Even as our TFR has been sub-replacement, our collective assessment of what we should be doing hasn't changed. We know replacement should be the floor. Fewer than 1-in-20 white Americans put the ideal number of children to have at 0 or 1.
Knowledge isn't enough, though, in this case or any other. We all have 10,000 Library of Alexandrias in our butt pockets. The sum of all human knowledge is 0.91 seconds away. Only when knowledge is put into practice does it become functional.
What we lack is the will. For more than a generation now the native populations of every Western nation--excepting Israel, if it is included as part of the Occident--have been failing to replace themselves.
This first manifests as an upward shift in the median age as the leading low-fertility generation grays. The total population doesn't actually start declining until that low-fertility generation begins dying off. It's already happening in Japan, and it will happen here when the Boomers check out.
Here are the median ages of populations in several refugee-sending countries:
Syria -- 24
Iraq -- 20
Chad -- 18
South Sudan -- 17
The Congo -- 20
Nigeria -- 18
Somalia -- 18
Yemen -- 19
Compare that to the geriatric West:
Germany -- 47
France -- 41 (the figure for the 10%+ of the population that is Muslim is significantly lower)
Italy -- 45
Great Britain -- 41
Sweden -- 41
The US -- 38
Increasing our birth rates is not sufficient to save Western civilization, but it is necessary. The future belongs to those who show up for it.
There are three actionable, conceivable things to do in the US (and Europe) to preserve ourselves and our posterity:
1) A moratorium on immigration (more politically palatable than preferential status for selected ancestrally and culturally compatible countries)
2) The repatriation of non-citizens ("you have to go back")
3) An increase in native fertility (an uptick of 25% would do the trick)
These are achievable. While we still have some ground to cover to get to 1) and 2), we're much closer today than we were even two years ago.
I'm anecdotal evidence for 3). My wife and I have two kids, aged 3 and 1, and we're not finished yet. My decision to start a family was spurred in large part by a sense of civilizational and ancestral duty. I was set to be a ZFG--zero fecundities given--genetic dead end through my mid-twenties, including the first few years of this blog. After a couple of years hovering in the seminal mists of the Dark Enlightenment--roughly the precursor to the Alt Right--it became clear to me that sitting on the sidelines was no longer an option.
Those who forget about their ancestors soon forget about their descendants.
Parenthetically, here's suggestive evidence that choosing cats over kids isn't something childless post-menopausal women are satisfied with having done:
Childless women over the age of 60 (n = 679) put the ideal number of children to have at 2.75 on average!
GSS variables used: CHLDIDEL(0-7), AGE(60-89), SEX, RACE(1), YEAR, BORN(1), CHILDS(0)