15 ms·

As Japan's population shrinks, bears and boars roam among schools and shrines

107 points by grej 10y ago

a3n 10y ago
While reading this article, it occurred to me that Japan is at worst slowly committing suicide, and at best "failing to thrive." Why? And what happens when the majority of the country all but de-populates? Will China invade? Will the US be asked to open military bases?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- justicezyx 10y ago
  Where is the 'will China invade' come from? Historically it always has been reverse.
  - fsloth 10y ago
    There was the one abortive attempt by Kublai Khan with flat bottomed boats which went really sour. If that is considered a chinese invasion is a matter of taste I suppose.
  - a3n 10y ago
    A depopulated Japan could easily be an undefended Japan. China is right now working to expand its sphere of territory and influence. They make islands in the ocean where none were before. This scenario is possible if two things happen: weak Japanese self-defense from depopulation, and a successful closing of US bases by either Japanese citizens who resent their presence, or US isolationism.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      Its interesting that the current PM wants to revise their constitution to remove limits on Japan’s military. http://www.wsj.com/articles/japanese-voters-to-render-a-verdict-on-abenomics-national-security-policy-1468111220 http://www.wsj.com/articles/japanese-voters-to-render-a-verd...
    - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
      China is heading towards its own demographic time bomb as well.
  - johan_larson 10y ago
    This stuff right here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan
  - tankenmate 10y ago
    Obviously Mongolia is not part of China, but Kublai Khan did twice try to invade Japan. Typhoons scuppered both chances (and from which the Kamikaze tradition was born). For most of Japan's history they have had an isolationist stance to the outside world. Obviously this was not the case from between Commander Perry and the end of World War II. With respect to China, for hundreds of years Japan was considered a quasi-vassal state to various Chinese Emperors.
- tacostakohashi 10y ago
  News flash: The U.S. has had military bases in Japan continuously since 1945.
  - a3n 10y ago
    > The U.S. has had military bases in Japan continuously since 1945 Of course. And if an area is severely depopulated, one of the easiest ways to populate it and simultaneously discourage opportunism would be to plop a US military base down. "Easy" because it's doable, there are already bases, and protocols, and familiarity.
    - tacostakohashi 10y ago
      Complete nonsense. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/19/thousands-protest-at-us-bases-on-okinawa-after-japanese-womans https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/19/thousands-prot... The existing bases are in sparsely populated areas. Even so, they're deeply unpopular, mainly because the servicemen have a bad habit of raping and murdering the locals. Adding more bases to boost the population would be political suicide.
    - happyslobro 10y ago
      It is hard for me to spot the difference between the Americans moving in and expanding their overseas military, and the Chinese doing the same thing. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the expansion of any superpower is generally just bad news for everyone else. An ideal scenario in my opinion, would be for the Japanese to automate a purely defensive military along with their workforce. Japan could go back to being that demon island that no one dares to invade.
- dominotw 10y ago
  >While reading this article, it occurred to me that Japan is at worst slowly committing suicide, and at best "failing to thrive." They make money through investments in emerging economies like India. They are investing in young emerging populations just not their own.
- labster 10y ago
  Why? Like all declines of civilizations, it's a complex mix of cultural, economic, political, and environmental reasons. And thus beyond the scope of an HN comment. It won't all depopulate. No, but I wouldn't be shocked to see claims over Okinawa (which is not depopulated). No, but I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. is eventually allowed to consolidate its bases into one in Okinawa.
- patrickg_zill 10y ago
  They are keeping their culture intact and will probably stabilize at about 100 million population (supposedly). I haven't lived in Japan - others can tell you if it is a nice place to live even with a slowly declining population.
  - marak830 10y ago
    Amazing place to live. I have been here for close to 5 years now, and I do noy plan on leaving.
    - gtirloni 10y ago
      I have family that lives in Japan for 15+ years and, while being a nice country with good quality of life, they say foreigners can never expect to be fully acknowledged citizens (e.g. how difficult it's to get citizenship, requirement of Japanese ascend, etc). It seems very closed to foreigners. Maybe that's different in the tech world.
      - goodside 10y ago
        Japanese citizenship is actually much easier to get than other wealthy countries -- if you've lived in Japan for five years on any non-tourist visa and you're willing to give up all other citizenships you hold, you're in. The thing that's so notoriously hard is permanently living in Japan without becoming a citizen, which usually requires marriage or descent.
      - marak830 10y ago
        I havnt applied yet, but I'm treated very well(better than locals in most cases). I have yet to see any discrimination, compared to Australia where my wife(Japanese) regularly had issues.
        Nadya 10y ago
        As long as you make an attempt to respect the culture and (ideally) make some attempt to learn Japanese - I've found only the most rural areas would dare to treat you poorly. They'll treat you well and when you are out of site they'll confide in friends about the "smelly foreign pig". Without a confidant, you'd never be any the wiser. People with tattoos face a higher risk of discrimination than anyone of a foreign (non-Japanese) race in most any part of Japan. As with any "rules", there are exceptions. But the above has been my experience (month-long travels totaling several years). Meanwhile, the U.S has no problems yelling out racist slurs or discriminating against others quite blatantly.
- akeruu 10y ago
  > Why ? Sorry for brevity, this only a HN comment but here are some highlights. The main reasons are low birth rate and low immigration and due to various factors : Low birth rate : Fewer / later marriage, Poor work/life balance, Small living space, Hight costs of raising children Low immigration : Japanese people view themselves as "uniform" (which is debatable), Country closed to foreigners for two centuries
- xamuel 10y ago
  One big elephant in the room no-one wants to talk much about (according to my Japanese wife) is that, incredibly, health insurance doesn't usually cover childbirth in Japan. They don't consider it to be an "illness" and therefore, you're on your own!
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - themaninthedark 10y ago
    That's odd, according to my wife there is lots help for having children. I know that here in Mie all doctor visits are free, all recommend vaccines as well. Day care is subsidized and based on income, 3rd kid is free. And we get a monthly stipend of 2万(not exactly sure about tje number, wife puts it in saving). I remember insurance paying at lesst part of the birth costs, but my wife had an atypical pregnancy. I seem to remember having to pay then getting money back. At work now, I will find out.
  - themaninthedark 10y ago
    Sorry for the double post, you are right insurance doesn't pay for birth. But you receive a payment(wife said present) of ~35万　from the government and wife says that covers the cost. If you have a cesarean that is covered by insurance. Also the monthly stipend is only ~1万. The stipend and free medical lasts until middle school(maybe not sure when it cuts off but elementary school students are covered).
- iwontreddit 10y ago
  Japan is the 10th most populous country in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependen... > Will China invade? Why would they invade? China and the rest of the world is doing what japan is. What japan is doing is moving to cities and depopulating their rural areas. Young people and even old people want to live in cities. You are misreading the article.
sgt101 10y ago
Perhaps this is what will happen across the world in 200 years time? People in advanced economies seem less keen to have lots of children, perhaps vast tracts of the earth will be abandoned to wildlife? I actually hope so, I wonder if culture will change and adapt and eventually find a new equilibrium, but at a much lower population. Perhaps people will enjoy reliving the experiences of people from "the crush". Perhaps they will struggle to understand the science of the artifacts that surround them and progress will effectively end - after all 10 billion people can go a lot faster than 100 million. There are no facts about the future.
- arkitaip 10y ago
  The trend is towards larger and larger cities and city networks, not a Mad Max type of future.
- Snargorf 10y ago
  Not in 200 years. What we're seeing now is a partial die-off. Eventually, evolution will re-assert itself. The sub-populations who, for whatever reason, continue to grow in population will come to dominate the numbers, after the non-breeding groups die off. E.g. in America, fertility is passing below replacement rates - on average. But the Amish population still doubles every 20 years. In 200 years, there will be hundreds of millions of Amish. We could be looking at a world of Amish, Quiverfulls, poor tribalistic Africans, religious Muslims, and orthodox Jews. There will be very few left-liberals, the childfree movement will be gone (like the Shakers already are). Gays and other queer people may breed out of the gene pool if their modern freedom reduces the fertility of their genes. Modernity may very well be self-defeating, because the future belongs to those who show up.
  - collyw 10y ago
    Religious nuts will rule. Not a good future.
    - ggamecrazy 10y ago
      A lot of us are all descendants of religious nuts. I'm not too worried.
Animats 10y ago
This is why the religious groups that keep women in their place at home, breeding, will rule the world.
- cjslep 10y ago
  There are quite a few things wrong with this post. Firstly, what is the "This" in "This is why"? "Non-religious groups of people will just die off"? "Religious zealots are taking over Japan as non-religious inhabitants dwindle"? None of this is sane. Secondly, modern religious interpretations do not dictate that women must stay at home and pump out babies. That bigoted stereotype is rooted in a warped view of some religions' beliefs about the role of sex in society. The stereotype is also rooted in extremist interpretations of some religions, but those extremist interpretations are not representative of what is going on in Japan[0]. Perpetuating this bigoted stereotype isn't helping any argument. Thirdly, just because people are born into a highly devout religious family does not mean they stay religious. I submit myself as an example of a person born into a religious family but turned agnostic. [0]Edit: It is also not fair to take the extremist minority interpretation from anywhere and apply it broadly everywhere, not just Japan. Hopefully it is self-evident why without me having to bring up other ugly examples.
  - mafribe 10y ago
    modern religious interpretations do not dictate that I'm not sure you understand what Animats means. He's not making a normative statement that religions should place women in this/that/the other role. He's making a factual statement: those social groups that do demand that women's role is primarily in reproduction will outbreed everybody. This is an undeniable and empirically observable fact, whether you turned agnostic or not. It's playing out already in the kindergardens and primary schools in my hometown already: most children are Muslims, with burka wearing mothers. Yet less than 1/3, probably less than 1/4 of the population is Muslim, the rest is white, highly educated yuppies, GLBTQ whatever ... who all have 0 children.
    - cjslep 10y ago
      > He's making a factual statement: those social groups that do demand that women's role is primarily in reproduction will outbreed everybody. That's not even close to what I read when I saw: > will rule the world That seems extremely normative to me. In fact, I honestly fail to see any facts presented in the one sentence I responded to. There are a lot of debatable nuanced points between the factual statement of having more kids and the conclusion of ruling the world. There are no connecting-the-dots arguments in the post I responded to. If Animats wanted to mean the fact you bring up, she/he would have just said the fact. But that is not what happened. Taking the simplest interpretation of Animats's one entirely-normative sentence, it is an extreme opinion that expresses a large contempt/disdain for organized religion. I really hope you examine your post, and evaluate how and why you took Animats' opinion and managed to somehow extract a fact from it. And that's whether I turned agnostic or not.
pwython 10y ago
Really interesting graph comparing children per woman and life expectancy over the past ~200 years: http://graphs.gapminder.org/world/#$majorMode=chart$is;shi=t;ly=2003;lb=f;il=t;fs=11;al=30;stl=t;st=t;nsl=t;se=t$wst;tts=C$ts;sp=10;ti=1800$zpv;v=0$inc_x;mmid=XCOORDS;iid=phAwcNAVuyj2tPLxKvvnNPA;by=ind$inc_y;mmid=YCOORDS;iid=phAwcNAVuyj0TAlJeCEzcGQ;by=ind$inc_s;uniValue=8.21;iid=phAwcNAVuyj0XOoBL_n5tAQ;by=ind$inc_c;uniValue=255;gid=CATID0;iid=thlR4hyNMEnaVyV_uxRzjfQ;by=grp$map_x;scale=lin;dataMin=12;dataMax=83$map_y;scale=lin;dataMin=0.855;dataMax=8.7$map_s;sma=49;smi=2.65$cd;bd=0$inds= http://graphs.gapminder.org/world/#$majorMode=chart$is;shi=t...
abpavel 10y ago
I think these two paragraphs nicely frame theme of the problem: <i>Politicians, he added, have propagated the myth that foreigners commit crimes at a higher rate than Japanese and have suggested that more immigrants could make the country vulnerable to terrorism. Labor unions have also put up a fight. “Look at nurses, they believe their income will be cut if we let in Filipinos and Indonesians,” said Katsuyuki Yakushiji, a sociologist at Toyo University in Tokyo. “They also say that these people can’t speak Japanese well and that could be risky. Yet, at the same time, they complain about severe overwork and say we need to add nurses.”</i> On one hand a defiance, even in the face of Armageddon. On the other it reflects worldwide general negativity, in this case xenophobia under the guise of overzealous job protection, as noone is worried that there will be more nurses per se, just as long as they are not... the "other kind"
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  Wanting your culture to not drift is expected. It's built into humans to prefer people like ourselves. It's also expected that people don't want their wages depressed by imported labor. A democratic government enforcing the above ideals (if supported by a majority of citizens) is expected. That's why Japan is exploring automation instead of immigration for its workforce. EDIT: @krapp (HN is throttling my posting ability) Japan is overhauling immigration, but only as a last resort: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-12-07/immigration-is-a-tough-one-for-japan-to-swallow https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-12-07/immigrati...
  - smt88 10y ago
    Automation solves the problem of filling some jobs (including undesirable ones). It doesn't make the population younger/healthier, nor does it expand the local consumer base.
  - orthoganol 10y ago
    > Wanting your culture to not drift is expected. It's built into humans to prefer people like ourselves. Or look at America, the world's biggest melting pot. Just because Japan has a preference for their own ethnicity (like most other countries around the world, India, China, most of Europe, etc.) doesn't mean they aren't wrong and IMO not on the wrong side of history. People I know here in the US have no issue having real friends, people they hang out with and regard as equals, who are ethnically Asian, Indian, African. In other countries, this simply wouldn't happen.
ra1n85 10y ago
Pictures of bears or boars roaming schools or shrines would have been a great addition to this article.
EGreg 10y ago
Good! Now if only the most populous countries would do the same then everyone would be richer. Thanks to automation, we no longer need the next generation to be larger than the last. Most existential challenges for humanity in the 21st century stem from the population explosion of the last 150 years.
ryankupyn 10y ago
It'll be interesting to see if this leads to a debt crisis in the future, as Japan's population shrinks and the per-capita debt burden increases. It'd be very tricky to deal with as social spending for the elderly increases at the same time.
discardorama 10y ago
I keep reading about the decline of the Japanese population, and I wonder: what are the major causes of people not producing enough kids? Is it that there's not enough bonking going on? Stress from work? Long hours at the office? I mean, sex is one of the most fun activities nature has given us, for free. Why aren't enough Japanese having sex? Is it something in the culture? The comics, maybe? This is a serious question. I often wonder why something that worked for millions of years, is suddenly not working.
- toasterlovin 10y ago
  Kids are a pain in the ass. Before they happened automatically, as long as you had sex. Now they're optional. Lots of people are opting out of the hassle. That's my two cents, at least.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- ripdog 10y ago
  The problem isn't that they aren't having sex, but rather than they're using birth control while doing so. Having children is a very conscious decision in this day and age, and the Japanese are on average not living in fantastic conditions for raising children. Wages which haven't risen in real terms for ~20 years, little paid maternity leave (or none?), small living spaces, and many others. Of course there are the Hikkikomori issue (young people who shut themselves in their room and never leave) and Soushoku danshi (men who take no interest in pursuing the opposite sex and forming relationships), two rather small factors reducing the birth rate further. But ultimately I think the economic issues are the biggest. Japan just isn't prosperous anymore, and people don't feel wealthy enough.
- themaninthedark 10y ago
  Many reasons. Women don't want to marry because they don't want to stay at home and raise kids and take care of in-laws. Men don't want to marry because they don't want to have to support a family and give up control of the finance to the women. Work consists of 8 hour shifts and mandatory overtime up to 3 hour or more. Which means the culture is not spontaneous and everything gets planned well in advance. Guys are friends with only guys, girls only girls(mostly) so not much chance to meet and spend time with the other sex. Starting salary is low and advances with age. In your 20s you make about 20k a year in your 30s 30k.

107 points by grej 10y ago

a3n 10y ago

While reading this article, it occurred to me that Japan is at worst slowly committing suicide, and at best "failing to thrive." Why? And what happens when the majority of the country all but de-populates? Will China invade? Will the US be asked to open military bases?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
justicezyx 10y ago
Where is the 'will China invade' come from? Historically it always has been reverse.
- fsloth 10y ago
  There was the one abortive attempt by Kublai Khan with flat bottomed boats which went really sour. If that is considered a chinese invasion is a matter of taste I suppose.
- a3n 10y ago
  A depopulated Japan could easily be an undefended Japan. China is right now working to expand its sphere of territory and influence. They make islands in the ocean where none were before. This scenario is possible if two things happen: weak Japanese self-defense from depopulation, and a successful closing of US bases by either Japanese citizens who resent their presence, or US isolationism.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Its interesting that the current PM wants to revise their constitution to remove limits on Japan’s military. http://www.wsj.com/articles/japanese-voters-to-render-a-verdict-on-abenomics-national-security-policy-1468111220 http://www.wsj.com/articles/japanese-voters-to-render-a-verd...
  - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
    China is heading towards its own demographic time bomb as well.
- johan_larson 10y ago
  This stuff right here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan
- tankenmate 10y ago
  Obviously Mongolia is not part of China, but Kublai Khan did twice try to invade Japan. Typhoons scuppered both chances (and from which the Kamikaze tradition was born). For most of Japan's history they have had an isolationist stance to the outside world. Obviously this was not the case from between Commander Perry and the end of World War II. With respect to China, for hundreds of years Japan was considered a quasi-vassal state to various Chinese Emperors.
tacostakohashi 10y ago
News flash: The U.S. has had military bases in Japan continuously since 1945.
- a3n 10y ago
  > The U.S. has had military bases in Japan continuously since 1945 Of course. And if an area is severely depopulated, one of the easiest ways to populate it and simultaneously discourage opportunism would be to plop a US military base down. "Easy" because it's doable, there are already bases, and protocols, and familiarity.
  - tacostakohashi 10y ago
    Complete nonsense. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/19/thousands-protest-at-us-bases-on-okinawa-after-japanese-womans https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/19/thousands-prot... The existing bases are in sparsely populated areas. Even so, they're deeply unpopular, mainly because the servicemen have a bad habit of raping and murdering the locals. Adding more bases to boost the population would be political suicide.
  - happyslobro 10y ago
    It is hard for me to spot the difference between the Americans moving in and expanding their overseas military, and the Chinese doing the same thing. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the expansion of any superpower is generally just bad news for everyone else. An ideal scenario in my opinion, would be for the Japanese to automate a purely defensive military along with their workforce. Japan could go back to being that demon island that no one dares to invade.
dominotw 10y ago
>While reading this article, it occurred to me that Japan is at worst slowly committing suicide, and at best "failing to thrive." They make money through investments in emerging economies like India. They are investing in young emerging populations just not their own.
labster 10y ago
Why? Like all declines of civilizations, it's a complex mix of cultural, economic, political, and environmental reasons. And thus beyond the scope of an HN comment. It won't all depopulate. No, but I wouldn't be shocked to see claims over Okinawa (which is not depopulated). No, but I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. is eventually allowed to consolidate its bases into one in Okinawa.
patrickg_zill 10y ago
They are keeping their culture intact and will probably stabilize at about 100 million population (supposedly). I haven't lived in Japan - others can tell you if it is a nice place to live even with a slowly declining population.
- marak830 10y ago
  Amazing place to live. I have been here for close to 5 years now, and I do noy plan on leaving.
  - gtirloni 10y ago
    I have family that lives in Japan for 15+ years and, while being a nice country with good quality of life, they say foreigners can never expect to be fully acknowledged citizens (e.g. how difficult it's to get citizenship, requirement of Japanese ascend, etc). It seems very closed to foreigners. Maybe that's different in the tech world.
    - goodside 10y ago
      Japanese citizenship is actually much easier to get than other wealthy countries -- if you've lived in Japan for five years on any non-tourist visa and you're willing to give up all other citizenships you hold, you're in. The thing that's so notoriously hard is permanently living in Japan without becoming a citizen, which usually requires marriage or descent.
    - marak830 10y ago
      I havnt applied yet, but I'm treated very well(better than locals in most cases). I have yet to see any discrimination, compared to Australia where my wife(Japanese) regularly had issues.
      - Nadya 10y ago
        As long as you make an attempt to respect the culture and (ideally) make some attempt to learn Japanese - I've found only the most rural areas would dare to treat you poorly. They'll treat you well and when you are out of site they'll confide in friends about the "smelly foreign pig". Without a confidant, you'd never be any the wiser. People with tattoos face a higher risk of discrimination than anyone of a foreign (non-Japanese) race in most any part of Japan. As with any "rules", there are exceptions. But the above has been my experience (month-long travels totaling several years). Meanwhile, the U.S has no problems yelling out racist slurs or discriminating against others quite blatantly.
akeruu 10y ago
> Why ? Sorry for brevity, this only a HN comment but here are some highlights. The main reasons are low birth rate and low immigration and due to various factors : Low birth rate : Fewer / later marriage, Poor work/life balance, Small living space, Hight costs of raising children Low immigration : Japanese people view themselves as "uniform" (which is debatable), Country closed to foreigners for two centuries
xamuel 10y ago
One big elephant in the room no-one wants to talk much about (according to my Japanese wife) is that, incredibly, health insurance doesn't usually cover childbirth in Japan. They don't consider it to be an "illness" and therefore, you're on your own!
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- themaninthedark 10y ago
  That's odd, according to my wife there is lots help for having children. I know that here in Mie all doctor visits are free, all recommend vaccines as well. Day care is subsidized and based on income, 3rd kid is free. And we get a monthly stipend of 2万(not exactly sure about tje number, wife puts it in saving). I remember insurance paying at lesst part of the birth costs, but my wife had an atypical pregnancy. I seem to remember having to pay then getting money back. At work now, I will find out.
- themaninthedark 10y ago
  Sorry for the double post, you are right insurance doesn't pay for birth. But you receive a payment(wife said present) of ~35万　from the government and wife says that covers the cost. If you have a cesarean that is covered by insurance. Also the monthly stipend is only ~1万. The stipend and free medical lasts until middle school(maybe not sure when it cuts off but elementary school students are covered).
iwontreddit 10y ago
Japan is the 10th most populous country in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependen... > Will China invade? Why would they invade? China and the rest of the world is doing what japan is. What japan is doing is moving to cities and depopulating their rural areas. Young people and even old people want to live in cities. You are misreading the article.

sgt101 10y ago

Perhaps this is what will happen across the world in 200 years time? People in advanced economies seem less keen to have lots of children, perhaps vast tracts of the earth will be abandoned to wildlife? I actually hope so, I wonder if culture will change and adapt and eventually find a new equilibrium, but at a much lower population. Perhaps people will enjoy reliving the experiences of people from "the crush". Perhaps they will struggle to understand the science of the artifacts that surround them and progress will effectively end - after all 10 billion people can go a lot faster than 100 million. There are no facts about the future.

arkitaip 10y ago
The trend is towards larger and larger cities and city networks, not a Mad Max type of future.
Snargorf 10y ago
Not in 200 years. What we're seeing now is a partial die-off. Eventually, evolution will re-assert itself. The sub-populations who, for whatever reason, continue to grow in population will come to dominate the numbers, after the non-breeding groups die off. E.g. in America, fertility is passing below replacement rates - on average. But the Amish population still doubles every 20 years. In 200 years, there will be hundreds of millions of Amish. We could be looking at a world of Amish, Quiverfulls, poor tribalistic Africans, religious Muslims, and orthodox Jews. There will be very few left-liberals, the childfree movement will be gone (like the Shakers already are). Gays and other queer people may breed out of the gene pool if their modern freedom reduces the fertility of their genes. Modernity may very well be self-defeating, because the future belongs to those who show up.
- collyw 10y ago
  Religious nuts will rule. Not a good future.
  - ggamecrazy 10y ago
    A lot of us are all descendants of religious nuts. I'm not too worried.

Animats 10y ago

This is why the religious groups that keep women in their place at home, breeding, will rule the world.

cjslep 10y ago
There are quite a few things wrong with this post. Firstly, what is the "This" in "This is why"? "Non-religious groups of people will just die off"? "Religious zealots are taking over Japan as non-religious inhabitants dwindle"? None of this is sane. Secondly, modern religious interpretations do not dictate that women must stay at home and pump out babies. That bigoted stereotype is rooted in a warped view of some religions' beliefs about the role of sex in society. The stereotype is also rooted in extremist interpretations of some religions, but those extremist interpretations are not representative of what is going on in Japan[0]. Perpetuating this bigoted stereotype isn't helping any argument. Thirdly, just because people are born into a highly devout religious family does not mean they stay religious. I submit myself as an example of a person born into a religious family but turned agnostic. [0]Edit: It is also not fair to take the extremist minority interpretation from anywhere and apply it broadly everywhere, not just Japan. Hopefully it is self-evident why without me having to bring up other ugly examples.
- mafribe 10y ago
  modern religious interpretations do not dictate that I'm not sure you understand what Animats means. He's not making a normative statement that religions should place women in this/that/the other role. He's making a factual statement: those social groups that do demand that women's role is primarily in reproduction will outbreed everybody. This is an undeniable and empirically observable fact, whether you turned agnostic or not. It's playing out already in the kindergardens and primary schools in my hometown already: most children are Muslims, with burka wearing mothers. Yet less than 1/3, probably less than 1/4 of the population is Muslim, the rest is white, highly educated yuppies, GLBTQ whatever ... who all have 0 children.
  - cjslep 10y ago
    > He's making a factual statement: those social groups that do demand that women's role is primarily in reproduction will outbreed everybody. That's not even close to what I read when I saw: > will rule the world That seems extremely normative to me. In fact, I honestly fail to see any facts presented in the one sentence I responded to. There are a lot of debatable nuanced points between the factual statement of having more kids and the conclusion of ruling the world. There are no connecting-the-dots arguments in the post I responded to. If Animats wanted to mean the fact you bring up, she/he would have just said the fact. But that is not what happened. Taking the simplest interpretation of Animats's one entirely-normative sentence, it is an extreme opinion that expresses a large contempt/disdain for organized religion. I really hope you examine your post, and evaluate how and why you took Animats' opinion and managed to somehow extract a fact from it. And that's whether I turned agnostic or not.

pwython 10y ago

Really interesting graph comparing children per woman and life expectancy over the past ~200 years: http://graphs.gapminder.org/world/#$majorMode=chart$is;shi=t;ly=2003;lb=f;il=t;fs=11;al=30;stl=t;st=t;nsl=t;se=t$wst;tts=C$ts;sp=10;ti=1800$zpv;v=0$inc_x;mmid=XCOORDS;iid=phAwcNAVuyj2tPLxKvvnNPA;by=ind$inc_y;mmid=YCOORDS;iid=phAwcNAVuyj0TAlJeCEzcGQ;by=ind$inc_s;uniValue=8.21;iid=phAwcNAVuyj0XOoBL_n5tAQ;by=ind$inc_c;uniValue=255;gid=CATID0;iid=thlR4hyNMEnaVyV_uxRzjfQ;by=grp$map_x;scale=lin;dataMin=12;dataMax=83$map_y;scale=lin;dataMin=0.855;dataMax=8.7$map_s;sma=49;smi=2.65$cd;bd=0$inds= http://graphs.gapminder.org/world/#$majorMode=chart$is;shi=t...

abpavel 10y ago

I think these two paragraphs nicely frame theme of the problem: <i>Politicians, he added, have propagated the myth that foreigners commit crimes at a higher rate than Japanese and have suggested that more immigrants could make the country vulnerable to terrorism. Labor unions have also put up a fight. “Look at nurses, they believe their income will be cut if we let in Filipinos and Indonesians,” said Katsuyuki Yakushiji, a sociologist at Toyo University in Tokyo. “They also say that these people can’t speak Japanese well and that could be risky. Yet, at the same time, they complain about severe overwork and say we need to add nurses.”</i> On one hand a defiance, even in the face of Armageddon. On the other it reflects worldwide general negativity, in this case xenophobia under the guise of overzealous job protection, as noone is worried that there will be more nurses per se, just as long as they are not... the "other kind"

toomuchtodo 10y ago
Wanting your culture to not drift is expected. It's built into humans to prefer people like ourselves. It's also expected that people don't want their wages depressed by imported labor. A democratic government enforcing the above ideals (if supported by a majority of citizens) is expected. That's why Japan is exploring automation instead of immigration for its workforce. EDIT: @krapp (HN is throttling my posting ability) Japan is overhauling immigration, but only as a last resort: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-12-07/immigration-is-a-tough-one-for-japan-to-swallow https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-12-07/immigrati...
- smt88 10y ago
  Automation solves the problem of filling some jobs (including undesirable ones). It doesn't make the population younger/healthier, nor does it expand the local consumer base.
- orthoganol 10y ago
  > Wanting your culture to not drift is expected. It's built into humans to prefer people like ourselves. Or look at America, the world's biggest melting pot. Just because Japan has a preference for their own ethnicity (like most other countries around the world, India, China, most of Europe, etc.) doesn't mean they aren't wrong and IMO not on the wrong side of history. People I know here in the US have no issue having real friends, people they hang out with and regard as equals, who are ethnically Asian, Indian, African. In other countries, this simply wouldn't happen.

ra1n85 10y ago

Pictures of bears or boars roaming schools or shrines would have been a great addition to this article.

EGreg 10y ago

Good! Now if only the most populous countries would do the same then everyone would be richer. Thanks to automation, we no longer need the next generation to be larger than the last. Most existential challenges for humanity in the 21st century stem from the population explosion of the last 150 years.

ryankupyn 10y ago

It'll be interesting to see if this leads to a debt crisis in the future, as Japan's population shrinks and the per-capita debt burden increases. It'd be very tricky to deal with as social spending for the elderly increases at the same time.

discardorama 10y ago

I keep reading about the decline of the Japanese population, and I wonder: what are the major causes of people not producing enough kids? Is it that there's not enough bonking going on? Stress from work? Long hours at the office? I mean, sex is one of the most fun activities nature has given us, for free. Why aren't enough Japanese having sex? Is it something in the culture? The comics, maybe? This is a serious question. I often wonder why something that worked for millions of years, is suddenly not working.

toasterlovin 10y ago
Kids are a pain in the ass. Before they happened automatically, as long as you had sex. Now they're optional. Lots of people are opting out of the hassle. That's my two cents, at least.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ripdog 10y ago
The problem isn't that they aren't having sex, but rather than they're using birth control while doing so. Having children is a very conscious decision in this day and age, and the Japanese are on average not living in fantastic conditions for raising children. Wages which haven't risen in real terms for ~20 years, little paid maternity leave (or none?), small living spaces, and many others. Of course there are the Hikkikomori issue (young people who shut themselves in their room and never leave) and Soushoku danshi (men who take no interest in pursuing the opposite sex and forming relationships), two rather small factors reducing the birth rate further. But ultimately I think the economic issues are the biggest. Japan just isn't prosperous anymore, and people don't feel wealthy enough.
themaninthedark 10y ago
Many reasons. Women don't want to marry because they don't want to stay at home and raise kids and take care of in-laws. Men don't want to marry because they don't want to have to support a family and give up control of the finance to the women. Work consists of 8 hour shifts and mandatory overtime up to 3 hour or more. Which means the culture is not spontaneous and everything gets planned well in advance. Guys are friends with only guys, girls only girls(mostly) so not much chance to meet and spend time with the other sex. Starting salary is low and advances with age. In your 20s you make about 20k a year in your 30s 30k.