It's called having aligned interests. If you have kids, you have an inherent bias towards having a long term stable and successful country. If you don't have kids, you might not give a shit what happens in the long term because you won't be around for it.
A childless person can still serve as a parental figure to or foster parent of others and leave behind an enduring legacy regardless. It's more accurate to say a selfish person makes a poor leader while a selfless one makes an awesome leader. Also it matters more what spiritual quality of kids you raise over the physical quantity of them.
I don't understand. You can be a good leader even if you don't have kids.
It's called having aligned interests. If you have kids, you have an inherent bias towards having a long term stable and successful country. If you don't have kids, you might not give a shit what happens in the long term because you won't be around for it.
A childless person can still serve as a parental figure to or foster parent of others and leave behind an enduring legacy regardless. It's more accurate to say a selfish person makes a poor leader while a selfless one makes an awesome leader. Also it matters more what spiritual quality of kids you raise over the physical quantity of them.
List of childless people (famous and less famous) and with some descriptions why they decided to be so in their own words:
https://childfreebychoice.com/history.htm