HOW MANY "DEGENERATE" MEN ARE THERE IN AMERICA?

"Degenerate" art by Frickl

by Duns Scotus

"Degeneration" (or "degeneracy") is an interesting framework for the problems of the West, and, even better, it is a term you often see banded about on the so-called Dissident Right when it isn't pathetically shilling for a war that is slaughtering a generation of Russians and Ukrainians. But, that aside, is "degeneration" really a problem? 

Usually the DR sees it as linked to perverted sexual behaviour that results in low birth rates or the failure to procreate at all (and thus more mass immigration). Already, any intelligent person can see the problem with the concept.

What if someone lives a monk-like existence of spiritual purity but fails to have offspring, while another person engages in the worst forms of sexual perversion but nevertheless manages to pump out a few sprogs at a "healthy" reproduction rate?

Unless one has Orwellian access into all their sexual peccadillos, the only way to apply this "degeneracy" metric to them is to check birth records, palimony chits, DNA swabs, etc. Only then will we know their true level of degeneracy or "generacy"!

Another obvious problem here is that maybe the people who should be generating are not the ones generating, while the ones who shouldn't be generating are.  Yes, prime taboo country in today's modern West, even if you take enormous efforts avoid the racial angle!

As you can see, there are a lot of highly debatable side issues here, but I think a general point most sane people can agree on is that -- all other factors aside -- people having children (i.e. "generacy") is better or healthier than them not having children.

Also, it surely shouldn't be too controversial to add that true "generacy" would be hitting, on average, the 2.1 kids replacement-level fertility of a healthy society, which, on a personal level, effectively means having 3 kids.

Of course, all this is dependent on there being no major ceiling on population, like food supply or pressing environmental issues that could lead to a situation that endangered the general population.

In this framework, then, having two children is slightly sub-par and could even be called "soft degeneracy," while having one or no kids could be called pretty degenerate.

So, with this in view, we can now ask and answer the question of how many degenerate men are there in society. According to relatively recent US data, the numbers are quite high: 

"Among all adult men, 40.5 percent have no biological children, 37.5 percent have between one and two children, and 22.0 percent have three or more children."

Yup, almost 4 out of 5 men are "degenerate" to some degree. Also, there is absolutely no data on whether the ones who are "generate" are generating the kind of people we want to see generated, as eugenic arguments of any kind are totally taboo. Although I suspect this is not necessarily the case outside the West.