Britain is already very crowded with ~70m people. The idea that things would be better with 200m people is … optimistic, IMHO.
There is simply a law of numbers wrt to influence, and the maximum feasible number of people is based on geography. Britain is a smallish country, smaller than most of its peers in Europe even, let alone the USA.
But with the rejection of science (eg: mRNA vaccines, and the political oversight of all federal funding now enacted), the USA is doomed to irrelevance anyway. Larger population countries will overtake it (China, India, possibly even Europe if the slide to the right is avoided) because they won’t invoke insane policies (probably). The sad part of that (apart from Europe) is that authoritarian societies look set to win over the rest of us in the medium to long term :(
spacedcowboy•6mo ago
There is simply a law of numbers wrt to influence, and the maximum feasible number of people is based on geography. Britain is a smallish country, smaller than most of its peers in Europe even, let alone the USA.
But with the rejection of science (eg: mRNA vaccines, and the political oversight of all federal funding now enacted), the USA is doomed to irrelevance anyway. Larger population countries will overtake it (China, India, possibly even Europe if the slide to the right is avoided) because they won’t invoke insane policies (probably). The sad part of that (apart from Europe) is that authoritarian societies look set to win over the rest of us in the medium to long term :(