Welcome back. I’m Adeline Atlas, 11-time published author, and this is the Depopulation Series — Are We the Last Biological Humans?

Today, we’re examining a contradiction that sits at the heart of the depopulation crisis: the paradox of elite fertility. While most of the world faces plummeting birth rates and widespread disinterest in parenthood, the wealthiest individuals on Earth—tech billionaires, financiers, and geopolitical influencers—are quietly growing their families. It’s a trend that raises unsettling questions about class, power, and the future of human reproduction.

Let’s start with Elon Musk. As of 2025, Musk has at least 11 children, some of whom were conceived through IVF and surrogacy. He’s been extremely vocal about his concerns surrounding birth collapse, repeatedly warning that a civilization without babies is doomed to fail. In 2022, he tweeted, “Population collapse due to low birth rates is a much bigger risk to civilization than global warming.” And Musk doesn’t just talk—he reproduces. This is not incidental. It’s ideological.

Jeff Bezos, who until recently had only one child, has now been reported to be pursuing advanced fertility strategies, including embryo preservation and embryo banking. Mark Zuckerberg has three children and publicly discusses family life. Many less-publicized billionaires in Silicon Valley and global finance have begun investing not just in children, but in legacy. They are building dynasties, securing multi-generational control of capital, data, and influence. And increasingly, their offspring are being raised with access to biotechnology, elite schooling, genetic screening, and environments optimized for longevity and intelligence.

This creates a fundamental split in the reproductive experience. While average citizens are having fewer or no children—often due to financial pressure, housing insecurity, social atomization, or cultural disinterest—the most powerful people on the planet are doing the opposite. They’re investing in children as assets. And that’s not speculation—it’s policy.

Take the example of Musk’s close association with tech-driven population solutions. He funds Neuralink, a brain-computer interface company, and has expressed support for artificial wombs and genetically optimized offspring. His company X (formerly Twitter) has become a platform for pro-natalist rhetoric, including endorsements of controversial figures who promote selective breeding and birth incentives for high-IQ individuals.

Now consider this: while elite fertility rises among a select group, the majority of society is facing a very different reality. Birth rates across developed nations continue to plummet. Millennials and Gen Z are not just having fewer kids—they’re actively choosing not to have any. Reasons include cost of living, fear of climate collapse, mental health, and a general sense of nihilism. But in elite circles, the child becomes a project. A strategic investment. A continuation of power, not a burden.

This is the class-based fertility split. And it raises the question—are we heading into a future where only the rich reproduce?

Historically, fertility was higher among lower-income populations. But in modern post-industrial societies, the inverse is emerging. Wealth grants not only the means to raise children comfortably but also the luxury of outsourcing gestation, using cutting-edge fertility tech, and curating optimal reproductive outcomes. Meanwhile, for average families, the cost of parenting continues to rise—housing, education, healthcare, and childcare are now prohibitively expensive. For many, children are simply unaffordable.

So what happens when reproduction becomes a privilege of the elite?

First, it becomes a lever of control. If only certain groups are reproducing—those with capital, influence, and access to enhancement technologies—then the next generation will reflect the priorities of those groups. Genetic editing, designer embryos, and embryo selection aren’t theoretical anymore. They are being normalized among those who can afford them.

Second, it creates a situation where population management can be leveraged for strategic ends. If the state or corporate entities begin seeing reproduction as a national security issue—as some countries already do—then policies will shift toward controlling who gets to reproduce. We’ve seen early signs of this in places like China, where reproduction was previously limited through the One-Child Policy and is now being incentivized for specific demographics.

This leads us to the darker edge of the discussion: reproductive enforcement. Could we see a world where governments, influenced or run by elites, begin mandating childbirth? Not universally—but selectively. In dystopian fiction like The Handmaid’s Tale, reproduction is centrally controlled, and fertile women become state property. While the show is dramatized, its core premise—reproduction as a nationalized asset—is not as far-fetched as it once seemed.

In Singapore, where the fertility rate has collapsed below 1.0, state-run matchmaking and fertility campaigns have been in effect for decades. The government runs dating apps, sponsors romantic holidays, and produces advertisements urging citizens to have more children “for the nation.” While these are still voluntary, they reflect a shift: fertility is no longer seen as private, but patriotic.

Now imagine that same logic applied with AI, surveillance, and biotechnology. Governments could issue birth quotas. Corporate employees could be incentivized—or even contractually obligated—to reproduce under specific conditions. Data-driven optimization could be used to pre-select genetic traits for national stability, intelligence, or emotional conformity.

And when the public no longer reproduces naturally, these systems would not be perceived as intrusive—they would be perceived as necessary.

But what about the individuals? How are people responding to the growing fertility gap?

Some are withdrawing entirely. In the West, a growing “childfree by choice” movement is aligning with environmentalist and anti-natalist ideologies. Online communities like “r/childfree” now number in the millions. There is a strong belief among some demographics that the world is too broken to justify bringing new life into it. These ideologies are not fringe—they are shaping real behavior and influencing public policy.

Others are resisting in the opposite direction. Pro-natalist movements are rising in conservative and religious circles, often as a counterbalance to secular, liberal depopulation trends. These movements emphasize the importance of family, tradition, and reproductive continuity. But they often lack access to the same enhancement technologies or economic support systems that elites enjoy. This creates not just a class divide—but a bio-political divide.

In effect, we are witnessing the emergence of two reproductive futures:

1. The curated elite future, where reproduction is optimized, outsourced, and designed for legacy.
   
   
2. The disempowered public future, where birth is delayed, avoided, or rendered inaccessible.
   
   

The longer this split persists, the more structural it becomes. Children of the elite will be born into advantage—not just in terms of money, but in terms of cognitive enhancement, health outcomes, and social positioning. Over multiple generations, this compounds. What begins as a fertility gap becomes a civilizational divergence.

And that brings us back to the paradox. The very people warning the public about population collapse—Musk, Thiel, elite demographers—are often building their own personal escape hatches. They’re having large families, buying land, building bunkers, investing in longevity science. Meanwhile, the average person is encouraged to remain childless, delay reproduction, and trust that the future will somehow take care of itself.

This is not an accident.

It’s a system.

One designed to concentrate continuity in the hands of the few while encouraging transience and detachment among the many.

The elites are not ignoring the fertility crisis—they are responding to it early, and on their own terms. The public is not being empowered—they are being distracted.

So what’s the endgame?

If present trends continue, we may see reproduction go the way of education and healthcare—something that was once a public norm, but has become a private luxury. Children may be increasingly viewed as assets, contracts, or products—designed for specific outcomes, managed by elite systems, and divorced from traditional notions of family.

Natural pregnancy may become risky, rare, or socially discouraged. Parenthood may become conditional. And the genetic legacy of the human race may be written not by culture or faith—but by algorithm and capital.

In closing, this is not a warning—it’s a description. The elite’s depopulation paradox is not theoretical. It’s unfolding now. And unless the public becomes aware of the full picture, it will be too late to ask why decisions about the future of humanity were made without them.

Fertility is not just a personal decision.

It’s a geopolitical one.

And the ones having children today are already shaping the world their children will inherit—while the rest of society watches from the sidelines.