The Tactics Elon Musk Uses to Manage His ‘Legion’ of Babies—and Their Mothers

Sadly for Elon, intelligent women won't fall for this.

WSJ has gone tabloid.

"We are legion"

Where have I heard that before?

Aryeh Jay said:

"We are legion"

Where have I heard that before?

Click to expand...

Jesus asked him, saying, “What is your name?” And he said, “Legion,” because many demons had entered him. Luke 8:30

JosephZ said:

.....That was about when Musk sent her a direct message asking if she was interested in having his child, according to people familiar with the matter. The two had never met in person.

Click to expand...

What is the Christian take on this kind of harem/breeder endeavor?

Actually I should probly break this into two questions:
1. What is the traditional Christian view of this?
2. What is the modern American politico-Christian view of this?

durangodawood said:

What is the Christian take on this kind of harem/breeder endeavor?

Actually I should probly break this into two questions:
1. What is the traditional Christian view of this?
2. What is the modern American politico-Christian view of this?

Click to expand...

The Nazi's had a badge for large families, perhaps we can too.

I'm sure a guy who sires a bunch of kids and then ignores them is going to put a lot of care and attention into the needs of the American people and the concerns of the folks impacted by his actions.

JosephZ said:

Musk has said he is concerned about what he called Third World countries having higher birthrates than the U.S. and Europe, a person familiar with the conversation said.

Click to expand...

That's actually a fair concern...along with just the declining birth rates in developed nations in general.

(granted, I can't throw stones because I got the old snip back about a decade ago to make sure I don't have any kids)

But declining birth rates in developed nations are concerning because
A) the solvency of social safety nets in developed nations dependent on having a certain ratio of working aged people paying in, to elderly people who can no long work, collecting. (some Asian countries are struggling with this right now...too many pensioners and not enough people to pay in)

B) non-developed and under-developed nations are often heavily reliant on the generosity of developed westernized nations. Both in terms of money, and in terms of piggy-backing off of the innovation of developed nations. If the "Modernized world" was confined to just Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, and Iceland...do you think an impoverished country in Africa or South America ever gets electricity or access to motor vehicles?

C) culturally speaking -- and this one may get a bit touchy -- I think the developed world should have a vested interest in making sure that westernized/liberalized cultures/mindsets remain the predominate ones that are "holding the cards" so to speak. Ultimately, you need to have numbers on your side to maintain that.

ThatRobGuy said:

That's actually a fair concern...along with just the declining birth rates in developed nations in general.

(granted, I can't throw stones because I got the old snip back about a decade ago to make sure I don't have any kids)

But declining birth rates in developed nations are concerning because
A) the solvency of social safety nets in developed nations dependent on having a certain ratio of working aged people paying in, to elderly people who can no long work, collecting. (some Asian countries are struggling with this right now...too many pensioners and not enough people to pay in)

Click to expand...

Totally. And countries that reject immigration as part of the solution will suffer economically.

ThatRobGuy said:

C) culturally speaking -- and this one may get a bit touchy -- I think the developed world should have a vested interest in making sure that westernized/liberalized cultures/mindsets remain the predominate ones that are "holding the cards" so to speak. Ultimately, you need to have numbers on your side to maintain that.

Click to expand...

Agree here too.

But I dont think super rich men harem/breeder pools where they drop in with cash now and again is even part of a viable solution. Its just a vanity project really.

ThatRobGuy said:

(granted, I can't throw stones because I got the old snip back about a decade ago to make sure I don't have any kids)

Click to expand...

I got married for the same reason, looking back, the snip would have been cheaper.

durangodawood said:

Totally. And countries that reject immigration as part of the solution will suffer economically.

Click to expand...

durangodawood said:

Agree here too.

Click to expand...

Economically, yes, countries that blanket reject immigration will suffer in that regard.

However, where A ties in with C (from the list I mentioned)

...is that not all immigration is equal in terms of that cultural aspect.

While immigration can prop things up economically to offset declining birth rates in certain countries. In terms of preserving the westernized/liberalized values, there's a staunch difference between someone coming to a country because they want to embrace those ideas and pass them on, vs. people who come here purely for economic reasons (some of which may not even like westernized society)

For example (just a hypothetical) 8 million people coming here from Afghanistan because they truly dislike Afghanistan's way of doing things and the oppressive theocracy and religious oligarchy, and want to become part of a freer more open minded culture...

...is going to have a very different effect than 8 million who may actually prefer that rigid theocracy, and if they had their druthers, would prefer to stay there, but were compelled to move for purely economic reasons.

One strengthens a country's westernized values, the other waters them down.

durangodawood said:

But I dont think super rich men harem/breeder pools where they drop in with cash now and again is even part of a viable solution. Its just a vanity project really.

Click to expand...

I think that pretty obvious...some narcissistic types tend to see is as "doing the world a favor" by passing their DNA on to future generations.

ThatRobGuy said:

Economically, yes, countries that blanket reject immigration will suffer in that regard.

However, where A ties in with C (from the list I mentioned)

...is that not all immigration is equal in terms of that cultural aspect.

While immigration can prop things up economically to offset declining birth rates in certain countries. In terms of preserving the westernized/liberalized values, there's a staunch difference between someone coming to a country because they want to embrace those ideas and pass them on, vs. people who come here purely for economic reasons (some of which may not even like westernized society)

For example (just a hypothetical) 8 million people coming here from Afghanistan because they truly dislike Afghanistan's way of doing things and the oppressive theocracy and religious oligarchy, and want to become part of a freer more open minded culture...

...is going to have a very different effect than 8 million who may actually prefer that rigid theocracy, and if they had their druthers, would prefer to stay there, but were compelled to move for purely economic reasons.

One strengthens a country's westernized values, the other waters them down.

Click to expand...

Yeah I think thats generally true. People steeped in tribal/fundamentalism arent going to be such a good mix. On the flip side, Im a little baffled over the "conservative" suspicion of Mexican and Central American immigrants who often align really well with western values, even to the point of leaning conservative.

ThatRobGuy said:

I think that pretty obvious...some narcissistic types tend to see is as "doing the world a favor" by passing their DNA on to future generations.

Click to expand...

Obvious to you and I perhaps. But I do like to say it pointedly tho, because "conservatives" might want to pause for second and consider who theyre getting in bed with. Musk might just "breed" them too.

durangodawood said:

Yeah I think thats generally true. People steeped in tribal/fundamentalism arent going to be such a good mix. On the flip side, Im a little baffled over the "conservative" suspicion of Mexican and Central American immigrants who often align really well with western values, even to the point of leaning conservative.

Click to expand...

I think they align with US-conservatives on certain religious values, but I don't consider that to be totality of "westernized values".

I've subscribed more to the school of thought of those like Durant and Strauss who defined westernized culture as the combination of Greek Reason and Judeo-Christian values. I believe the words Strauss used to describe it were "The collaboration and tension between Athens and Jerusalem"

Latin America has been something of a mixed bag in that regard.

You had everything ranging from far-right dictatorships like Pinochet, all the way to the polar opposite extreme of Cuba and central American countries that were Soviet allies.


But, as for the "conservative suspicion", sometimes the easiest answer is the right one. Their concerns are rooted in the fact that many of the people involved don't share their political values, and the opposing team expressing interest in fast tracking citizenship thereby granting full voting rights.

If the roles were reversed, and say, Latin Americans (by a score of 70/30) were reliably pro-gun and anti-environmental protection laws, and the conservative party seemed very eager to bring them in as easily as possible, and fast-track citizenship to allow them to get to the polls and start voting. I assume there would be some liberal suspicion about such maneuvers.


So, in reality, I don't think it's the actual Latin Americans that conservatives are suspicious of, it's their political rivals they're suspicious of.
(I say that based on the fact that conservatives seem to have little to no issue with Cuban immigrants (who are 3-1 conservative) coming to the US)

Whereas people from other countries of origin...

ThatRobGuy said:

I think they align with US-conservatives on certain religious values, but I don't consider that to be totality of "westernized values".

I've subscribed more to the school of thought of those like Durant and Strauss who defined westernized culture as the combination of Greek Reason and Judeo-Christian values. I believe the words Strauss used to describe it were "The collaboration and tension between Athens and Jerusalem"

Latin America has been something of a mixed bag in that regard.

You had everything ranging from far-right dictatorships like Pinochet, all the way to the polar opposite extreme of Cuba and central American countries that were Soviet allies.

Click to expand...

Do you not recall the USA's own complicity in installing Pinochet? He's the man our own government wanted at the time and so should be no more held against Latin American values as against our own.

As for Cuba, also dont forget that state communism was essentially a western project. It emerged from western thinking and values in the heart of the west. It certainly didnt come from China, African thought, or the Islamic world. It was our mistake. Let not define "western" as only the good things that emerge from the Athens/Jerusalem heritage. The history of "the west" is chock full of despots and tyrants right through the 20th century.

The whole regional analysis is confounded by the history of US and Soviet power games and raw economic imperialism. It seems to me that on a personal level most of our southern neighbors value economic liberty, personal freedom, and general benevolence about as much as we do.

ThatRobGuy said:

But, as for the "conservative suspicion", sometimes the easiest answer is the right one. Their concerns are rooted in the fact that many of the people involved don't share their political values, and the opposing team expressing interest in fast tracking citizenship thereby granting full voting rights.

Click to expand...

Yeah this is probably true (although the trend is in the opposite direction). Its not really about general personal and societal values. Its about partisanship and the same things "true and decent Americans" have been arguing over forever.