The liberal baby bust

[Postmanx]

USA Today


What's the difference between Seattle and Salt Lake City? There are many differences, of course, but here's one you might not know. In Seattle, there are nearly 45% more dogs than children. In Salt Lake City, there are nearly 19% more kids than dogs.

This curious fact might at first seem trivial, but it reflects a much broader and little-noticed demographic trend that has deep implications for the future of global culture and politics. It's not that people in a progressive city such as Seattle are so much fonder of dogs than are people in a conservative city such as Salt Lake City. It's that progressives are so much less likely to have children.

It's a pattern found throughout the world, and it augers a far more conservative future — one in which patriarchy and other traditional values make a comeback, if only by default. Childlessness and small families are increasingly the norm today among progressive secularists. As a consequence, an increasing share of all children born into the world are descended from a share of the population whose conservative values have led them to raise large families.

Tomorrow's children, therefore, unlike members of the postwar baby boom generation, will be for the most part descendants of a comparatively narrow and culturally conservative segment of society. To be sure, some members of the rising generation may reject their parents' values, as often happens. But when they look for fellow secularists with whom to make common cause, they will find that most of their would-be fellow travelers were quite literally never born.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. I see this trend in my classroom

where the conservative parents all have three and four children and most of the more liberal parents have one.

Europe appears to be experiencing the same trend. My husband is from Germany. Our two children are the only progeny out of 11 cousins.

[Midlodemocrat]

I have three. So does my brother.

Most everyone I know here has three, both Rethug AND Dem.

[Pirate Smile]

12. I've got three also.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

30. Y'all are doing your part!

I only managed two.

[serryjw]

8. It would also be interesting to see

how many (like me!) that are VERY liberal never had children. Does my liberal cat count?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

13. Yes, I wouldn't know about them!

My son is getting married this year and is very liberal and I'm not real sure if kids are in the future or not.

[serryjw]

16. Most liberals are

working class people, are secular and don't have children they can't afford. This may all change as the family farm/business is a thing of the past. Raising children in a urban setting is expensive even if you lean towards conservative values.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

39. I'm wondering

is "working class" the same as middle class? (In your definition)

[radio4progressives]

69. working class is the range from low wage workers to working middle class

but the so called "middle class" - traditionally has always meant the blue & white collar workers, when the working class could afford to purchase a medium sized home with an affordable modest rate mortgage -

middle class was never considered the "investor class" -

[TallahasseeGrannie]

74. The reason I clarified

is that in my experience (around here) working class is often rather RW with the professional teachers, doctors, lawyers, etc., being liberal. (all of whom work, of course)

[Donald Ian Rankin]

32. I don't know. Does it vote?

[Yupster]

43. I read some magazine article a while back

that actually projected when the last German would die.

It was silly but the German birthrate is so low that they were actually able to extrapolate for hundreds of years and decide when Germans would become extinct.

It won't happen of course. Times change and Germany gets many immigrants too, but there is a real population replacement problem in many European countries, Germany included.

[cantstandbush]

57. I wager that child abuse and wife abuse will increase also. n/t

[I Have A Dream]

2. Very interesting.

It's not enough to make me want to have children, but it does concern me.

[LiberalEsto]

3. There's a lot of babies at our Unitarian church lately

Looking at the number of kids in our religious education classes, the number of new babies, the number on the way, and the number being adopted, I can only hope that these are signs of a new trend --liberal population growth.

[AlCzervik]

6. i have one, one i can afford, my sister has 2 and my rw neighbor

has 7--7 they cannot afford.

[LiberalEsto]

18. I'll betcha 3 or 4 of your neighbor's kids

rebel and end up becoming liberals when they get older.

[AlCzervik]

22. 2 for sure, i can pick up their vibe already, losing interest in church

activities and the eldest son Jr. finally took the Bush sticker off his shitbox.

[swag]

4. Ruy Teixeira has argued for a long time that Latino immigration

is one factor that would more than offset the incontinent breeding of the right-wingers.

Ruy's blog:

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/

[TallahasseeGrannie]

24. I was under the impression

and I could be mistaken, that most Latin families are Catholic and conservative?

[AllieB]

60. Catholics still vote Democratic by a 60-40 margin

I would wager that among working-class Catholics, the percentage is higher.

[Xithras]

72. Most Latino's just don't vote.

As my very Latino friend once put it "Our choice is between supporting a party we don't agree with, and one that wants to throw us out of the country".

Sadly, WE are the party they don't agree with. Mention abortion rights to a recent Latino immigrant and observe the look of horror on their face. Ask them about "proper family dynamics", and you'll hear a macho, male dominated answer straight out of 1950's America and freeper wet dreams. And babies? They have LOTS of babies...unlike the descendants of the European Catholics, Latino Catholics are far more likely to heed the papal decrees against birth control. I've had discussions with Latino students that would horrify any decent liberal.

IMO, we'll eventually see the formation of a Latino political party in this country. It's simply a matter of numbers right now, but neither party is really serving latino needs.

[aquart]

5. Who is paying for those children?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

29. If you mean the children in Utah

I'd assume they are Mormons and they are pretty affluent. At least around here they are. And those are the largest families in my school. Seven and eight kids.

[underpants]

7. "fellow travelers"?????

Tomorrow's children, therefore, unlike members of the postwar baby boom generation, will be for the most part descendants of a comparatively narrow and culturally conservative segment of society. To be sure, some members of the rising generation may reject their parents' values, as often happens. But when they look for fellow secularists with whom to make common cause, they will find that most of their would-be fellow travelers were quite literally never born.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellow_travelers

A fellow traveller is a person who sympathizes with the beliefs of a particular organization, but does not belong to that organization. The phrase must be understood as referring to people who "walk part of the way" with an organization, without committing themselves to it. The term is most often applied to a sympathizer of communism, or particular communist states such as the Soviet Union, who is nonetheless not a "card-carrying member" of a Communist Party.

[4dsc]

9. Peak oil will take of them all

I wouldn't be put much emphasis on this story as this nation faces an energy crisis, the likes that have never been seen before. These poor children are going to grow up in a society that doesn't look anything like it does today!!

[GreenPartyVoter]

10. Yes, it's hard to beat them on numbers. Those of us who only have a couple

of kids at most because of earth resources and population concerns are becoming a smaller and smaller minority. Which menas we have to somehow "convert" their offspring to keep things balanced.

Then again, the world has been filled with ignorant people for as long as humans have existed. We may yet see another enlightenment one day as the pendulum swings back again.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

41. It has always been that way

and I would assume it always will be that way.

[bluestateguy]

11. Possibly

But never assume that children will end up voting just like their parents, and I see rising rates of immigration as helping the Left even out this disparity.

People on the Left are less likely to lead conformist lives, meaning that they won't have children just because the rulebook of society says you are supposed to do at a certain age. This would also explain why people on the Left are more inclined to want to live in the city rather than the suburbs (most of them anyway, save for trendy places like Marin County, CA) or some homogeneous small town. In cities, diversity is appreciated and celebrated, while small towns and most suburbs look upon diversity and alternative lifestyles with disdain or suspicion.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

42. I think you are right about small towns vs. cities

and I guess it is nice that there is a place for everyone. I grew up in a huge metropolitan area (NYC) and was happy to find more space, peace and quiet. I have a particular dislike for vehicular traffic. But I miss the diversity, even in this, a college town.

[daleo]

Is liberalism vs conservatism a genetic trait?

Mostly not, as far as I know. This kind of pop sociobiology strikes me as unlikely scare-mongering. I came from a big family and we are about equally split between liberals and conservatives. One's political development is influenced by much more than genetics and parental attitudes.

This is just more "inevitable victory of conservatism" pap.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

44. I think the dynamic works like this:

The working class conservative family puts enough money aside to send junior to an Ivy League school and boom. Liberal. Kind of like Meadow on the Sopranos.

The universities and professional class are basically the liberals in this country and by their nature a bit smaller than the greater middle class. The lines are crossed constantly.

They have more kids, they send them to us to go to college and we get them. It's always been that way. I don't think it is going to change. We don't have to be huge in numbers to be huge in influence and service.

[Mithras61]

14. There's another possibility...

The earth cannot support unlimited population growth. Those of us with smaller families will be better able to feed ourselves than those with larger families (it takes far less food to feed four than to feed 9, and a group of four is far more mobile than a group of 9). Maybe they (like the dinosaurs they replaced) will starve themselves into extinction...

[PunkPop]

15. I'm doing my part

It's a hell of a lot of work, but I like to think that the three I'm raising to think for themselves will counter at least three fundie drones who are probably being programmed right now to carry out what they think is the Word of God, and further screw up this country by voting for Republican thugs who's only goal is to enlarge their bank accounts no matter who it hurts.

[Writer]

17. This article makes the terrible assumption that...

conservative parents breed conservative children. There are more factors at play here.

[enlightenment]

36. Yes, that jumped right out --

the baby boomers may be more liberal, but their parents are/were members of the "Greatest Generation" -- and those folks are not generally considered liberal by any stretch.

Though they do change -- my parents, both in their 80s, life-long republicans, and retired career military (starting with WWII) have come over to the liberal side. Heck, my mother would be marching in the streets if she was able. Dad is still struggling with the switch, but can't abide what's happened to 'his' party.

[julialnyc]

37. Many of my most liberal friends came from conservative families

Some rebelled against the insanity, some moved to NY from a very red state, and some just didn't figure out who they were until later in life.

There is no formula.

[knitter4democracy]

77. I thought that too.

My hubby's parents are so Republican they get the catalog (there's really a party catalog and was ten years ago). He's close to being more liberal than I am. It's a false assumption.

[Atman]

19. What is to be expected when we don't educate the kids we already have?

Ignorance and poverty is prime breeding ground for, well...breeding. When people don't know anything about the impact their multiple births have on the planet, or why they should care, they can't be expected to be concerned about the consequences. Combined with poverty, wherein the expense of birth control and doctors visits must take a back seat to minimal food and shelter, and a welfare system which "rewards" child bearing, it is a recipe for disaster. It may upset the PC police to hear it said, but we democrats are at least partly to blame, because we've made it practically criminal for anyone to say that we must find a way to "stop them from breeding." Everybody has a free will! Everybody should be allowed to do what they please with their bodies! But when demographic trends like this are revealed, it still cannot be addressed directly, we have to tip toe around it with euphamisms and throw money without knowing what we're throwing it at.

I don't have a solution. It is complex, and the complexity is compounded by the many different factions who feel they have some stake in the lives of their constituents, be that stake religious membership, voting blocks, whatever. We live in an age where bold leadership is suspect and any attempt to address such personal issues as child bearing is met with an outcry from somebody.

(BTW, I know this story doesn't point to the poor and uneducated...but what the current A&E special called "Inside Polygamy" for a better grasp of Salt Lake City's problems. "Conservatism" in the context of the USA Today story is just another euphamism for "ignorance" and "poverty.")

:popcorn:

[TallahasseeGrannie]

47. And here is where it gets REAL interesting

because when you (the editorial you) start talking about who can breed and who can't, what have you got? The other F word.

(fascism)

All in the interest of creating a better, more liberal world. I always say if you move far enough to the left and far enough to the right, you'll meet yourself somewhere in the woods of Idaho.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

20. Ya, this would certainly explain the 60's

Traditional parents in post-war suburbia producing conservative children coming of age in the 60's...oh wait, just the opposite happened.:rofl:

[yorgatron]

21. my father voted republican when i was growing up,

but i'm pretty sure all 6 of us children vote for democratic candidates.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

48. Okay, I get what you mean

but where the heck DID the fundies come from? The Jesus Freaks? Are they an anomoly?

[llmart]

23. Well, it is a well-known fact......

that the more educated a woman is, the less children she has.

Therefore I deduce that conservatives aren't as educated as liberals:)

[otohara]

25. Liberal Care More About Environment Also

I felt so guilty using Huggies for my one kid. Over population does not concern republicans either. I don't know any republican's who recycle either.

They care not about the planet

[TallahasseeGrannie]

26. I've read all the posts to date

and it just occurred to me that this is the reason (duh) the Catholic Church is down on birth control. Because it controls the birth of Catholics. (double duh)

Their strategy appears to be working. And I guess the fundies who opposed BC have taken a page from that successful playbook.

[sam sarrha]

27. Freepers only breed with freepers, producing an Genetically Pure Alpha

Reich Wing Cylon.. the most hidious being ever to enter a civilized conversation...

[Efilroft Sul]

33. Cylon says...

TROOF.
\

[Iris]

28. Hmmm. So every child of a conservative family ends up being

a conservative adult?

[SmokingJacket]

31. They assume that conservatives have conservative kids...

Tell that to the flower children of the 60's!!!

[KurtNYC]

34. So when these kids grow up and rebel against their parents...

Boom! Millions of liberals!

[American Tragedy]

49. Agreed.

My best friend is very liberal despite (or perhaps because) her parents are scary right-wing.

[julialnyc]

35. My husband and I are liberal and do not have any kids yet

We just got married last summer and are both about to turn 30. While we are both approaching 30 I am the first one of my friends to get married.My husband has some friends that are married-- and conservative (some that married in their young 20's).

Maybe it has to do with where we live, but my liberal friends seem to get married later in life (which might make it harder to have as many children.

[jeffrey_X]

63. Same here...

We got married when we were 33/34. We have no plans for kids.

[julialnyc]

84. we want to have kids, but we have some time

I don't want 15 children so I don't feel like I'm that old to begin in a few years. I can't imagine starting as young as some do

[K-W]

38. Liberal isnt a race of people.

Liberals do not need to worry about out reproducing thier political opponants.

Those children are not our enemies, they are our potential allies. Liberal isnt genetic, and one can just as easily become enlightened by liberal parents as one can become enlightened by growing up in the heart of a christian dystopia.

The subtext of this argument is a reinforcement of the culture war mentality, a mentality that is wholly destructive to the progressive cause. We must look at these communities as alienated allies, not as the enemy. We will not achieve progress by having children who will argue with their children, we achieve progress by enlightening and uniting the working class communities in this country to fight for progress. Without a destruction of the culture war there will never be progress no matter how many babies our 'side' produces.

[Bridget Burke]

59. The kids need to be educated, no matter who bore them.

Education in school* is important. Also, our ideas need to be expressed clearly in public. Through our candidates, through art, through protest & through conversation.

Even the grownups might learn something...

* Yes, some of "those people" may homeschool for what we consider the "wrong reasons." So, while fighting for good public schools, we also need other ways to let our convictions be known.

[laundry_queen]

40. While I think that is a generalization

I do think there is some truth to it.
However, I'm super far left and have 3 kids (and want more).
My righttard bro only wants 1 or 2 and his wife doesn't want any for a long time if ever.
But I do see this play out online on parenting sites, where the "god will provide" mentality comes into play.

There is a small subsection though of the far right population that is very self centered and for whom money and ambition are their lives and those types rarely have more than 1 child.
That's my experience anyway.

[meganmonkey]

45. Mistermonkey and I plan to remain child-free

and so do the vast majority of my enlightened friends and co-workers.

This trend kind of scares me. Although I know that children raised in a certain mentality will not necessarily retain that mentality.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

50. That IS scary

and kind of sad.

[American Tragedy]

56. Yeah, though not enough to make me want to reproduce.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

64. That's such a personal decision

personally, I never even thought about it. I guess I always assumed I'd have kids and I did, at 21. Got it over with.

My son and his bride-to-be are thinking long and hard about it, but they are in their 30's. I don't know what they'll decide.

I have two grandchildren already, so no pressure from me. I've learned from many years in teaching that parenting is tricky and you sure can screw up, so better safe than sorry, as they say!

[Odin2005]

46. It's things like this that make me support population control.

Theocons have no respect to the enviroment, Gawd told them to multiply like rabbits and that protecting the enviroment isn't needed because they think Jebus is gonna come down a rapture them. These people are dangerous and should not be allowed to have more kids then secular people do.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

51. You said

"these people are dangerous and should not be allowed to have more kids than secular people do."

How would you propose to put the brakes on it?

[rinsd]

53. It's statements like this that make me shake my head

"These people are dangerous and should not be allowed to have more kids then secular people do."

How exactly do you propose to do that?

[meganmonkey]

58. Do really mean this?

Or are you being facetious? I just can't believe someone could possibly believe something like this.

Do you propose a questionnaire to find out exactly how much of a 'theocon' someone is and then tell them their baby-quota based on their answer?

[0rganism]

52. Plenty of kids waiting to be adopted...

If anyone feels the need to parent a larger number of children, one doesn't have to churn them forth from one's own loins to do so.

[Bleacher Creature]

54. Are these "red-state babies" being born as billionaires?

Otherwise, Karl should hold off on the victory paries just yet.

[mitchum]

55. Their preachers told them, "Be FRUITCAKES and multiply"

[pnwmom]

61. Liberals are also rampant in the entertainment business. Think how

much difference television shows can make. Will and Grace, for example. I bet in another twenty years (for most of the country anyway) -- people will wonder why there was ever a controversy about gay marriage. Because young people today are far more likely to be "liberal" on this issue than their parents.

[Platypus]

62. Fight back!

This sounds like the best reason yet for liberals to have kids. Come on, people, start screwing for the cause.

[Strong Atheist]

65. I never intend to have any kids. nt.

[FatDave]

66. The other big assumption

Others have pointed out that conservative parents do not necessarily end up with conservative children, and I think we all have seen examples of parents and children with differing political ideologies.

But what is the deal with the use of dogs as an indicator of childlessness? As far as I can see, there is little to no relationship. In fact, having a dog is a very "family" thing to do. My family had a child before we had a dog. Then we added two more kids and three cats.

Is it possible that some other factor contributes to the dog populations? Is there a chance that those bleeding-hearts up in Seattle run more no-kill shelters and the heartless SLCers round up every stray and kill it? Do breeders possibly prefer Seattle? Does the mormon church discourage pet ownership? (I don't think so, I'm just pointing out that there could very well be other contributing factors).

And I haven't checked census records or anything, but I get the impression that Seattle simply has a higher population of young people than Salt Lake City. People in the 20 to 30 range who may well be single and/or not yet ready to have children. If this is the case, just wait a few years.

I call bullshit on this article. They're basing their entire argument on two illogical assumptions. You want to make the argument, base it on median age of adults, their stated political ideology and birth-rates among each group. Not on whether or not they have a fucking dog.

(Besides everybody knows it's easy to have more kids when you've got three wives.)

[Cleita]

67. This same argument is used by white supremists to say

that there will be fewer white babies because white people aren't breeding like the brown people. Maybe you should look at the backlash aspect. Often children will adopt different political and religious views from that of their parents.

I can imagine if I were growing up in a cramped apartment with lot's of brothers and sisters, forced to wear hand me downs, and couldn't afford to even dream of going to college, I would be looking at my better off liberal classmates and thinking, they've got something there.

As a matter-of-fact, my classmates back in the forties and fifties all came from families that had an average of four or five kids. They used to envy me, an only child, because I didn't have to wear hand me downs or share my stuff with siblings. Families were very conservative then with stay-at-home moms and divorce considered scandalous.

Most of them grew up to become hippies at the time, to embrace the counter culture and when they did get married to limit their families to one, two or maybe no kids.

[blindpig]

68. To give partisan politics precedent over human overpopulation is nuts.

So is the premise that the children of conservatives must adopt the politics of their parents. Lots of folks here at DU come from conservative households from what I've read over the years.

The author of this piece, Phillip Longman, is a Fellow with the New America Foundation. I've never heard of it, which may just prove my ignorance, but I scooted over to their site and it seemed bland, pretentious and corporate. The Board consisted entirely of CEO's, which gives me cause for suspicion. For all of their claim to be the cutting edge of the next generation of problem solvers they don't even mention the environment. Hmmmm.:think:

[hunter]

70. Hmmm, USA Today....

On no! If U.S. White People don't start breeding quick, it's all brown people and Mormons from here on out.

Liberal and Conservative White People must join ranks and reproduce or they will become EXTINCT.

:nopity:

This is crap. Parents pass on the parts of their culture that work, and discard the parts of their culture that don't. It's obvious to many people, whatever their cultural background, that many "conservative" traditions are useless in the modern world. Most of the kids who come from large families will not go on to have large families themselves.

My parents and my wife's parents had many children, but the cultural expectation that families should have many children stopped with them.

[Cleita]

71. You said it best.

:thumbsup:

[hunter]

73. Yours was good too.

I'm surprised more people didn't comment on the blatant racism of this article.

[Solon]

80. Just the title tipped me off a little bit...

Anytime anyone starts mentioning the disparity of birth rates between different groups in the nation, a little red light goes off in my head screaming "Racism, Racism, Racism!"

[Solon]

79. Not to mention the increase in interracial marriages...

I wonder how the WS(White Supremacist), oops I mean US Today feels about that?

[dusty64]

75. Have no fear,

kids like to rebel against the ideas and idealogy of their parents.

[Delphinus]

76. The replies on this thread are terrific!

I often don't view things from all angles - but this thread, more than any I can recall lately, helps me see so many sides. Amazing ... and many thanks to everyone who chimed in!

[RB TexLa]

78. Oh well, I'm still not going to give up my time and life to raise children

[booley]

81. Aren't we assuming a lot?

I mean, how do we knwo that these kids are going to be conservative liek thier parents? I sure as hell am not a con like my Dad.

And isn't lack of planned preganacies often linked ot cycles of poverty as well? Are the cons really winning by making thier descendents more prone to living in poverty?

And what about all the kids that come from the Gayby Boom? I see gay couples adopting 3, 4, or even 5 kids.

I mean, if one aspires to be the human version of Kudzu, i can see why this may seem like good news for cons. But as a Liberal, i still beleive Quality over Quantity.

[Missy Vixen]

82. We live 30 miles east of Seattle

>It's that progressives are so much less likely to have children.<

We are not having children by choice for a myriad of reasons I won't go into on a public message board. Interestingly enough, we are surrounded by "childless or childfree" by choice couples ranging in age from 30's - 50's. They also made their decision for a variety of reasons. With the arrival of reliable birth control, it's possible to make this choice.

Am I worried about a lack of progressive thought in the future because we're not going to add to the population? No. I'm more worried about couples who are pressured to have children for the wrong reasons.

Julie

[Neil Lisst]

83. Reason number one churches teach HAVE MORE BABIES!!

because the baby makers will overtake those who don't make babies