Russian population

One very good effect of the Murican sanctions is that it keeps woke ideology out.


https://thesaker.is/woke-in-tokyo-the-us-nukes-cool-japan-out-of-its-existence/

par far wrote:One very good effect of the Murican sanctions is that it keeps woke ideology out.


https://thesaker.is/woke-in-tokyo-the-us-nukes-cool-japan-out-of-its-existence/

The US flag is in-your-face signalling about cabal control. It has a literal star chamber in the the upper left corner.
The alternating stripe colours are also suspect since they can indicate a divided populace such as we now have with
red and blue instead of red and white.

...just compare the times of "bloody totalitarianism" and the period of "freedom and democratic values".


https://gks.ru/bgd/regl/B21_16/Main.htm

The 1990s going into 2000s drops are economic depression driven. They have recovered to values that they would have
reached if 1990 never happened and the USSR was still around. The slow drift to lower birth rates is not a simple function
of the ideology. It is driven by effective urbanization even in "rural" areas. People used to have many children over a century
ago because

1) a high percentage of them died (as was the case for all of human history)

2) children were an economic asset and and not a financial burden

Dreaming about a TFR of 2.3 under modern conditions is delusional.

GarryB wrote:

Dreaming about a TFR of 2.3 under modern conditions is delusional.

And dangerous... WTF are you going to do with all those extra people?

Send them East to populate Siberia?

GarryB wrote:

Dreaming about a TFR of 2.3 under modern conditions is delusional.

And dangerous... WTF are you going to do with all those extra people?

I agree with you on a global level. Locally, Russia wouldnt hurt with extra 10 or 15 million. In any case, they need to stabilize own population and higher TFR is needed for that.

kvs wrote:The 1990s going into 2000s drops are economic depression driven.   They have recovered to values that they would have
reached if 1990 never happened and the USSR was still around.    The slow drift to lower birth rates is not a simple function
of the ideology.   It is driven by effective urbanization even in "rural" areas.   People used to have many children over a century
ago because

1) a high percentage of them died (as was the case for all of human history)

2) children were an economic asset and and not a financial burden

Dreaming about a TFR of 2.3 under modern conditions is delusional.

By 1960, urbanization in the USSR and Russia in particular had already been completed. So the coefficients of 1960-1990 are already indicators of the society of the urbanization that took place. From 1980 to 2022, the degree of urbanization or the degree of development of Russian society practically did not change. So you can really see the difference between socialism and capitalism on this chart.

One hundred years ago a yanqui writer named Lothrop Stoddard published in NY a book titled Under Man: the menace of the Under Man. By this term, Stoddard meant the "mass of savages & barbarians, essentially incapable of civilization and its uncorrectable enemies" with which it is necessary to proceed with a radical count adjustment.
Praised by two yanqui presidents, Harding and Hoover, Stoddard was received immediately after with full honours in Berlin where he was met not only by the most illustrious representatives of the Nazi eugenics, but by Adolf himself, who was already engaged in the extermination and slavery of the Untermenschen, that is, of the Eastern European Slavic "indigenous" population.
In the US of white supremacy, as in Germany, where the movement gained momentum later shaped into Nazism the programme for the re-establishment of the racial hierarchies adapts suitably to the eugenics project.

Scorpius wrote:

kvs wrote:The 1990s going into 2000s drops are economic depression driven.   They have recovered to values that they would have
reached if 1990 never happened and the USSR was still around.    The slow drift to lower birth rates is not a simple function
of the ideology.   It is driven by effective urbanization even in "rural" areas.   People used to have many children over a century
ago because

1) a high percentage of them died (as was the case for all of human history)

2) children were an economic asset and and not a financial burden

Dreaming about a TFR of 2.3 under modern conditions is delusional.

By 1960, urbanization in the USSR and Russia in particular had already been completed. So the coefficients of 1960-1990 are already indicators of the society of the urbanization that took place. From 1980 to 2022, the degree of urbanization or the degree of development of Russian society practically did not change. So you can really see the difference between socialism and capitalism on this chart.

The TFR fell to just above 1 by the 1960s. The USSR population growth was driven by the Muslim central Asian republics. That is why in the 1980s there was
lots of talk in the west about how the Muslims would take over the USSR.

The post 1990 degeneration has indeed helped to suppress Russia's birth rate and at the same time increase its death rate. But the
idea that Russia somehow is not led properly because the TFR is not over 2 is total BS.

Kiko wrote:One hundred years ago a yanqui writer named Lothrop Stoddard published in NY a book titled Under Man: the menace of the Under Man. By this term, Stoddard meant the "mass of savages & barbarians, essentially incapable of civilization and its uncorrectable enemies" with which it is necessary to proceed with a radical count adjustment.
Praised by two yanqui presidents, Harding and Hoover, Stoddard was received immediately after with full honours in Berlin where he was met not only by the most illustrious representatives of the Nazi eugenics, but by Adolf himself, who was already engaged in the extermination and slavery of the Untermenschen, that is, of the Eastern European Slavic "indigenous" population.
In the US of white supremacy, as in Germany, where the movement gained momentum later shaped into Nazism the programme for the re-establishment of the racial hierarchies adapts suitably to the eugenics project.

Western propaganda has memory holed the fact that eugenics was not a Nazi phenomenon in Germany. It started in the UK with social
Darwinism (Cecil Rhodes and "white man's burden" come to mind) and flourished in the US. In the US they engaged in forced sterilization of the "inferiors".
Hitler was just the cherry on top of the racist, chauvinist pathology of western colonialist society. The global south is not too keen
to jump on the anti-Russian bandwagon over Ukraine because this bandwagon is organized by the colonialist west, which treats them
with the contempt it does Russians.

Time to put the f*cking west in its place. Humanity must liberate itself from the yoke of the "golden billion".

Scorpius wrote:

kvs wrote:The 1990s going into 2000s drops are economic depression driven.   They have recovered to values that they would have
reached if 1990 never happened and the USSR was still around.    The slow drift to lower birth rates is not a simple function
of the ideology.   It is driven by effective urbanization even in "rural" areas.   People used to have many children over a century
ago because

1) a high percentage of them died (as was the case for all of human history)

2) children were an economic asset and and not a financial burden

Dreaming about a TFR of 2.3 under modern conditions is delusional.

By 1960, urbanization in the USSR and Russia in particular had already been completed. So the coefficients of 1960-1990 are already indicators of the society of the urbanization that took place. From 1980 to 2022, the degree of urbanization or the degree of development of Russian society practically did not change. So you can really see the difference between socialism and capitalism on this chart.

That doesn't sound correct.

The rural agrarian economy of the socialist system suffered a complete collapse in the 90s eclipsing the huge difficulties the urban industrial economy went through.
The system of enforced registration to place of birth as it were; which would require marriage or a major job offer to change - was also abolished with the end of the USSR
Therefore the first circumstance incentivized rural residents to move to the cities, and the 2nd circumstance made it a lot easier for them to do so. Those that didn't drink themselves to death that is; the death rate was the greatest AFAIK for those living in Russian villages.

I'm aware of the official statistics of urbanization but in actual fact, I think by the end of the 80s a whole third of Russia's population was still living in villages and rural locations. By now it's not much more than 20%.