It seems to me that fertility correlates not with authoritarianism per se, but with nationalism. Nationalist countries promote family growth and values, and discourage women from going into fertility crushing professional jobs (male to female upper Ed ratios). This would also see a decrease in liberal arts academia and overall student debt. Obviously religiosity would see an increase but I think that is merely an effect of nationalism (tradition, heritage, culture) rather than a cause.
———-
Example: Israel
“ Israel's high fertility stems, directly, from the form and salience of nationalist sentiments in the Israeliconscience collective, which in turn derives from Israel's special position in the Middle East and in the world-economy. Using voting returns from Israel's proportional vote elections, we classify census statistical areas by religiosity and their support for radical nationalist parties. We show that area-level fertility is a function of nationalist support and the area standard of living, and that once these are controlled the effect of religiosity is insignificant. We therefore conclude that the statistical association between fertility and religiosity in Israel is spurious, and that much of the religiosity recorded in fertility surveys is an expression, in consciousness and in the mode of daily living, of a strongly felt nationalist sentiment.”
1. Which subfactors of authoritarianism (RWA or other) or social dominance (SDO) is the best contributors of fertility? How would these tie to cultural theories by Schwartz or Haidt?
2. Could it possibly correlate to the economic and social environment, instead of the political policy?
3. Other than IQ, has other indices like HEXACO, Dark Triad, Vulnerable Dark Triad, and Life History (Sociosexuality) been accounted for?
It might be not about authoritarianism per se but about certain laws - about divorce and power balance in marriage, for example wiki on divorce in Spain: “In Spain, the 1931 Constitution of the Second Spanish Republic for the first time recognised a right to divorce. The first law to regulate divorce was the Divorce Act of 1932, which passed the Republican Parliament despite the opposition of the Catholic Church and a coalition of the Agrarian Minority and Minority Basque-Navarre Catholic parties. The dictatorship of General Franco abolished the law. After the restoration of democracy, a new divorce law was passed in 1981, again over the opposition of the Catholic Church and part of the Christian Democrat party, then a part of the ruling Union of Democratic Center. During the first socialist government of Felipe González Márquez, the 1981 law was amended to expedite the process of separation and divorce of marriages, which was again opposed by the Church, which called it "express divorce". Also Philippines has higher fertility than neighbouring Indonesia even though latter is muslim, but former doesn’t have legal divorce.
I'm glad that you followed up to your previous article with one about authoritarian regimes! I think the explanation for Russia's big drop in the early 1900s is that Russia became industrialized during that time. With industrialization came clean water and sanitation and better public health so there were more children that survived. No need to have 6 just in case 1-2 die of childhood diseases due to poor sanitation or lack of vaccines.
You don't have births per 1000 chart for Russia just like for France/Germany/UK/etc right? I'm really curious about the psychology of population boom after a big war where a lot of men die during the war. All these countries had big baby booms post WW I. Why? Is it just because there were fewer men and a lot of women so the remaining men could just go wild?
Men have a dating advantage in universities in most countries today because universities are becoming 60/40 female/male. If this sexual market place applies to post WW I or WW II in western Europe and Russia, we should see higher illegitimate births as men have children with multiple women.
It seems to me that fertility correlates not with authoritarianism per se, but with nationalism. Nationalist countries promote family growth and values, and discourage women from going into fertility crushing professional jobs (male to female upper Ed ratios). This would also see a decrease in liberal arts academia and overall student debt. Obviously religiosity would see an increase but I think that is merely an effect of nationalism (tradition, heritage, culture) rather than a cause.
———-
Example: Israel
“ Israel's high fertility stems, directly, from the form and salience of nationalist sentiments in the Israeliconscience collective, which in turn derives from Israel's special position in the Middle East and in the world-economy. Using voting returns from Israel's proportional vote elections, we classify census statistical areas by religiosity and their support for radical nationalist parties. We show that area-level fertility is a function of nationalist support and the area standard of living, and that once these are controlled the effect of religiosity is insignificant. We therefore conclude that the statistical association between fertility and religiosity in Israel is spurious, and that much of the religiosity recorded in fertility surveys is an expression, in consciousness and in the mode of daily living, of a strongly felt nationalist sentiment.”
*https://www.jstor.org/page-scan-delivery/get-page-scan/20164749/0
Some leading questions:
1. Which subfactors of authoritarianism (RWA or other) or social dominance (SDO) is the best contributors of fertility? How would these tie to cultural theories by Schwartz or Haidt?
2. Could it possibly correlate to the economic and social environment, instead of the political policy?
3. Other than IQ, has other indices like HEXACO, Dark Triad, Vulnerable Dark Triad, and Life History (Sociosexuality) been accounted for?
https://pop.umn.edu/about/announcements/over-policing-linked-higher-odds-preterm-birth
It might be not about authoritarianism per se but about certain laws - about divorce and power balance in marriage, for example wiki on divorce in Spain: “In Spain, the 1931 Constitution of the Second Spanish Republic for the first time recognised a right to divorce. The first law to regulate divorce was the Divorce Act of 1932, which passed the Republican Parliament despite the opposition of the Catholic Church and a coalition of the Agrarian Minority and Minority Basque-Navarre Catholic parties. The dictatorship of General Franco abolished the law. After the restoration of democracy, a new divorce law was passed in 1981, again over the opposition of the Catholic Church and part of the Christian Democrat party, then a part of the ruling Union of Democratic Center. During the first socialist government of Felipe González Márquez, the 1981 law was amended to expedite the process of separation and divorce of marriages, which was again opposed by the Church, which called it "express divorce". Also Philippines has higher fertility than neighbouring Indonesia even though latter is muslim, but former doesn’t have legal divorce.
I'm glad that you followed up to your previous article with one about authoritarian regimes! I think the explanation for Russia's big drop in the early 1900s is that Russia became industrialized during that time. With industrialization came clean water and sanitation and better public health so there were more children that survived. No need to have 6 just in case 1-2 die of childhood diseases due to poor sanitation or lack of vaccines.
You don't have births per 1000 chart for Russia just like for France/Germany/UK/etc right? I'm really curious about the psychology of population boom after a big war where a lot of men die during the war. All these countries had big baby booms post WW I. Why? Is it just because there were fewer men and a lot of women so the remaining men could just go wild?
Men have a dating advantage in universities in most countries today because universities are becoming 60/40 female/male. If this sexual market place applies to post WW I or WW II in western Europe and Russia, we should see higher illegitimate births as men have children with multiple women.
Sylvia Plath vindicated.