Natalism for Progressives
I’m not sure if this is against the etiquette of substack posts, but I wanted to point out that I’ve had a fairly lengthy piece published in the latest issue of Works in Progress magazine.
The piece, titled Natalism for Progressives, argues that those of us who care about human progress should care more about natalism. In short, its argument is that without new humans, growth will slow, and we will be less likely to reach the stars. Instead we’ll have an aging population which will lead to more policy like the UK’s new tax raise to fund social care.
It also argues that, too often, the cause of natalism is dominated by unsavory types. This needn’t be the case. Caring about there being more children being born need not mean telling people, particularly women, what to do. Instead, we should be single-minded in helping families have the children they *want* but are currently unable to have.
I do hope you take the time to read the piece. Its accompanied by some fantastic articles on how problems with housing explain a lot of problems in the Western world (which links very nicely to my piece); how cooking at home has improved no-end since 1960; the future of weightloss; how new technologies are developed and launched; how trust in science undermines the very institution of science; and how we’re all vastly overrating the chance we will be wiped out by a giant asteroid.
Enjoy!