❝

For Malcolm and Simone Collins, 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.

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”.

The Collinses are leading spokespeople for a movement called pronatalism, popular in Silicon Valley. Elon Musk, a father of 11, is one of its leading proponents. “Population collapse due to low birth rates is a much bigger risk to civilization than global warming,” Musk tweeted.

Demographers disagree: there is no collapse, and one is not even predicted. Such evidence has not stopped the rise of pronatalism in response to an imagined “population bomb.”

Pronatalism has strong links to effective altruism, a movement tied to Silicon Valley and elite schools, which uses “evidence and reason to figure out how to benefit as many people as possible”, and longtermism, which insists our long-term future is the key moral priority.

The most profitable and fashionable place to be in media right now is pretending to be on the Left but actually being on the Right. Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Tulsi Gabbard and now Elizabeth Bruenig. Christ. There’s just SO MUCH of this shit.

I shouldn’t even have to say this, but “trad liberals” are much more pronatalist than all of these posturing trad wife Catholics and assorted other fad-following dummies.

How are we “pronatalist”? We fund public education and public health. We don’t tell people not to get their kids vaccinated. We protect the environment. We support workplace safety regs so parents can return to their children at the end of the workday. We support labor unions and high wage policy so parents have enough money to HAVE children. We invented WIC. We invented Head Start. We covered 37 million children under Medicaid and the Right fought us every step of the way. But all of these policies are too boring and old fashioned to attract our facile, silly elites in media and tech, so they think they discovered something new when tech titans told them there could be pro child policy. The far Right is fashionable now so expect every weak-minded ninny in media on Left, Right and Center to clamber aboard the far Right grift train. It’s all bullshit. Dull, wonky Medicaid expansion has done more for children than anything any of these people have done in their whole lives, or will ever do.

The best part of the far Right becoming fashionable and profitable is now normie, non elite Lefties and liberals are the counterculture. Maybe we can contact The Atlantic and the New York Times and tell them we invented Medicaid and food stamps in an Austin think tank and they’ll start actually covering real life.

Reply

Avatar

or to participate

Avatar

Pacem Appellant1 year ago

As someone who lives in Silicon Valley, works in Silicon Valley, and was born in Silicon Valley, I hate hate hate that they call this fad "popular in Silicon Valley." It is not. It is popular with fLDS Mormons, ultra-conservative Catholics, and two billionaires. Christ, they interviewed two idjits and their poor children in PA, which, last I checked, is several timezones separated from Santa Clara County, California.

Avatar

Marmot Pimpernel 1 year ago

There's no end to my rage that they plopped that "think" tank in Austin and called it The University of Austin. That's like a crazy shortcut to invalidating the college degrees of everyone who went to the very real, actually academic institution called the University of Texas at Austin.

This city was cool. And these heels like Rogan and Musk and those base opportunists at UofA came here all "it's Texas — yeeeee hawwww!" like they'd just watched freaking St. John Wayne all weekend in a special-K bender.

Avatar

Sepideh M1 year ago

There is an inherent white-supremacy to this Silicon Valley pro-natalist movement. It is edgy to be about getting married and having lots of kids when you live in a place where the men who surround you suffer from Peter Pan syndrome, and no one can afford a place big enough to house children.

The quiverfull types that mister mix is talking about end up with most of the people leaving the movement because growing up in poverty because your parents can't do math or use birth control is not as glorious as they want you to believe.

A lot of the trad-wives are incredibly rich, and some of them don't even have any kids so they are just building up a fancy influencer career, which is not a thing you can do while raising your own kids.

Avatar

Scott H1 year ago

I posit that there's an inherent white-supremacy to any "movement" originating in the Slicon Valley tech bro bubble.

Avatar

C P1 year ago

Never thought of it that way, but I see your point about what pro-natalism means in the specific context of Silicon Valley.

Avatar

Pacem Appellant1 year ago

Argh! I hate this framing! Pronatalism isn't a Silicon Valley thing! My home county is fucked up, and I hate my techbro neighbors, but pronatalism among techbros is limited to two billionaires, neither of which live in Santa Clara County.

Avatar

Sepideh M1 year ago

They think they are reinventing rich men having multiple mistresses in the way people in Silicon Valley reinvent stuff that already exists.

Who is the second billionaire who is trying to have a gazillion kids?

Avatar

Pacem Appellant1 year ago

For some reason I thought Ellison or Bezos had a ton of kids but they have 2 and four respectively. Four is too many, IMO, but not pro-natalist territory. So, just the one ketamine-addict billionaire thinks the US needs more white babies.

Avatar

Scott H1 year ago

Somebody I follow on twitter is more nuanced in the labeling, calling it the "Tech Right". As she puts it:

Natalism is a Tech Right obsession, like “race science” and eugenics.

And the usual media actors are coming into play on this, for example typical white Vox "journalist", Rachel Cohen, has written on this and it's a classic Vox approach to "lib up" fundamentally right wing ideas.

Little Ezra was recently interviewed by one of Theil's favorite economists, Tyler Cohen, where it was basically two white men discussing how to make women baby factories with Little Ezra citing a friggin podcast by noted deep thinker Bari Weiss and UK loon Louise Perry, a kindred spirit to Elizabeth Bruenig.

Avatar

Sepideh M1 year ago

I used to read all these folks, including Tyler Cowen. I still read him sometimes, and it is still terrible. But he shares the blog with Alex Tabarrok who is a Canadian economist who is better person than he is.

Avatar

mister mixAuthor1 year ago

We went to the eclipse in Texas last year. The place we were at was going to cloud over, so we drove to the parking lot of a WalMart on the edge of totality. One of these quiverfull families was there in their 15 passenger van. Kids from infants to late teens.

The women (mother and daughters) were doing all the work. The dad and boys were doing very little (dad did a couple of things). I didn't hear one word about why an eclipse was happening, but assumed this was their home school lesson for the day.

Those kids are going to be ignorant. The smarter ones will resent it and rebel. The less-smart ones will probably go on to have their own quiverfull. This is the reality of "pronatalism".

Avatar

Pacem Appellant1 year ago

Per the comment that I just posted, Austin isn't in Silicon Valley and the quiverfull dumbjucks I will bet you my life savings don't work at a SiVl company, either.

Avatar

C P1 year ago

"The most profitable and fashionable place to be in media right now is pretending to be on the Left but actually being on the Right. Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Tulsi Gabbard and now Elizabeth Bruenig. Christ. There’s just SO MUCH of this shit."

And effectively the entire mainstream media, which for at least two generations now has existed to launder right-wing talking points into left-wing audiences.

Avatar

Scott H1 year ago

Much of what you're describing has been pimped by centrist Dems for years now, using banal, progressive-sounding language to push glibertarian econ policies, anti-union, anti-public education (School Choice!) positions that come out of places like Niskanen, Mercatus, a myriad of Koch-networked groups or Theil-funded groups.

The Atlantic (and Vox) exist to launder such far-right propaganda into Totebagger Radio-friendly "think pieces". All the "abundance" bullshit of late is simply another rebrand of that. And yet, we've got plenty of people in our 'coalition' totally onboard. It's easy to single out clowns like Greenwald, Taibbi, et al., but we have a shitload of people who lap up MattY, Little Ezra and the rest of their very white, very entitled ilk whose messages ain't all that liberal.

They don't talk about Medicaid or food stamps either because at one level, their not at all removed from their "socially liberal/fiscally conservative" upbringing which hates stuff like that.

Avatar

mister mixAuthor1 year ago

If you want add to your list of terrible people (Greenwald, Taibbi, Yglesias, Klein), read some Elizabeth Bruenig. If I were to construct someone in a lab who was going to appeal to Democrats who wanted to "understand" the right wing, she's it. She was raised as a christian in Texas or somewhere like that, and converted to Catholicism (always a tell), so she's the natural conduit for these northeast rags who need a Dr. Dolittle to talk to the rubes. She has a very open mind when it comes to nonsense.

Her husband Matt is also an interesting piece of work - a very leftist public policy wonk.

Avatar

Scott H1 year ago

She's a certifiable loon, particularly on population. But hey, she's white and wealthy so immune from such pesky problems like climate change. I remember her from the Wa(com)Post: she represented a bevy of "young" writers the Post brought on (like the atrocious Monica Hesse) pre-Bezos in an effort to appeal to "the youngs". Like Hesse, she never wrote anything worth reading.

I'm actually familiar with him from twitter and my national networking on econ policy as it pertains to much of the stuff I rail about in here.

He had an interesting review of Little Ezra's "abundance" book:

"It’s a pop policy book written for a Malcolm Gladwell type of audience, which is a valuable thing for a political movement to have...the book is attempting to push forward a world that appears to be teeming with libertarians, right-wing Democrats like Jared Polis and Ritchie Torre, and tech sector types [and] does seem like it could head in some pretty bad directions."