World Economic Forum adviser deems fewer English babies 'good news' for the planet

Birth rates are bottoming out in the Western world. While some might consider this demographic trend worrisome — perhaps indicative of a worsening culture of death and/or societal collapse — an Oxford academic and World Economic Forum adviser recently expressed joy, calling the prospect of fewer English babies a "good thing."

According to official figures, the number of babies born in England and Wales last year was at a two-decade low, reported the Guardian.

America similarly has seen its general fertility rate plummet to all-time lows in recent years, recording roughly 56 births per 1,000 women in 2020 — about half of what it was in the 1960s.

In addition to 51.4% of the babies being born out of wedlock, Britain's Office for National Statistics revealed that nearly one-third of babies were born to immigrants.

When pressed by the Telegraph about Britain's slipping birth rate, Sarah Harper, director of the Oxford Institute of Population Ageing, said that fewer English babies are "good for ... our planet."

Rather than seek to replace the country's fading native population, Harper would prefer to see non-Western nations replenish the human stock.

Harper, who served on the prime minister's Council for Science and Technology between 2014 and 2017, said, "I think it's a good thing that the high-income, high-consuming countries of the world are reducing the number of children that they're having. I'm quite positive about that."

Declining fertility in countries such as Britain and the U.S. would reduce the "general overconsumption that we have at the moment," claimed Harper, glossing over not only the incredible waste and emissions of poorer countries, but the restorative technologies and initiatives launched by richer nations.

Harper further suggested to the Telegraph, "We will see smaller populations in high-income countries going forward. It's just going to be a trend of the 21st century and that will actually be good for general overall consumption that we have at the moment and our planet."

The Oxford academic appears to be partial to the depopulationist agenda advanced by the likes of anti-human American biologist Paul Ehrlich, the Club of Rome, the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, CNN founder Ted Turner, and the radical British group Population Matters.

Population Matters, which recently had Harper join as a speaker, cautions that each new human being brings with them the guarantee of carbon emissions. The depopulationists advocate for abortion and shrinking family sizes.

One patron of the group, "Planet Earth" narrator David Attenborough, has stated, "All our environmental problems become easier to solve with fewer people."

While Harper, Attenborough, and others don't bother disguising their revulsion for humanity, some climate alarmists, like leftist academic Robin Maynard, now couch their calls for pre-emptively erasing future generations within the rhetoric of "family planning, gender equality and education."

The impact of this anti-human propaganda, parroted by some Democrats, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), has been significant, as the fears whipped up by climate alarmists are successfully dissuading some young couples from becoming parents, as demonstrated by a 2020 study published in the journal Climatic Change.

Morgan Stanley analysts told investors in 2021 that the "movement to not have children owing to fears over climate change is growing and impacting fertility rates quicker than any preceding trend in the field of fertility decline."

The Telegraph noted there will be fallout from the course the depopulationists wish the West to pursue. For instance, while declining birth rates may reduce consumption rates, they will also place greater strain on younger generations to pay more in tax for the health care of older generations, including Harper's.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!