Tea Party rally
2,247 words
Globally, two countervailing population trends are occurring simultaneously.
Overall, world population is growing at an alarming pace, a rate so high many fear it will ultimately exceed the carrying capacity of the planet.
Of course, the term “carrying capacity” is subject to ideological abuse. Estimates of the Earth’s carrying capacity range from less than 1 billion people, which seems ridiculous in light of the fact that it currently “carries” 7 billion and has carried >1 billion since 1800, to 1 trillion, which seems equally far-fetched. Reportedly, two-thirds of estimates fall in the 4 billion to 16 billion range, with a median of 10 billion.
A countertrend is also present. Within the overall population growth, the white race is shrinking precipitously, so rapidly that biological and cultural extinction looms.
Now, if your primary concern is the environment, or overall human sustainability without regard to the fate of subgroups, then white population decline or extinction can be viewed as positive. (This flies in the face of moralistic mouthings about genocide, but governments and elites are indifferent to, or even enthusiastic about, the crime as long as politically incorrect out-groups are targeted.)
In fact, this is the position of the Establishment, government, and most white people. The Population Reference Bureau’s (see below) researchers last year expressed gratification that First World fertility (which means white fertility, since nonwhite immigrants are reproducing rapidly), and Chinese and East Asian fertility, are below replacement level, because otherwise overall population growth would have been higher. The analysts were not concerned about the fate of declining populations because such shrinkage pulled down overall numbers.
Contrast this with a position opposed to white extinction or genocide. The latter view entails de facto support for increasing white fertility to at least replacement level, if not more, within the context of a still-expanding global population.
An alternative, of course, would be to foster asymmetric intra-global population change precisely the opposite of the Establishment’s: lowering nonwhite fertility among the world’s “poor” while increasing white fertility among the world’s “rich.”
Since this is politically incorrect on both racial and Marxist grounds, it is unlikely to win favor within dominant institutional structures.
Growth in World Population
The Population Reference Bureau (PRB) is a Washington, D.C.-based private, nonprofit organization founded in 1929 to provide population data to policymakers, bureaucrats, journalists, academics, and interested laymen. It analyzes complex demographic data and research to present up-to-date population information in easily understood formats.
According to the PRB, it took all of human history for world population to reach the 1 billion mark in 1800. Growth in increments of 1 billion people since then has been as follows:
1800: 1 billion
1930: 2 billion
1960: 3 billion
1974: 4 billion
1987: 5 billion
1999: 6 billion
2011: 7 billion
Currently, the world is in the midst of its largest population growth in history, adding an additional one billion people every 12 years.
Writing in 1994, population geneticist L.-L. Cavalli-Sforza and colleagues stated:
We are presently in a critical period in which most populations living on the Earth have recently decreased their mortality rates, but only those that did so earlier [whites] have learned to decrease their fertility rates. As a result, there is a rapid exponential growth in many developing countries, leading the world toward demographic bankruptcy unless growth can be effectively curbed. (The History and Geography of Human Genes, abr. pbk. ed., 1994, p. 106)
Virtually all population growth today is in the Third World, or among immense immigrant populations imported into formerly white countries.
- Dhaka Street Crowds, Bangladesh: “Staying the night in the hotel room from which this photo is taken doesn’t give you sleep. Instead it teaches you what cacophony really means: it means hearing any possible human sound you can think of at the same time. You’ll hear what you think of—and you don’t stop thinking. Actual sounds—including (in the middle of the night) marriage parties, political demonstrations, sirens, drums, shouting, market screams, passengers and rickshaw drivers hitting busses, claxoning, and who knows what kind of anguish—all combine into every known and not-yet-known rhythm.” — Ahron de Leeuw, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Sub-Replacement Fertility
As noted, worldwide growth has been less than it otherwise would have been thanks to sub-replacement fertility in Europe, white America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, China, Japan, and other East Asian nations. White populations, by failing to reproduce, are vanishing.
Large families are still the norm in the Third World, as well as among non-whites imported into First World countries to replace the native inhabitants. Therefore, many non-white populations continue to expand at a rapid rate. Their death rates have been slashed by foreign aid, housing, medical care, transfer payments, and other Western largesse, while fertility rates remain high.
Replacement fertility—where each generation exactly replaces the one before it (i.e., equilibrium, or zero population growth—no expansion)—is currently 2.1 children per couple in the First World and 2.4 in developing countries.
Because some men and women in each generation do not reproduce, couples who do so must give birth to more than 2.1 children to sustain the overall population.
Actual First World fertility is currently below replacement level (signifying population implosion)—despite factoring in miscegenation, which is now substantial, and the high birth rates attributable to permanently-settled non-whites, whose numbers under existing policies are continuously augmented by new arrivals, legal and illegal, at a ferocious pace.
According to the Population Reference Bureau’s 2011 World Population Data Sheet (the most up-to-date), here are the total fertility rates (TFRs) for the major regions of the globe:
Europe: 1.6
North America: 1.9
Australia: 1.9
New Zealand: 2.2
World: 2.5
Developed world (the “white” regions above + Japan): 1.7
Developing world: 2.6-4.5
Since the figures for the “white” world incorporate the high fertility rates of the large, youthful, recently-imported races, actual white fertility is exceptionally low, possibly even negative, as demographer Massimo Livi-Bacci hints in the quoted passage at the end of this article.
One consequence of low fertility is the disappearance of white extended families. The existence of many families with only one or two children greatly reduces the number of siblings, aunts, and uncles, making the demographic winter not only colder, but much lonelier.
US Hispanic Immigrants: A Case Study in Differential Reproduction
First World elites have imposed massive nonwhite immigration on white countries, intensifying the downward pressure on native populations and radically transforming them from white to nonwhite in a breathtakingly brief period of time. Since whites have nowhere to go, they are effectively being annihilated.
The US serves as a case study for this process all over the world.
By 2010, whites made up a rapidly shrinking 64% of the US population. Just a few decades before the figure was 90%.
It is this massive change in racial makeup, replicated in every First World country, that makes me hesitant to call historically white lands “white,” “First World,” “developed,” or any other noun or adjective suggestive of an advanced, racially homogeneous populace. The fact that whites are officially discriminated against, and legally prohibited from speaking, associating, organizing, or voting to effectively protect their interests, renders such designations even more dubious. It is unclear in what sense a declining 64% “majority” of aging, dying helots constitutes a “white” country when they don’t even rule it.
Unlike the rest of the First World, the US population has grown in recent years. Two factors were involved: natural increase and immigration.
Over the past 30 years, 1980–2009, the percentage of growth due to immigration has risen from 24% to 36%.
Immigration began to rise rapidly in the US in the 1970s, shortly after passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. At the same time, the average number of white births leveled off at two children per woman—less than zero growth.
High levels of immigration offset declines in white fertility, thereby making the overall growth rate appear positive compared to Europe.
Between 1990 and 2010, the Hispanic population more than doubled. Of course, immigrants, legal and illegal, from Asia, Africa, and the rest of the world, plus native black and Amerindian populations, must also be factored in.
This massive influx affected more than the raw numbers of newly-arrived nonwhites. The immigrants also had much higher fertility rates than whites. Indeed, the population age structure, or pyramid, of white Americans resembles that of Europeans.
White Americans are aging rapidly as the baby boom cohort reaches age 65+.
Meanwhile, the age profile of newly-imported Hispanics presents a sharply different picture. Their age structure forms a pyramid with a wide base, characteristic of a young, growing population.
Hispanics have a much higher fertility rate than whites—indeed, Hispanic fertility in the US is higher than in Mexico. This creates great momentum for future growth. Even if fertility eventually declines, children already in the pipeline insure a sizeable number of future births. (A baby boom.)
Nevertheless, North America’s Total Fertility Rate for all races combined is still only 1.9 children per woman—below replacement level (2.0 in the US and 1.7 in Canada, which also encourages mass immigration and enforces harsh anti-white policies).
Since no matter where you live in the US, or where you go, you see massive numbers of nonwhites, interracial couples, hybrid children, and elderly whites, the true picture is clear enough. Of course, many who “look white” under such circumstances are actually Jews, non-European Caucasians, Amerindians, and hybrids of every imaginable variety.
Global Growth Conceals White Population Decline
Most brown and black regions of the world are experiencing population expansion. Death rates have fallen precipitously, but fertility rates remain high. Sub-Saharan (black) Africa, which has one of the highest fertility rates in the world, is the poster child in this regard. Though Africa’s death rates are very high, birth rates are even higher.
Meanwhile, in the First World the true extent of white population decline is concealed by aggregate national and regional statistics. White decline is worse than aggregate multiracial numbers suggest due to the high fertility and large numbers of immigrants.
Nevertheless, familiar demographic statistics, graphs, and models can be adapted for racial use. Even without being able to fit precise numbers to the models, application of basic demographic concepts provides a good, dynamic sense of what is happening.
Let’s imagine that Angola’s (currently in Stage 2 of the demographic transition) 2005 age pyramid (below) represents not that specific country, but any rapidly expanding nonwhite race inside or outside the First World. Conceptually, we thus eliminate national boundaries and substitute races for national (state) populations.
The age pyramid for our hypothetical race illustrates what a “population explosion” looks like—many young and few old, many births and few deaths.
Representative Age Pyramid for a Hypothetical Expanding Nonwhite Race (Angolan age pyramid, 2005)
Besides a current historically large population, such a race has built-in momentum for future growth because so many young people will reproduce at high rates in the future, even if total fertility gradually drops.
A comparison of Finland’s population pyramids from 1917 (still white) and 2006 (whites + immigrants) illustrates the effects of the demographic transition (fertility decline) on the white race. It may be viewed as representative.
Finnish Population Pyramids, 1917 v. 2006
The population pyramid of 1917 still looks like a pyramid and is typical of a youthful country with a high fertility rate producing healthy numbers of offspring. In contrast, the 2006 profile does not resemble a pyramid at all, but rather a column. White fertility is extremely low—indeed, lower than what is depicted due to immigrant and interracial reproduction.
Finally, contrast Angola’s 2005, or Finland’s 1917, population pyramids with a hypothetical, inverted pyramid presumably characteristic of the current or impending age structure of the white race, characterized by below replacement or possibly even negative fertility—many old and few young, many deaths and few births:
Hypothetical Inverted Age Pyramid of the White Race
Italian demographer Massimo Livi-Bacci succinctly sums up the dynamics of this crisis situation:
[Population changes] vary between a maximum annual potential growth rate of 4 percent (many developing countries have a growth rate of over 3 percent) and a minimum of -1 percent (which will be realized by many European countries should the current fertility and mortality levels remain unchanged). We are able to recognize the exceptional nature of the current situation if we keep in mind that a population growing at an annual rate of 4 percent will double in about 18 years, while another declining by 1 percent per year will halve in 70. Two populations of equal size [emphasis added] experiencing these different growth rates will find themselves after 28 years (barely a generation) in a numerical ratio of four-to-one! (A Concise History of World Population, 4th ed., Blackwell Publishing, 2007, p. 20)
Note that Livi-Bacci is saying these disparate growth trajectories exist now. Observe too the tremendous velocity built into the numbers. Race is not static.
Key is ever-changing dynamism, motion, and flux. Races can expand and contract rapidly, both absolutely and relative to other races. They can grow, shrink, collapse, and become extinct.
As with any endangered species or subspecies, white fertility must return to above replacement level as soon as possible—an admittedly arduous task. A race characterized by sub-replacement fertility does not have a future. It will suffer a tragic loss of population, culminating in race suicide or genocide.
Whites must see the dawn of a new demographic spring, have more children, more life, more resources.
Unless this is done, we will cease to exist. So remember—“Tomorrow Is Always Too Late.”
35 comments
Population growth — i.e. large families has only been considered something beneficial subsequent to the agrarian age. Prior to that large families were frowned upon in hunter gatherer tribes, who did not want extra mouths to feed through the winter; when they knew their food would only be enough for a certain number in the tribe.
According to Peak Oil and Peak Non Renewable Resources the future is of abundant energy and abundant non-renewable resources (upon which industrial civilisation is based) is hasta manyana, bye bye… If there is a voluntary transition of population reduction, the future could be a simple village agrarian one. If not, the future Peak NNR shall be so severe as to reduce the plants population and lifestyle back to Hunter Gatherer status.
Peak NNR: Scarcity: Humanity’s Last Chapter : A Comprehensive Analysis of Nonrenewable Natural Resource (NNR) Scarcity’s Consequences, by Chris Clugston (available at: in-gods-name.blogspot.com)
Why is it that the most intelligent races (White and East Asian) are rapidly committing suicide by failure to reproduce, while the birth rates for the least intelligent races (Black and Amerind) are still well above replacement levels? The high levels of individualism and selfish consumerism promoted by Jewish capitalism is a large part of the problem. Only an openly National Socialist government can solve this problem.
The Asian countries still have large populations given the area of landmass in which they live with Japan according to the 2010 census having a population of 128 million that is slightly smaller that the state of California.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan
Government, N.S. or otherwise, won’t solve the problem. It has to be a change in social attitudes reslutling in more desire for children. That meas spreading the gospel of white survival.
15 years ago I offered $50,000($62,000 in 2012 $’s) to my neives and nephews, all married with at least one kid, if they would have one more child and name it after their grand parents. Of 5 people, I got ONE taker.
The oldest niece was 35 with two boys. The next niece was 32 with two children. The next nephew was 32 with one daughter. The next nephew was 28 with two children and the last nephew (who did take me up on it) was 25 with two children. This nephew not only had his first daughter and named her after her great grand mother, he and his wife later went on to have a fourth child totally on their own hook. (They are a very religious family by the way, another important indicator.)
Moral of the story, it’s going to take a lot more than a $62,000 life time government subsidy per child to get most young people to procreat to replacement level.
We need wide spread social attitude change. Government won’t fix this disaster.
Lesson learned; I’d be better off donating my money to white dissident propaganda out lets like this one.
Thank you. We appreciate your support.
Good points, Phil. I would say, however, that NS Germany’s social revolution did succeed in uplifting social attitudes regarding their national population policy. Despite the birth control methods that were available at that time, with the post 1933 economic recovery, and a new faith in their future, Germans did reproduce, and became ‘Kinderreich’, (rich in children). The award of Mother’s Crosses (medals), tax subsidies, and an extensive social welfare system (NSV) all helped induce people to have kids. It was done then, and could be done again, if and when people have a strong sense of identity, faith in themselves, and faith in their future.
The current situation, (read mental enslavement), that we in the Anglo-White West are enmeshed in is not conducive to anything racially or demographically positive. Judging by our historical tomfoolery, and deracinated collective mentality, adding more ideologically poisoned White, kids to the current gaggle of fools, who have blown their patrimony, solves nothing. It is the toxified Anglo-American state-of-mind that is the real problem. To correct this ongoing White racial debacle would have to entail one hell of an attitude change, and a literal revolution in thought. Let’s keep chipping away, against the long odds, to try to bring that future about.
This is why I am not worried about our impending doom (as long as we take measures soon). A few generations of 4-6 children per couple (with most suriviving) and we’ll be back in fighting form….maybe a little expansion.
One of the most toxic movements that needs to be destroyed is this bastardization of “feminism” that celebrates selfish, mannish sluts that spend their prime years getting drunk and sleeping around and then end up childless and bitter (or helicopter mom to one “gender neutral” child).
Marriage is a losing proposition for men now, and I understand why they do not want to marry- the risks are too great and the rewards too small and elusive.
Especially when they can have the cow for free. If we are to preserve our race and our heritage women need to control the price of sex. The price used to be marriage (or at least very real commitment). Now it’s a drink and a neg.
Anyway, I think the Northwest guy said it best. Women are water (for the most part). We’re followers- women only think that a life of spinsterhood is amazing because Avi Goldenbergstein from the TV produces shows that say so. When we control the information everything will fall into place.
Not sure about that. I think that what the feminists are saying is that spinsterhood ain’t so bad compared to life with the wrong man.
Does anyone here stop to think about why feminism was latched onto so desperately by countless white women? Are we all that stupid? When women were generally better behaved than they are today, they got married all right – and too many of them were treated like shit by their husbands. The suffragists were waiting in the wings. This was not some accident.
If women all magically started behaving themselves by “control[ing] the price of sex”, there’d be a shitload of people left out of marriage, because it’s the men who’ve gotten weak (and many of the reborn women wouldn’t want them.) Why would they want a man who agrees to marry only because sluts are no longer readily available, but in his heart he’s still a lying lecher who’ll resume his ways after marriage?
Let the men embrace old fashioned Christian morality first and see how it pans out. Men are supposed to be the stronger sex, we are told here – yet it’s up to us women to “control the price of sex” by demanding marriage?
“Feminism” was latched on to by countless women for the following reasons:
1) Inflation made it so that one income could no longer support a family and women were given no choice but to work. Feminism was the justification. Wage slavery was marketed as freedom.
2) Media propaganda. Men are buffoons that need to be “tamed”- women are perfect and above reproach.
3) Propaganda in educational institutions.
The pendulum has swung too far in the favor of women, and it is women who are indeed abusing their power. The reason a lot of these men act “weak” is that they have been pussified and beaten down by our “pro-women” rhetoric and laws. A girl can file a rape charge and get a man arrested without evidence, or cuckold him with no consequence. Colleges and workplaces sometimes define harassment as an undesirable male merely speaking to a female or “looking at her weird.”
These, by the way, are the very same men that did not treat their women poorly. They are the guys that keep their heads down and follow the rules. Those are the guys girls should marry.
Why should men embrace Christianity? To what end?
So what you’re saying is that you want men to put you on a higher pedestal than the one feminism has created? You want men to just start committing to these she-beasts, with a 50+ headboard count?
My gods.
Wait- So you’re arguing that men were too dominant back in the day, but then further down you think men should stop being weak. So which is it?
Stronza:
Welcome to the white dissident movement. I’d expect here you will find more strong and pricipaled men. It takes moral courage to oppose the anti-white system.
P.S. If you’ve also been divorced, I recommend “Uncoupling” by Diane Vaughan, if you can locate a copy.
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Stronza in blockquote:
No, feminists wish to remove men altogether from the social system, save as useful, non-threatening drones and geldings. They are doing this de facto in schools and colleges, and in the workplace with Affirmative Action. Incidentally, look at the effect Title IX has had on school and college athletics.
The Gelding Strategy is well under way.
Nonsense. The suffragettes have been up and running since Seneca Falls, where, like the “free speech” at the Occupy meetings, men were not allowed to speak at ll (Seneca Falls), or were “allowed” to speak next to last – Black Men – or last – White Men (Occupy).
As for the Institution of Marriage, men were manipulated by society and women into being providers of their wishes, their whims, their fantasies. Given “equality,” there is nothing whatsoever in this for us – not when she can use Paul Elam’s Magic Five – (9-1-1, “I’m afraid”) – and lose everything he has worked for in his life, and his economic future, all in a court system that is not based on “law,” but “equity,” and here he is guilty, and can NOT be proven innocent. As Father Himself, Tom Leykis, Of Blessed Name said, “Guys, there is NOTHING in this for us.” Or, you can ask the late Master Sergeant Thomas James Ball about what he called “The Second Set of Books.”
You seem to miss the point we’ve discussed here and on other threads here.
Women do not want to BE married. Women want to GET married. After that, and particularly after any child s born, she has an infinite claim on ALL of his resources and ALL of his income. She just waits for the magic moment to hit the Magic Five.
Female hypergamy has become a respectable topic for discussion, and women are living in fear of the day we have mandatory DNA testing at birth. Incidentally, do you think It Is By Accident that the Internet is being overwhelmed with cuckold porn – White Husband, White Female, Black Male – cuckold pron.
No. Go over to the-spearhead.com and see discussions of female hypergamy. Incidentally, the Family Law Courts will usually hold you responsible to support the little bastard. Yeah. Like there is something in this for us…
We’re reaching a pivotal moment in the history of man-women relationships – for the first time in history, they don’t need us for income, and we don’t need marriage for sex. For the first time in history, we can see how badly we have been played for fools, and, with our Hoffman Lenses in place (HT: movie “They Live”) “I CAN SEE” what is really going on, and I do not have to play THEIR Game by THEIR Rules.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
Flavia,
You caught the basic idea of these articles—not to have 20 kids, which is near the limit of possibility, but to move white numbers above 0-3. (Not that I’m against white couples who desire more having them. Also, you can learn a lot by studying the extremes.) I remember you said, “perfect can’t be the enemy of good . . . 4 is better than 3, etc.” Of course, we’re talking about a specific time and place and set of racial circumstances. In other times or places the numbers might be different.
Thanks also for the comment about the Duggar episode you saw. I don’t have cable or satellite, so I haven’t seen the program. But the same day I’d watched a short online clip of the couple’s appearance, without their children, on a morning talk show. They didn’t rule out having another child despite the recent miscarriage.
The difference between population decline and population growth is a third child. All the intimidating numbers can obscure this fact. But for an individual white couple, the difference between being in genetic decline or genetic increase is that third child. And a third child is not so hard to imagine. We need to break down racial salvation into baby steps, no pun intended, and the one small step for a family that is a giant leap for our kind is that third child.
In the dark days after 9/11/2001, and the magnitude of the oemmnt of destruction and death had sunk in, the President made a single appeal to the citizens of the USA…………..consume. Do not stop consuming, he implored. It was suddenly a partriotic act to buy a new car. Of course, sales popped up.It seems to me if consumerism is what our country needs from us in a time of great peril, then I suppose the time has come for us to take look at ourselves and at what we are doing in our planetary home.What does it mean when consuming becomes the highest and most necessary individual expression of partriotism to country in wartime?Perhaps the time has come to also ask some other questions.1. What does it mean to be a human being in the post WWII world era?2. What meaningfully characterizes an adequate relationship of one human beings to other human beings?3. What is our relationship to all that lives on Earth?4. What are to be our personal responsibilities to and for the planetary home God has blessed us to inhabit?IF the questions above are answered in the following way:Answer to question 1 —- consume and accumulate resources;Answer to question 2 —- encourage others to consume so as to keep up with me and with“the Joneses”;Answer to question 3 —- consume whatever it is I desire;Answer to question 4 —- consume as much as possible, THEN we will soon devour everything on Earth. We will literally eat up the finite natural resources as well as the living things which depend upon the Earth for existence. There will plainly and transparently not be adequate resources remaining, even for our children’s survival.At the current scale and rate of growth of individual footprints in the US, for example, just with regard to per capita consumption of resources, where will humanity likely find itself in 2050 when a fully anticipated 9.2 billion human beings will be members of the human community? How on Earth will those people be fed? Please note that millions upon millions of our brothers and sisters in the human community are starving now when the global population is much smaller (6.7 billion people) than demographers generally expect it to be in 2050.All the excuses are insufficient that have been presented to Magne and to Dr. Hopfenberg for NOT recognizing certain overgrowth activities of the human species as legitmate subjects of scientific inquiry. At least to me, scientists could be parties to one of the most colossal mistakes in human history by consciously ignoring the good scientific evidence of human population dynamics as well as the potentially profound implications of overpopulating Earth in the twenty-first century.Sincerely,Steve
Spot on. Control of information flow and the culture is the key. With it the Bolshevik Jim Jones was able to convince 900 followers, many of them white, to literally committ mass suicide in Guyana.
Mean while I note some young white dissidents here seem bitter about the opposite sex.
I got over it with age. I do wish I’d had children I had to pay child support for though.
You younguns don’t have the luxury of time to mellow out.
Even F. Roger Devlin came across as a bit bitter in his articles “Sexual Utopia” on this site last summer.
America was built by strong pioneer men and women working together. Let’s try to help each other.
I do think reform needs to be made in divorce law. When a woman remarries and is living in a two income house hold again child support should be significantly reduced.
And supporting the child of another man just because it was concieved while you were married to the mother should be out of the question.
But lets at least try to not argue against each other. That only helps those intent on white genocide. And believe me that’s their intent.
A final note, DON’T argue with or critisize the divorced parent of your child in the child’s presence. Please, I know. It’s hard but that’s part of what being strong for our children is. Go some where later by your self and scream as much as you need.
Hi, Phil. No, I am not divorced. Been married for 2-1/2 decades to the same guy. Got kids, too! First marriage and there will be no more. No matter what, I will never, ever get divorced. Split up if things should get unbearably bad, but will not put thousands of $ into lawyers’ pockets. Neither will I chase after my husband for support. I’ll go on welfare first. If I hate him enough to split, his money will stink too, in my books. Divorce is a racket to end all rackets. Maybe legal marriage, ie, registration with the government, is a racket, too. Not decided on that.
Flavia, when I say that if men don’t like things and that they should try strict Christian sexual morality, that means that they should try behaving themselves (keep it in their pants) and be modest in all things + expect women to behave the same and if they don’t, give them the boot till the right person comes along. In this one area, the evangelicals & rapture bunnies have a clue. Yes, they stumble from time to time, but at least they know they did wrong.
Re the present injustice to men: this is the way of the world. They had the upper hand to an extreme degree and women rebelled. Things swung over to the other side. Geeze, people, this is not brain surgery.
Yes, 4Myle, it’s true, you don’t need marriage for sex – that is a pity, not an advantage.
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Stronza in blockquote:
If you look at the situation with a bit deeper historical perspective, you will realize the-spearhead.com Perspective: Women had the REAL power all along, but masked it with manipulative facades, to great effect. Remember, read “The Manipulated Man,” available for free online, and see why the Pilar received bona fide death threats from women. She broke THE Code, the system of nonverbal control women have used to control men for millennia.
Once you realize this is happening, and can accept it, you realize how profoundly effective it is. I saw too many gelded males respond blindly, automatically, when she said, “The trash goes out tonight.” He automatically reacted, without a thought that she was TELLING him to take the trash out.
By the time the Control System gets to formal verbalization (nagging!), The System is in danger of breaking down. Suddenly,. she will start fights to avoid him having to process this information at a conscious level.
This is how the Consensus Trance works, and why women do NOT want to “talk” about things too much; rather, they want to “talk” just enough to place him in a zone of emotional discomfort, where he will realize what he wants, and do it, all with very few words at all, and a lot of (nonverbal!) emotional manipulation.
Once we realize this is happening, something like the movie “Gaslight” to the Nth degree, we have to battle systemic masculine invalidation to accept The Truth, and then WORK on it, and with it.
This is the tremendous service to Mankind Tom Leykis kickstarted, and the-spearhead.com moves down the track at damn near warp speed. As Father Himself, Tom Leykis, of Blessed Name said (loose paraphrase):
“I know why you are listening. I know why you listen long after you have pulled into your driveway at home. It’s because you are listening to the ONE Man alive who tells you you are smart, you are worthwhile, and you don’t have to be a victim.”
Once you get THIS mindset, the-spearhead.com introduces you to a community of fellow thinkers, who have blazed the trail for you, and will blaze the trail with you. It’s like the Hoffman Lenses in “They Live,”where suddenly you can SEE, and see that you have been played for a fool by the Consensus Trance. You can then choose to NOT play The Game, or, if you do, so so with open eyes, and on your terms.
No, it’s an advantage.
The Reality of Marriage was the price paid for the Promise of Sex. In reality, all too often, men got married, and sex was used as a (NONVERBAL) weapon, a silent control system, with all of the power in her hand, and the Courts of “Equity” backing her up.
No more. Go to the-spearhead.com and read the comments of men who are Awakening from the Dream, the Consensus Trance.
In time, they will join us, as well.
Then it will get interesting around here.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
Your opinions and ideas are interesting & well worth reading, 4Myle and it is nice you took the trouble to reply politely to someone who you disagree with. One doesn’t see a lot of that. I went to have a look at the-spearhead. Lots of good reading there.
Re taking the trash out, ha ha ha! Grown ups don’t need to be told to do a few basic chores relating to the maintenance of their own homes & selves. They just do it. In your example, the woman is just giving the man a reminder. That she worded the reminder in a manipulative way is only your take on it. Men get so involved in their own thoughts and ideas (that’s the way you’re built!) they forget some minor duties at times.
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Thanks to Andrew Hamilton for another excellent essay. That having been said…
Andrew Hamilton in blockquote:
An impossible task, given the status quo, and frankly, as it has been defined, is it worth the candle?
Brazil’s demographic growth is shifting into reverse. Yes, Buckminster Fuller said the future of Brazil was just breathtaking – this, more than sixty years ago! – and this has been borne out by the lower family sizes. Part of this is economic growth, and much of this is due to women having free contraception, and seeing their role models on television with smaller families. Indeed, the youngest and most fashionable don’t have children at all, but live lives many would choose to live.
Concerns about the rising tide of color are legitimate. Yet, instead of trying to be better breeders – Chine has a tremendous had start, as does India – shouldn’t we try to be breeding better?
Where would you rather live – Scandinavia, particularly if it is a bit more masculine, or South Africa?
In time, no. But, as we ecological economists like to say about compound growth, “Trees don’t grow to the sky.” The base needed to sustain their growth becomes depleted, and catastrophic decline becomes manifest, as trees, unable to support their own weight, fall in the forest.
Alternatively, do you think It Is By Accident that the technology needed to make biological weapons far more effective than what has been used are now being discussed online, with people announcing they have done so – with garage lab type equipment! – and would be interested in making this knowledge available to all?
Can it be coincidence that the original Club of Rome models put the carrying capacity of the Earth – the entire planet – at half a billion people, and the number of half a billion people has taken on a life of its own, with people quoting it “Georgia Guidestones,” for example – without backchecking the source?
Just as a thought experiment, divide the half a billion people proportionately among the continents in roughly the same proportion of world population as they are now. Remember, the man in charge of the Robotics Lab at MIT said that robots are available TODAY that can replace EIGHTY percent of the work force. John Deere is finally getting robotics involved in agriculture, and robotics applies to very small scale agriculture, as well.
Take care of the Useless Eaters, as a good biological weapon would do, and take care of the Machine Tenders with soma, and high-def tv – ESPN, the Masturbation Channel, the NFL Channel, the Soap Channel, and the Weather Channel for background noise.
I suspect a place that is not targeted by the people who would use such depopulating weapons would have to be cooler, and with a dispersed population. In on such place, the Northwest, a Northwest Republic could rebuild fairly quickly, with tremendous local clean energy sources for starters. An intentional focus on having a Smart Fraction population, a la Singapore, would not hurt.
Just saying.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
All that has to happen is stop sending food and meds to the 3rdworld. The 3rdwold population will collapse without anyone smart enough to dig wells.
actual white fertility is exceptionally low, possibly even negative
Fertility cannot be “negative.” (Women would have to give birth to “anti-babies,” whose birth somehow eliminates an existing living person from the population, for the concept of negative fertility to be intelligible.)
Besides a current historically large population, such a race has built-in momentum for future growth because so many young people will reproduce at high rates in the future, even if total fertility gradually drops.
Not quite. Demographic momentum means that the population can keep rising for a number of years even as total fertility rates decline and go sub-replacement (even if this happens totally unrealistically rapidly, eg 3.5 children one year to 1.7 the next), not that the young of today will go on to have high fertility themselves (though they of course may do so).
The fortunate aspect of demographic momentum is that when it’s approached from a sub-replacement to above replacement angle is that the momentum can be stopped and reversed very quickly and easily. Even after years of far below replacement total fertility rates, the population can be begin to grow again virtually immediately — as soon as fertility goes (and is kept) above replacement.
Re immigrant fertility. The picture is dire, but perhaps not as dire as you think. This link http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_02.pdf contains fertility data by year and by race (of mother). (Changing the last digit in the link from “2” to “1” links to a better organized report but I’ve linked to this one because it contains data up to 2010 rather than only2008.)
On page 35 (of 36) you can see the total fertility rates broken down by race. (They are reported per 1000, so divide by 1000 to get them into a more familiar form of 2.xxx or 1.xxx etc.) As can be seen, the only group with above replacement fertility is hispanics. Blacks have mercifully recently gone sub-replacement (let’s hope they stay there), and asians and amerinds are well below replacement. While white total fertility continues to decline, it’s pleasing to note that hispanic fertility has been declining more quickly. The link with last digit as “1” contains data on hispanics broken down by origin. There you’ll see that the longer established hispanic groups (who no longer experience mass immigration), Puerto Ricans and Cubans, have very low total fertility rates. So even though the more recently arrived mexicans and central americans (immigrant mexican numbers drown out the longer-established mexicans) have distressingly high total fertility rates of around 3.0 there is a realistic hope they’ll decease in time.
These are total fertility rates by race of mother only, so they need to be reduced to account for race-mixing. If the rate of race-mixing of white women is 10% then reduce the white total fertility rate by 0.1. This means that white fertility will have to increase more than would otherwise be the case in order to rise above replacement. At race-mixing rate of 10% this shouldn’t be difficult, but that rate could certainly conceivably grow to 50% in coming years, making the task considerably more difficult.
In my opinion, aside from everything else, this data demonstrates the sheer lunacy of attempting to “take back America” for the white race. Whites are going to be very fortunate to secure any sort of permanent existence in N. America (and perhaps elsewhere) at all, let alone taking the whole thing back.
You sound very knowledgeable about this subject.
About “negative fertility”: Of course, you’re right. It looks like I made that error twice in the article. As you can see from the first instance, where I refer to the Livi-Bacci quote, I was thinking in terms of growth and decline in population when writing about fertility .
Similarly, in a recent comment here I said that England in 1750 had a region in Canada called Saint Rupert’s Land, when I meant to write Prince Rupert’s Land (I’d been writing about the Saint Lawrence River). In both cases I crossed my wires, so thanks for pointing out the error. Unfortunately, it happens!
Thanks, too, for the link to the report breaking down US data by race. I had not known about it. Your suggestion about how to adjust the numbers to correct, however imperfectly, for interracial reproduction is also valuable.
I wish someone with the appropriate knowledge and expertise would try to put together a global white census. Although an arduous task, we need something like that. Even before starting, “white” would have to be clearly and explicitly defined—which lands you in hot water all by itself! Nevertheless, it needs to be done. (For example, I’d want to back out all Jews and part-Jews.)
Jews regularly keep a census of their global population, broken down by country and region. For a long time the project has been directed by an Israeli demographer with an Italian-sounding name, Sergio DellaPergola. It used to be published in the American Jewish Committee Yearbook, but now is issued separately, and is available online.
I do not find the numbers particularly useful, although when I skimmed the latest report it looked perhaps a little better than previous ones. Maybe they keep two sets of books, or multiple sets of books by different organizations, each for its own purpose. At any rate, they do keep track of Jewish numbers in some fashion. Whites should do likewise.
American blacks have low fertility rates, but those of African blacks are among the highest in the world. So as a race they are doing OK. Also, black immigrants keep streaming into white countries—e.g., Somalis, as I know all too well.
Your suggestion about how to adjust the numbers to correct, however imperfectly, for interracial reproduction is also valuable.
Just to clarify, what I meant was that one should multiply the given total fertility rate by (1-mixing.rate). If the mixing rate is 10%, multiply by (1-0.1) (ie by .9); if 25% multiply by (1-0.25) and so on. Of course, this rate will never really be known with any great precision, but the imperfect measures of it today (even things like online surveys) should be tracked over time to gauge the magnitude of changes.
I wish someone with the appropriate knowledge and expertise would try to put together a global white census. Although an arduous task, we need something like that. Even before starting, “white” would have to be clearly and explicitly defined—which lands you in hot water all by itself!
A (proper) racial census would be most helpful but I just can’t see one ever being taken (unless/until racialists achieve power). At best a dedicated (and well-funded) racialist organization could perform extensive sampling of the general population but I’m afraid the data will always be subject to considerable doubt.
In my opinion, the best way around the “who is white” (or more generally, who is “my group”) conundrum is to be more accommodating to one’s racial next-of-kin. That’s not to say to “include” them, but to be more accommodating in terms of rhetoric and policy. The hope is that they’ll thereby develop a more realistic grasp of (and appreciation for) their “proper” group belonging while still supporting racialist objectives. (After all, if they genuinely believe “race matters” (in all sorts of ways) then it continues to matter regardless of how “white” they themselves are assessed.) The alternative is to anger them and have them redouble their opposition. There isn’t any essential reason that this approach be restricted to one’s racial next-of-kin, but more distant groups are less likely to share similar concerns and are less likely to be understanding of your perspective. This approach risks angering some purists, who perhaps believe that if they can’t be openly, proudly, blatantly, “supremacist-ly” WHITE!!! no matter who is upset by it then they don’t deserve to win at all. But purists, almost by definition, will be always be angry about something, so that is no great loss.
NPI, the NATIONAL POLICY INSTITUTE, has a good account of this White population collapse at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6pzPp1Q2ew
They also had a PDF of it with excellent graphs, but I can’t seem to find that page now. It’s quite startling.
Ed,
I watched the video, which I had not seen.
I read the PDF when it came out. It’s exactly what we need, albeit more detailed and better sourced.
I have never cited the report for two reasons. (I’m speaking from memory, since I lost my PDF in a computer crash.)
First, it did not define “white” or “European” satisfactorily. There will always be problems in this area, but whatever definition is used needs to be stated with specificity. The report’s definitions for other races weren’t much better.
Second, my recollection is that it relied upon a secondary source, the Information Please Almanac or something like that, for its figures. That isn’t adequate.
It would be nice if one could use the CIA World Factbook’s data, but it suffers from the same drawbacks, so I don’t cite it, either. I looked high and low once to find its definitions for ethnic groups (which really need to be specified separately for each and every country), but to no avail.
Something along the lines of the NPI report is exactly what we need, and they’re the only ones who have attempted a global white census of any kind that I know of in recent years.
I am the youngest out of a family of 9!!!! I decided to have 1 child… why? Economics friends…. as Flavia said women became slaves to the wage, (didn’t we all). So will the 3 turd worlders…. their populations will collapse soon because the hand outs coming from the 1st Worlders will no longer be there. Already there is a huge famine affecting the whole of East Africa. The holier -than -thou NGOs are already harping that the West is slow in donating…. A recent report I heard on the Marxist radio show Democracy Now, stated that 500 million children will be or are already suffering from malnutrition because of the high cost of food! So if the White 1st worlders want to reverse these figures, stop the stipends now.
Gladiator:
Two questions: Economicly speaking, what happens to you in old age if the ZOG social security net collapses? (With only one child to care about two aging parents.)
And interest you in a “Marxist” radio show?
Very interesting article.
These are some of my reflections. I suppose that they contain nothing that readers of this site don’t already know. But this is how I think formulate the problem of overpopulation in my own mind.
It ultimately boils down to a value judgment; which life are we to give preference to? r-strategists or K-strategists? Quantity or quality? Whether people realize it or not, their emotions have been used in the service of giving preference to homo-multidedus because this man is the best man for “the global economy.”
White and East Asian infertility in ONE sense can be viewed as a sane and rational response that these groups have from the reality of living in a world of seven billion people. Infertility in and of itself is not necessarily a problem.
However, there are two main underlying problems with respect to the present infertility the way I see it:
1) Dysgenics
In Nietzschean terms, the relative proportion of biological “bridge” (as in “mankind is a bridge”) material that can get us to the Superman is drastically shrinking from what it once was a century ago.
a) In racial terms– The White race and the East Asians may exercise prudence with respect to bringing another being into the world. But we know that a large chunk of the brown mass of humanity and virtually all of the black masses do not possess this feature. Indeed, they’ll sooner bring a child into the world to starve to death than they will exercise control over their genitalia. Examples in India and sub-Saharan Africa seem to be the most obvious but this can be seen in all across the “Latin” American world and Third World as well. Of course, the moral burden (from the dominant Marxist perspective) falls upon whites to redistribute, no (too soft) forefeit (!) their resources (and future inheritance) in the service of the undertow of untermensch. They are moral slaves to the lowest common denominator– the man with no self-discipline over his pee-pee. Sad. This will ensure that it is they, and not us, that will be the inheritors of the Earth over time. The only value judgment “Mother Earth” makes is sustainability at the end of the day. But too much of the white race is too morally self-righteous to factor this into any system of moral thought.
One feature the East Asians have going for them is that they were not foolish enough to give up their demographic sovereignty the way whites have done. So the Japanese, unlike the Swedes, have some time on their side to get a grip on the underlying cultural diseases that are preventing generations from literally materializing. In white countries, they are going to simply be eaten from the inside out unless change happens FAST. In Texas, I have front row seat to this phenomenon.
b) In individual terms: Even if the whole planet was populated with nothing but Germanic whites, these “mass” trends would still be troubling as they are still quite dysgenic. One figure from the past that comes to mind is Dr. William Shockley. Five decades ago, at much personal cost to his own reputation, he tried to get BOTH the black and white races to understand that dysgenics and its consequences was our future. He did stress that the blacks would be hit harder by this for obvious reasons but the word of warning applied across the board. So we can’t just be content with “whiteness” even though stressing the importance of being white is perhaps the first step to undoing this whole mess. In a situation where whites have an orderly, but overpopulated nation like say…Japan, whites will have to be willing to swallow their vanity and allow for the more intelligent among us to be the ones to have those three children at perhaps their own genetic expense. This is where the meta-politics of white nationalism inevitably MUST collapse back into a national socialist bent (as opposed to a left wing egalitarian socialism) to sustain itself over time even if a white ethnostate followed libertarianish guidelines with respect to the economy.
2) The current infertility, were it strictly a symptom of prudence and in the context of no non-white immigration, would be welcomed. However, cultural nihilism (which is also most acute among whites, in my estimation) and feminism (also a largely white thing) seem to be the chief drivers of this infertility. As I mentioned before, were we at least wise enough to fence off our land from others, there would be less of a “beat the clock” scenario going for the white race. This is why I think Japan will be okay in the future. The cost of living will likely diminish if the Japanese population takes a strong hit. There’s plenty of opportunity there for their feudal spirit to reawaken. Whites have to fight a war on two fronts– with themselves and others. They must juggle between keeping some sort of relative pace with non-white breeding while at the same time de-programming themselves of egalitarian and nihilistic thinking.
If anyone has not seen the movie Idiocracy, I highly recommend it. Mike Judge wrote and directed it. I’m surprised it was even able to be made. I have never before seen a movie that so closely touched upon this issue.
PUTIN WANTS MORE BABIES
Marcus Roberts | 15 Feb 2012
According to the Christian Science Monitor, the Russian Prime Minister is seeking re-election to the presidency (for a third term) and is setting out his policy platform. The fourth of his programmatic articles trying to convince Russians to vote for him in three weeks time (or else!) deals with his plans to reverse Russia’s population decline.
Furthermore, he is promising improved housing and educational prospects for all Russians and a “smart” immigration policy that will entice Russians living abroad to return to the motherland and attract educated and talented foreigners.
This is easier said than done. An opinion poll from last year found that 22% of all adult Russians in Moscow would like to emigrate! This suggests that the factors pulling people to live in Russia are not that strong. Finally, Putin makes it clear that he wants to attract not just any immigrants, but Russian speakers who are willing to “embrace our culture and our values”. This is significantly narrowing the size of the pool of potential immigrants.
More: http://www.mercatornet.com/demography/view/10303
first time poster. not a White Nationalist, but pro-white.
how many white people should be on the planet?
as verlis points out above, statistics are not nearly as dire as many white nationalists belive. by my math, there are about 900 million whites today: 180 million in the United States, about 675 million in Europe, about 45 million in Canada, Australia New Zealand South Africa and elsewhere. Take away half Jews and mongrels and anyone else whom William Pierce would exclude from a white homeland and you have perhaps 100 million fewer. So we are down to 800 million. Much more than we have had ever before in history.
the idea that we need a huge amount of new whites above replacement rate is based on the idea that absolute numbers is not relevant, what is really relevant is the declining white population relative to non-whites. there are all kinds of problems with this assumption, i think, but to accept it for the sake of argument, wouldn’t it be better, given the explosion in total world population, to concentrate more on REDUCING non-white procreation? We know what causes fertility rates to decline in both white and non-white populations, and instituting policies to encourage this would seem to be the most intelligent course for the survival of whites, for humanity as a whole, for the planet and its ecosystem. (are pro-white people allowed to care about that too?)
we need enough whites to be able to keep economic system going and take care of non-working elderly, without massive immigration. No more.
Marius f. beat me to the punch in essence,
The problem is not that Whites do not have enough children. Overpopulation is one of the greatest threats to the world and therefore to our race survival as well. The problem is rather that the third world is having way too many children: therefore, how to reduce these populations?
Last I checked, 44 of the first 50 countries in per capita birthrate were Black African, and each of the top ten.
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=31
Moreover, would you want to try to compete with the fertility of people to do not live well?
I would wish, for the most part, for Whites to have children later, not younger; after they have accumulated money/property, experience and wisdom to share with children; perhaps traveled and are now prepared to be stationary and devote all the good life has brought them, without resentment, to their children.
Sincere there is a necessary concern, there should also be fertility projects, of all kinds: from various advanced scientific methods to groups devoted to having huge White families, even at a young age, by contrast to the above suggested way of life. Distributist and other re-worked economic systems need to be implemented as well. But most critically, I, like perhaps many of us here, need to be sure that we are not going to be donating a White daughter to become a piece of ass for a Negro; or a son to be a techno-slave to for Negroes and their White whores. That is, we need White separatism and a firm acknowledgement of commitment among native European folk in order to be sure that we are not throwing good after bad, not merely throwing our efforts into the abyss.
Finally, as non-Whites threaten us with their over-population we need reduce their non-White population.
Good information, AH. And good comment from daniel.
As for the other commenters worrying about how to encourage White parents to have four children instead of three, or thereabouts, –
Societies that are on the defensive will always, over time, experience declining birth rates. It’s a law of nature. And it’s a fact that we as a society are on the defensive. And as pointed out above, the dark races who’ve been encouraged in their aggression are in an unprecedented population boom.
“Encouragement” by or of a few racially aware Whites isn’t going to turn our problem around, and we can hardly force our people to increase their births. Therefore I see no option other than doing what was done for thousands of years – going on the offensive against “them”. Of course, just the revelation of the equation to our people and the whole show is on the road.
It’s that presentation of ‘us’ and ‘them’ as a matter of survival that has to be driven home. With ‘us’ people will survive, with or without ‘them’. Without ‘us’ no one will survive, with or without them. At least not for long.
Have you read the free e-book series “And Gulliver Returns” –In Search of Utopia (http://andgulliverreturns.info ? it is the most complete approach I had seen from looking at the problem of overpopulation in Book 1 to looking at the ethical and psychological hindrances that people and groups will use to justify increasing our problem .(Books 4 and 6) I would have to agree with some major investigators that say we have no possibility of turning it around. The lack of land, natural resources and jobs coupled with the amount of garbage we toss into the air and water and our increasing climate change make it fairly clear that our global mother nature will spank us pretty severely within the next hundred years.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.