Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the lower house of parliament and an ally of President Vladimir Putin, said a new bill would tackle the “ideology of childlessness.”
Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the lower house of parliament and an ally of President Vladimir Putin, said a new bill would tackle the “ideology of childlessness.”
Russia’s fight against the West and its values has taken aim this week at an “ideology” that the Kremlin and its allies say threatens the country’s very foundations: people not wanting to have children.
Lawmakers have proposed a ban on “propaganda of conscious refusal to bear children,” Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the lower house of parliament and an ally of President Vladimir Putin, said in a post on Telegram on Tuesday.
It is the latest effort by authorities to combat the demographic strain of falling birth rates, exacerbated by the war in Ukraine, which the Kremlin says could threaten the country’s long-term outlook. In July, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called Russia’s declining birth rate “catastrophic for the future of the nation.”
You know, I would bet there's tens of thousands of Russians that would be interested in having children if they didn't all have a case of unnecessary deadness.
If only something could have been done to avoid that.
Why does ml crew defend modern day Russia? Modern day Russia is not a communist country. I’m confused why any communist would defend the USSR in general, especially after Stalin took power. Makes no damn sense to me.
At the most the only thing that can be said is that the article says "could" and a law is "proposed". That is already concerning but it is not reality yet at least.
I don't know enough about Russian law if this maybe just means the guy told another guy while taking a piss in a toilet or if there was an official meeting and tomorrow it is voted on.
this is why .world is full of mostly braindead folks who've never had to think for themselves, only what their master propagandists feed them
to be fair, i didn't have to respond, i did to bust your cocky egos. in what world do supporters of the American Empire think they're superiors to fanboys of the Russian state? isn't the repeal of Roe v wade even worse than whatever this Duma member is threatening?
I get why, from your interactions with .ml peers, you would immediately jump to the conclusion that any opposition to any country means that person is a turbofan of all its adversaries. That's actually a big part of what I am mocking here. Thank you for confirming it is so ingrained that you cannot conceive other people aren't like that.
💡If we simply make it illegal to... not have children? No, that's not right. Not want to have children? No, impossible to enforce. Ah, it must be illegal to profess the lack of desire to have children. What a beautiful and simple law that will certainly address the root cause of falling birth rates.
Citizens stop having kids because they can't afford them, government fines them and makes rape, I mean traditional values, more acceptable instead of making rich people stop hoarding all the cash.
Does anyone know the strategic reason for right wing authoritarians prioritizing people having kids? Like project 2025 talks about it a bunch, but nothing totally clear cut comes to mind as to why. At least not that feels like it fully justifies how clearly important it is, and that isn't just me dismissing it as meaningless control or whatever. It feels strategically important
In this case it's clearly important militarily, but that's also not likely to help in the present conflict in Ukraine. It'll take a long time for those kids to grow up, but at least they'd help mitigate population loss
Traditional values used to subjugate women. That's really it. The same reason they hate abortion. Pregnancy and children are traditionally ways to control womem. "Keep em barefoot and pregnant" and so forth.
More working class children means that there will be more people to exploit in the future. The size of the working class population is extremely important for the generation of wealth because they’re basically the only ones doing productive labour.
Yeah, I guess that feels like the obvious reason. It just feels like there's gotta be something more immediate and tangible. Maybe there isn't though 🤷🏻♂️
They want to grow the population in order to have more workers and consumers. There's also a white nationalist component where they're afraid that white people will become a minority and they'll use this demographic power to agitate for more equality, which is basically oppression to those people (because if it was only about economic growth, they'd be pro migration).
No idea what kind of level prioritising is meant, but all governments should provide benefits to children since any country needs their population to be healthy and not decline. You want young working able people to replace old population so that there are enough workers and taxpayers to keep country going.
So I just did a quick analysis of war lengths after and including WWII, and given that this isn't my area of expertise, but they tend to run around 30 years on average. You either get out quickly or you're there for generations. Russia is losing troops at a rate that worries me and I'm on Ukraine's side of the war.
I hate headlines with the word could. Remind me when it has or is. I could become a billionaire but it's highly unlikely I will. Just like her fine or the arrest of Putin.
This is why US First Amendment standards for freedom of speech need to be adopted everywhere, not with hundreds of "but this kind of speech is harmful to society" exceptions.