We don't know how a society can work that way as it's a first time.

This system can't work. This system is going to collapse. Just matter of time.

USA/EU might be putting money into SK.

Both to “prove to the other side” that their ideology is the right one.

Where it becomes a right wing talking point (or a discussion about the socio-economic future of a country) broadly comes down to how you present the causes, implications, and necessary actions.

The fact that many more-developed countries having shrinking native populations is a fact that governments must reckon with in some way, and salting the earth on discussing because one faction is trying to exploit it cedes the ultimate policy decisions to them.

The problem with Hitler wasn’t that he wanted German people to be successful, it was his proposed solution that involved mass murder between genocide and global war.

This is a problem that requires thinking beyond lazy pattern matching

I actually think they pay their workers too much though - for not working.

I think standard unemployment on full salary is 2 years, even if you quit your job yourself!

Generous benefits invite abuse…

People attribute it to empowerment of women, but I wonder if it's more correlation than causation. Women empowerment happened in the same time frame there was a large shift towards urbanization. The situation across the world before was like ~80% of people living in rural areas, and ~20% living in cities. Now those proportions are approximately flipped in many places. IIRC cities appear to be a net population sink for most of history, counting on an steady stream of people moving from the countryside each generation to replenish sub-replacement numbers. Raising children "free-ranging" is more straightforward in the countryside. In cities they demand a lot of micromanagement and resources from parents, because car-infested, cramped urban landscape is expensive and hostile to children. So perhaps the causation arrow flows from accelerated urbanization to both women empowerment and sub-replacement fertility rates, not necessarily from women empowerment to sub-replacement rates.

> Researchers have variously estimated the Muslim population of France at between 8.8% and 12.5% in 2017, and less than 1% in 2001,[64][65] making a "replacement" unlikely according to MacKellar.

It's not just men's rights. There is a massive part of the West who believes that to acknowledge that women are physically different than men is the real sexism. Erasing female as a distinct category entirely is supposed to be the anti-sexist option. Females are just weak men, too lazy to get taller and stronger. Or men are just big, sterile, extremely strong women. Now that I type it, I guess it is a men's rights movement.

Turning "woman-hating" into "misogynist" into "sexist" was as men's rights as turning Women's Studies into Gender Studies.

edit: always remember that the history of "sexism" is not a history of people hurting people, it's a history of men hurting women. Sexism is a euphemism. The reason only males are required to do military service in Korea is because men decided that's how it should be. If men decided otherwise, it would be changed.

I'm not so sure. If you're shot or suffer other injury that affects mobility, it's really helpful to have some comrades around with enough upper-body strength to carry you somewhere where you can get help, or at least cover while waiting for it. Being able to carry a lot of equipment is also useful.

Being expected to raise the children, keep the house clean, keep up with laundry, do the grocery shopping, and keep the family fed among other things all on your own while your partner’s day ends after coming home from his 9-to-5 doesn’t sound very pleasant, and a lot of young adult women (especially in East Asia) saw exactly this play out with their parents so it’s only natural if it’s led them to become avoidant.

I also was perfectly polite in my post.

It wouldn't have been difficult for you to do the same.

To be clear, you are claiming it is time to roll back woman's rights (the right to work) so they maintain the same army size.

May I be bold, and make a conjecture?

You are aware this argument is unjustifiable and people react as such, otherwise, you wouldn't be rolling out your 9 year old anon account to do it.

You do not understand why it is unjustifiable, so, you blame some sort of conspiracy or ill in civil society for your inability to back your free-association with your name.