Or so says the all-seeing, all-knowing . . . no, not the Wizard of Oz, but close. It’s Elon Musk. So you know it must be true. Right?

And what does he brings us today? Not, for once, a product of his fertile imagination, but a concept that has been around for a while, and that he has now wholeheartedly embraced: Pronatalism.

“Excuse me? What the hell is that?” . . . I hear from every direction, including from my own mind. So let’s break it down into its individual parts:

pro: meaning “for” or “in favor of.”
natal: referring to birth.
ism: a belief system.

Now I’m beginning to get it . . . sort of. It’s a movement to get people . . . well . . . moving. Having more children, to be specific — lots and lots of children — whether you want them or not. Remember yesterday’s discussion of Musk’s alleged (but denied) offer to donate his sperm in order to populate Mars? Well, it sounds like it’s gonna be one big ‘60s-style love-in.

Now, cut that out! This is serious.

And strange. He was just telling us we need to get Mars ready to be inhabited because we’ve pretty much worn Earth to a frazzle, and now he says we need more people here? Surely he’s talking about raising the first generation to be sent to Mars . . . right? That would sort of, almost, make sense.

Well, now I’m not so sure. Because what the Pronatalists are saying is that, in spite of Earth’s worsening problems — not the least of which are the environmental issues caused by global warming, which in turn is partially the result of overpopulation — our planet is actually in danger of becoming . . . drumroll, please . . .

UNDERpopulated!!! We need more people.

Again: “Excuse me? What the hell . . .?”

Yes, I hear you. And I’m with you. There does seem to be a bit of a dichotomy here. Does Musk even realize that he’s touting two diametrically opposed premises: one, that the Earth’s resources are being exhausted due to the ravages of over-population so that an alternative habitat must be found; and two, that . . .

Well, this is where it gets interesting, and somewhat complicated. Two articles, both focused on a couple named Malcolm and Simone Collins, explain it most clearly. According to Luke Munn of the University of Queensland in his May 28, 2024, article in theconversation.com, “Pronatalism is the latest Silicon Valley trend.” Its advocates feel that “declining birth rates across many developed countries are an existential threat. The solution is to have ‘tons of kids,’ and to use a hyperrational, data-driven approach to guide everything from genetic selection to baby names and day-to-day parenting.” [Luke Munn, The Guardian, id.]

My initial reaction: Stepford babies??!!! Holy crap!

And reading on, I found I wasn’t far off. In fact, it appears to be even worse than I’d feared.

As Mr. Munn describes the Collinses: “They don’t heat their Pennsylvania home in winter, because heating is a ‘pointless indulgence.’ Their children wear iPads around their necks. And a Guardian journalist witnessed Malcolm strike their two-year-old across the face for misbehaviour, a parenting style they apparently developed based on watching ‘tigers in the wild.’”

I was about to Google the number for Pennsylvania Child Protective Services when I came across another article, this one by Jenny Kleeman of The Guardian, detailing her interview with the Collinses, which took place when Simone Collins was eight months pregnant with their fourth child. When Ms. Kleeman arrived at the Collins home, she met their four-year-old son, Octavian George Collins. His little brother, two-year-old Torsten Savage Collins, was “on his iPad somewhere upstairs.” Simone had her daughter, 16-month-old Titan Invictus Collins, strapped to her back — perhaps as a counterweight to her eight-months-pregnant belly. And Ms. Kleeman was proudly told that the name chosen for the soon-to-be born fourth baby — a girl — was Industry Americus Collins. [Jenny Kleeman, The Guardian, May 25, 2024.]

This was now beginning to sound more like Orwell’s 1984.

And I thought Elon Musk and a few show biz stars were the only ones who cursed their kids with names that will plague them throughout their lives . . . or until they’re old enough to have them legally changed.

I’m fairly certain (or at least I hope) that not all Pronatalists are cruel to their children. But they do share the basic belief that — as stated by Elon Musk on X — “Population collapse due to low birth rates is a much bigger risk to civilization than global warming.” [Id.] They’re afraid that, with the growth of the aging population, there won’t be enough younger people to support their elders, or to keep the world running as the older folks retire and ultimately pass on.

What does not seem to be taken into consideration is that birth rates are not declining across the board; in some countries, including much of Africa, populations are expanding at troublesome rates. Shouldn’t we work on that as well? And although the Pronatalist advocates do propose financial assistance and other programs to support families with multiple children in the lower-birth-rate countries, I have yet to see an explanation of how those governments are expected to cover the added costs. Those droves of additional children aren’t going to be pumping tax dollars into the national budget for a good many years. And their parents don’t all have the resources of Elon Musk. (In fact, neither do some countries!)

*. *. *

I did warn you that it was complicated, and . . . what’s the word? . . . unusual. In the interests of time and space, I’ll leave you to check out the cited articles for further details, if you think your psyche can handle it. But while we’re trying to figure out the pros and cons of this (quite literally) growing movement, keep in mind that Elon Musk and his like-minded friends are busily cranking out duplicates, and triplicates, and quadruplicates of themselves.

Quelle nightmare!

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
7/16/24