Why would the usually thoughtful New York Times, which seems to appreciate the dangers of climate change and other environmental crises, publish an article lamenting Japan’s population decline?
“Like Japan itself, the imperial family has a demographic problem. Just as Japan’s population is shrinking and aging, so is the royal family’s.”
Isn’t falling fertility the most effective way to mitigate the harms of climate change, and do other good things, like improve child welfare and increase each person’s share of their democracy? Why would the NYT not even mention the upside?
Here’s the problem. Even though we may value those things, we have a moral blind spot when it comes to family planning. We assume that because we grew up in ever expanding nation-states with constant economic growth, that way must continue.