this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
32 points (86.4% liked)

politics

18866 readers
21 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I seen this style on a few other sites, and where did you see those dog whistles becuase from the text it talks about how people can't afford kids and thats a problem?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm going to use "=" as a shorthand that means what the statements are dog whistling. These are statements from their about page

Declining fertility rates more prominently among the affluent = the poor shouldn't be reproducing, and we should encourage only rich babies (this one sounds alot like those silicon valley pronatalists). Also "affluent" is usually code for white.

Forced migration and places being "unable to take care of their own" = anti-immigrant, isolationism.

Demographic changes = tied closely to the last one, but typically also related to domestic racism and almost always bigoted against nonwhite people. Never seen someone worry about demographic changes without a racial element.

NIMBY regulations = deregulate housing market and allow developers to build whatever. Given all the other things and the fact they don't mention affordability makes me think they just want to make developers rich.

The interesting thing here is they mention austerity and privatization a couple times. These are typically left wing critiques. So honestly it's pretty confused. It's possible it's left wing trying to propagandize to the right. Could be vise versa. Seeing population decline (especially since it's mostly majority white nations that have declining populations) as a bad thing gives me fascist impressions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think you are reaching

They also talk about "increasing social spending, improving social systems, or promoting better and more flexible work conditions can start the process of reversing this trend." That doesn't really sound anti poor, along with the fact the site published multiple articles praising democrats, and attacked Tories (https://www.stoppopulationdecline.org/tories-and-local-government-refuse/), GOP (https://www.stoppopulationdecline.org/republicans-shut-down-gov-evers-special-session/), and Elon Musk (https://www.stoppopulationdecline.org/silicon-valley-pronatalists-against-wfh/)

Forced Migration can also mean, being forced to leave California because you can't afford rent

Demographic changes can refer to the fact we are dying younger and younger

"Deregulate housing market and allow developers to build whatever. Given all the other things and the fact they don’t mention affordability makes me think they just want to make developers rich." Except they published an article attacking Sunak for trying to deregulate with a title called "Sunak's Ploy Pretending to be Pro-House Affordability fails" (https://www.stoppopulationdecline.org/sunaks-ploy-house-affordability-fails/) and does talk about in their articles https://www.stoppopulationdecline.org/tories-and-local-government-refuse/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Damn, okay. I take it back. I guess I'm just so used to seeing fascists use terms like population decline, etc. that I'm pretty jaded. I don't personally agree with the proposition that we should prevent population decline, but respect where they're coming from otherwise. Thanks for the links