Pessimism: The nature of the ultimate 'no' vote

By Jim Thompson
HCP columnist

I recently became embroiled in a heated argument on Facebook about how those with a pessimistic view of the future might want to determine their near term future actions.

My suggestion was very specific. I said if I were a 20-year-old today, the very first thing I would do is have a vasectomy.

After all, given conditions that have transpired in the United States in the last half century, condemning a child to live during the next 50 or 80 years is an irresponsible act if you adopt my viewpoint.

My logic is simply that the deterioration of society in the past few decades, coupled with an Islamic Jihadist commitment to kill off everyone who does not precisely follow their ways, assigns today’s babies to a bleak future.

Recent events in Libya reinforce the perception we a losing this war.

You would have thought I had suggested we euthanize this year’s kindergarten class. Progressive liberals, in particular, negatively and violently reacted to my assessment and suggested actions.

Why? They immediately see through this (they are not dumb) and realize this is the ultimate no vote on their agenda.

I did not say this in a distracted, theoretical way. I have a grandson who will turn 4 in February. My daughter is pregnant. I am not thrilled. I weep for these children, for it is clear that they are going to grow up in a society more repressive, more totalitarian, more financially burdened than the one I have enjoyed – if things don’t change.

The current view of the United States of the future, should the progressive liberals continue to dominate the agenda as they have for many decades, is bleak.

Interestingly, others, by their very definitive actions, indicate they are at least partially in agreement with this view.

Federal government (Centers for Disease Control, the CDC) information released on Oct. 3 indicates that U.S. birth rates have declined for the fourth year in a row.

In 2011, births dropped to 3.95 million, from a peak of 4.32 million in 2007. Prior to 2007, births had risen steadily since 1998 – the last time births were as low as the numbers recorded last year.

“The preliminary general fertility rate (GFR) for 2011 was 63.2 births per 1,000 women age 15-44 years, the lowest rate ever reported for the United States” according to the CDC. Even during the Great Depression rates were not this low – the lowest year during that time, 1933, recorded a GFR of 76.3.

Of course, this could partially be explained by the bleak, short-term economic conditions during the current president’s administration. However, if it continues at the current pace or lower (last year’s rate of birth was 1.9 per woman), it means our population will decline.

This is a huge problem already for Japan and Italy. It simply means not enough people are being born to replace the current population and hence to support all the progressive liberal programs promised us by the government to take care of us throughout our lifetimes.

So, this is the pessimistic view of the future. I find myself standing almost alone with this posture, although I am not sure why. When I have suggested to grandparents that their desire to have grandchildren was motivated by selfish wishes rather than a view from the newborn child’s lifetime prospects, this only resulted in larger and nastier figurative rotten tomatoes being thrown at me.

Perhaps I am suggesting people consider issues they do not wish to face. However, if you don’t like this view, next week I plan on providing arguments that will suggest a positive outlook for the future. Stay tuned.

Jim Thompson, formerly of Marshall, is a graduate of Hillsboro High School and the University of Cincinnati. He resides in Duluth, Ga., following decades of wandering the world, and is a columnist for The Highland County Press.