting their fellow students. But they do not start hitting their fellow students. Instead, the scold the teacher quite vehemently.
We need to form groups to specialize, trade, procreate, etc., and we choose to do so even though we are free to choose otherwise. Plus, even the nastiest of criminals tend to go nutty in solitary confinement.
It is stuff like all of the above that I am referring to when I describe us as a social species. But I will keep my eyes and ears open for misuses of the terms!
lol. ty. in confinement they were denied anything but the screams of their neighbors & their own mind. now, rarely are they alone but usually have a cellmate & some property. now they are beginning to allow them their tablets.
i spent my life around children. work & home & animals. i was a solitary in the midst of crowds. lol. i have spent over a decade focussed on how the 60 plus years of manipulative propaganda has been applied. it is one thing to know the steps & tactics but i needed to know how these pursuasion techniques were applied to destroy us even whilst supposedly with intent to do good. one thing i have found is that most of the time we are talking past each other thinking we are talking about the same thing, agreeing and then when you get into it find out not even talking about the same thing. you are very concise and seem to take time to achieve clarity & understanding. "highly social" is more an abstract??
lord, writing this stuff is not my chosen profession! for a time discussing it was. i miss that.
I think what you point out—the difficulties of communication in general—is why it is so good to remain calm, civil, friendly, etc., and to take the time to try to understand. Most everyone here at the Freedom Scale has been really good about that.
What would you say would be the best way to avoid the propaganda? Just do the obvious and avoid most mass-media?
I was a young adult in my mid twenties. I was having a conversation with my best friends brother about starting a family. It was a popular topic then because of the feminine revolution. I mentioned motherhood might not fit into my future lifestyle as a traveling entertainer. His response shocked me and woke me up when he said if we don’t continue procreation our Caucasian race would be greatly reduced. Much of feminism propaganda back then was directed towards Caucasians.
It could be argued, I suppose, that feminism was primarily a phenomenon in Caucasian-founded countries/cultures, so Caucasians might have just been the de facto target because of that. Then again, you do hear a fair amount of targeted rhetoric as well. It’s all gross.
Directed at the take your bra-off-white-gals! Lol! That’s what I noticed back in those days and I lived in a multi cultural community where Mexican gals preened themselves each day focusing on their grooming and beauty while us white gals were trained to stop shaving and throw our make up away. A certain amount of men-hate came along with it. Aaron Russo has some good videos exposing this psyop operation — if you can find them.
Yuck. Terrible!
I managed to have My first and only child 12 days before My 46th birthday. Went into menopause even while breastfeeding. I have an article about what happened with My blessed daughter:
I Should Have Known (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/i-should-have-known
Herr Cook
Free Hunter Biden!
BLM
Biden
Lives
Matter
Tusen Takk
Jon
🤣