Counter-Currents
High-level Dialogue on International Migration and Development, United Nations, New York City, October 2013
3,143 words
“Demographic theory, and numerous simulations, have already shown that immigration cannot compensate for population ageing except with flows so large as to hugely increase population growth and rapidly replace the existing population with a foreign one—‘replacement migration’ indeed.” David Coleman, Professor of Demography, University of Oxford
The white population worldwide is experiencing massive demographic collapse, a fact perfectly comprehended—and applauded—by its enemies, who call Aryans “the cancer of human history” and promote genocide as morally “good.” (They have a long habit of calling evil good and good evil, of putting darkness for light and light for darkness.) Genocide directed at whites is now de facto public policy.
It is implemented by numerous methods, including genetic swamping via Third World immigration, curtailment of white births, and the imposition of dictatorial laws suppressing protective reactions (including free speech and political parties) against physical annihilation. Fundamentally, “replacement migration” is the inviting idea—inviting to our overlords—of substituting non-white immigrants for “missing” white babies never born due to culturally-induced low fertility.
With the abrupt onset of sub-replacement fertility in the (then still-white) West after 1970, falling to levels way below any historically experienced or thought feasible, a major problem with the final stage (three) of the prevailing demographic transition model became apparent. (For a discussion and critique of the model see Andrew Hamilton, “Holes in the Demographic Transition Model?”)
That theory had predicted stable replacement fertility (just over 2 children on average) for European peoples, zero population growth, and life expectancies higher than 70 years of age. Household, marriage, and child-bearing patterns would continue to be typified by heterosexual couples in stable, long-term marriages with children.
Today, however, sub-replacement fertility is regarded as a permanent (structural, long-term) feature of white populations. A multitude of living arrangements has replaced matrimony, marriage has been decoupled from procreation, and white children are often viewed as undesirable.
Like many of their colleagues, two Dutch-speaking demographers, Ron Lesthaeghe and Dirk van de Kaa, see white sub-replacement fertility as causing a “demographic need” for “sustained immigration,” a “compensatory trend” that will fuel the growth of multiracial societies far into the future. Lesthaeghe explicitly refers to this as “replacement migration,” though van de Kaa avoids the term.
Should this pattern persist within the existing dictatorial, anti-white, multiracial environment, whites will cease to be a major race in the not too distant future.
The UN’s Replacement Migration Report
Thirteen years ago the United Nations published a report, Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations? (United Nations Population Division, 2001). “As part of its regular work programme, the United Nations Population Division continuously monitors fertility, mortality and migration trends for all countries of the world,” said the report, which was overseen and possibly written by then-UN Population Division director Joseph Chamie. (p. 7)
Judging from the report and other things he’s written, Chamie appears to favor large-scale immigration and amnesty in the West, although he carefully camouflages his views by the ample use of Communist-style bureaucratese.
In 2000 he condescendingly noted that Jean-Marie Le Pen’s National Front party in France viewed his report “as a recipe for cultural genocide.” Unsurprisingly, in an enumeration of arguments against amnesty in a different paper (counterbalanced with a long list of pro-amnesty arguments), he makes no mention of the most important one of all: the survival of a people and civilization.
In light of the circumstances, it is of interest whether Chamie is a Jew. His photos do not rule it out. He maintains that emigration is a universal human right, but immigration is not, and therefore up to the receiving country to determine. (Reminds me of a politician I once knew.) He has written articles about Israeli population issues. Despite his mealy-mouthed style, they seem essentially pro-Jewish: the Palestinian refugees of 1948 have no right of return to their homeland; the United States or NATO must provide both Israelis and Palestinians with security guarantees (why, for Christ’s sake?). There is, of course, the cosmopolitan profile. And the kind of influence he wields over the life and death of our people suggests Jewishness as well. Lastly, because Google conceals Jewish identity in searches (except for flaming Jews), I’ll assume Chamie is Jewish until I definitively know otherwise.
The report analyzed eight countries and two regions, all relatively large, which had below replacement fertility in 2000: France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the US, Europe, and the European Union. Though not mentioned, the baseline figures included large numbers of non-whites due to many years of high fertility Third World immigration and extensive hybridization between whites and non-whites.
The time period covered is roughly half a century, from 1995 to 2050. Omitted from the report are Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, whose trends, however, were the same.
“Replacement migration” means “the international migration that would be needed to offset declines in the size of population, the declines in the population of working age, as well as to offset the overall ageing of a population.” (Executive Summary, p. 1)
Keep in mind that whenever you read statements such as the following, anywhere, in any source, hybrid fertility (race mixture) and the much higher fertility of endlessly arriving non-whites and their descendants are included in the raw numbers, meaning that white fertility must be incomprehensibly low: “Fertility is presently at record low levels in many countries where total fertility rates (TFR) as low as 1.2 children per woman have been recorded in recent years—well below the level of 2.1 children per woman that would ensure the replacement of the parents’ generation.” (Overview of the Issues, p. 8)
The report distinguishes three distinct “migration streams,” each with rising numbers, necessary to offset:
- total population decline
- working-age population decline
- prevent countries from ageing
The size of migration flows needed to maintain a support ratio of working to retired age groups (the third option, “prevent countries from aging”) would require immigration levels so high that the percent of the population by 2050 traceable to post-1995 immigrants and their descendants would range between 59% and 99% of the total. (Chapter 5: Conclusions and Implications, p. 98)
“Such high levels of migration,” the study continues, “have not been observed in the past for any of these countries or regions.” It seems “extremely unlikely” that flows of such magnitude will happen “in the foreseeable future.” (p. 98) Unhappily, we’ve been subjected to thirteen additional years of unchecked, ever-accelerating immigration since those words were written.
The report uses 1995 as the baseline, a period when Western nations already had historically unprecedented numbers of non-whites within their borders. As the report itself states, “For example, in 1990 [emphasis added], 16 per cent of the population of Canada and Switzerland and 23 per cent of the population of Australia were foreign-born” (p. 98; yes, that’s what it says). Therefore, the numbers, no matter how you slice them, seem radically different from whites “merely” falling below 50 percent of the population by 2050, as the media and government ordinarily state.
Absent very high migration, projected declines in some nations during the first half of the 21st century will be “as high as one quarter or one third of the entire population of the country.” (p. 97)
The report grumbles particularly about supporting people aged 65 and older (i.e., predominantly whites). One option would be to require them to work until age 75. By that time, of course, many would have conveniently dropped dead slaving for their Jewish and plutocratic overlords and brown, black, and yellow “replacements.” Also appealing is a substantial reduction in retirement and health-care benefits for the elderly (pp. 97, 98, 99).
During the second half of the twentieth century, the industrialized countries have benefited from population sizes and population age-structures that were the result of a history of moderate levels of fertility and low mortality. These favourable demographic circumstances made possible, to a large extent, the provision of relatively generous benefits to retirees at comparatively low costs to workers and employers. (p. 98)
But those days are over.
The gist of the report may be summarized as follows (Executive Summary, pp. 3, 5):
During the first half of the 21st century, the populations of most developed countries are projected to become smaller and older as a result of below-replacement fertility and increased longevity.
In the absence of migration, the declines in population size will be even greater than those projected, and population aging will be more rapid.
Although fertility (the fertility of racially mixed populations) may rebound in the coming decades, few believe that fertility in most developed countries will recover sufficiently to reach replacement level in the foreseeable future, thus making population decline inevitable in the absence of replacement migration.
Radical reassessments of, and sweeping changes to, economic, social and political programs and policies will be made.
It is odd that the Republican Party, viewed as America’s de facto white party, is pioneering proposed cuts to Medicare, Social Security, farm subsidies, and other programs aimed (by now, accidentally) at its core constituency while simultaneously promoting amnesty and huge welfare programs like Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s Romneycare, the prototype for Obamacare, which vastly expanded Medicaid expenditures for young non-whites, including illegals. Such Republican initiatives amount to massive racial wealth transfers favored by Democrats, whose anti-white racism is overt. Why not let them do the dirty work? But no.
Muted Criticism
Because it is such a spectacularly bad idea, replacement migration has had one or two critics.
University of Oxford demographer David Coleman called the UN report an exercise in “demographism,” which he defined, in the words of the Population Reference Bureau, “as an excessive reliance on narrow demographic statistics relating to the numbers of people, without regard to their characteristics and without regard to the consequences of such population change on social and political structures, community relations, or social cohesion.”
Will the ageing populations of the Western world need even more immigrants to avert imminent population decline and to support the unsustainable burden of the elderly? Or is migration on that scale just a simple-minded short-term solution which ignores domestic demographic reserves and which would rapidly transform, in unwelcome ways, the receiving countries into a radically different kind of society. . . ?
Europe already receives many more immigrants than it knows what to do with (up to 1 million a year net for much of the 1990s). Regular labour migration is managed by work permit and by free movement in the EU [European Union]. But most migration is unrelated to economic needs: asylum claimants, spouses and dependents. European public opinion does not on the whole welcome large-scale migration. Europeans think they know who they are and unlike (say) Australians, do not want to become something different. Post-war immigration has already turned large sections of European cities into foreign enclaves. About 10% of Continental Europe’s workforce is out of a job. Europe’s immigrants (especially women) are already less likely than natives to be in the workforce and are much more likely to be unemployed. Compared with its industrial competitors, the EU makes poor use of its own demographic resources. If people of working age throughout the EU had the same work patterns as Denmark, then over 30 million people would be added to the EU workforce.
In 2002 Frank Salter, an Australian researcher in Human Ethology at the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Physiology in Germany, likewise addressed the question of replacement migration, though not directly in response to the UN report. (In a footnote he mentioned a special issue of Population and Environment [March 2001] devoted to replacement migration, in which many articles did discuss the UN findings.)
Instead of replacement migration, Salter advocates “universal nationalism,” essentially the same concept articulated in different ways by Greg Johnson, and Richard McCulloch in his book The Racial Compact (1994) (physical version here). In Salter’s words:
Universal nationalism means thinking again about ethnic states where the state unambiguously serves the ethnic interests of the majority. By ethnic state I mean something closer to the traditional German than the French model of the nation. The German model adopts ethnicity as shared descent as a criterion of citizenship and thus offers a constitutional barrier to replacement migration. In the second half of the twentieth century this barrier collapsed in wealthy states that adopted the French model. (“Estimating Ethnic Genetic Interests: Is It Adaptive to Resist Replacement Migration?” Population and Environment 24 (November 2002): 111-140 at 134)
Salter sardonically observes that “From the majority perspective, it would seem that the only thing more maladaptive than multiculturalism that does not ‘work’ is multiculturalism that does ‘work.’” (p. 133)
To Hell With This
It was consciously decided by elites in direct opposition to the will of the people as expressed by popular vote and in extensive surveys over many decades that collapsing populations in formerly white nations were to be supplemented, and ultimately replaced, by Third World migrants. There was nothing inevitable about this process, as the examples of Israel and Japan, not to mention common sense, prove.
Indeed, Jewish populations everywhere are permitted to retain their own segregated laws, institutions, and communities free of ubiquitous charges of racism or legal prohibitions against discrimination. This includes not only dual/multiple citizenship, Jewish courts, autonomous institutions of self-government (federations, congresses, committees), tax exempt racist organizations such as the ADL, SPLC, and AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), but even domestic terrorist groups (JDL, JDO, JTF) and community vigilante organizations resembling police forces. To the extent that Jews integrate with other races (including, unfortunately, whites), they do so at their own volition, not because they are compelled to by the state.
As an aside, an enigmatic statement in a brief paper by Charles B. Keely, Professor of International Migration at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University in Washington, DC, is attention-grabbing, though not further explained:
[T]here was good evidence, since strengthened, that Soviet authorities [in the mid-20th century] were facilitating movement of asylum seekers into Europe to discomfort the West in return for the West’s attempts to embarrass the East by its open asylum policy for those from Communist countries.
The effect of these Cold War policies was an attempt in the mid 1980s for European countries to change asylum practice. This set up political controversy within European democracies about whether narrowing asylum practice to adhere only to what was required by international conventions was acceptable. Opponents charged that a fortress Europe was evolving based on racist motives toward Third World asylum seekers. (p. 3)
Whether Keely is referring to Communist Jews, Third World colored immigrants, or both, is unclear. Although tens of thousands of Jews were permitted to leave the Soviet bloc without hindrance, Aryans were never free to leave en masse.
Replacement migration blandly treats all races as fungible. The only thing that matters is age of the migrants: they should be young and highly fertile. Even education, language, and basic skills, never mind IQ, do not matter.
Mass immigration was not a policy response to white fertility decline. Immigration throughout the West was imposed before white fertility dropped below replacement level. Replacement migration as an excuse for countering white population collapse surfaced only decades later.
At the middle of the twentieth century—when Europe and North America were still white—the average fertility level stood at 2.6 children per woman in Europe and 2.4 children for the countries of the European Union. For the countries in the UN study, the range was from 2.2 children per woman in Germany and the United Kingdom to 2.7 children in France. Fertility was markedly higher in the US at 3.4 children. By 1965-1970 (nations still white), fertility had increased a little on average for the countries of the European Union, to 2.5 children per woman, but fallen below replacement in Japan and the Russian Federation at 2.0 children. Fertility had decreased to 2.5 children in the United States (still above replacement). By 1995-2000, however, fertility was below replacement level in all countries and regions analyzed by the UN, ranging from a high of 2.0 children in the United States to 1.2 children in Italy. The average for Europe and the European Union was 1.4 children per woman. But by that time high fertility non-whites were a major factor, demonstrating how suddenly and precipitously white fertility, which is lower than the racially mixed averages, collapsed. (Data from UN, Replacement Migration, Chapter 4, “Results: Overview,” p. 21)
The new migration undoubtedly accelerated white numerical decline through genetic swamping, hybridization, immense compulsory interracial wealth transfers, the movement of white women en masse from the home into the labor force, racially discriminatory laws, and job displacement—not excluding lucrative, powerful, and socially elite positions.
While white immigration is everywhere flagrantly blocked in discriminatory ways, Jewish and non-white migration has consistently been pushed far beyond legal limits—even as laws were continuously expanded to promote higher and higher levels of non-white entrants from the most backward regions of the globe.
“The whole of Europe now became an area of destination for would-be immigrants from other parts of the world. . . . seeking entry by whatever means feasible,” Dutch demographer Dirk van de Kaa wrote.
Open borders for non-whites were achieved by ceaselessly ratcheting up “legal” immigration quotas, governments’ refusal to enforce existing laws, public subsidies to illegal residents, admitting “guest” and “migrant” workers who never left, providing an open door for anyone born in former colonies long since independent, using restricted categories such as “displaced persons,” “refugees,” and “asylum seekers” as de facto open portals, and chain migration (“family reunification”), a technique by which everyone who arrives is allowed to invite family members as new residents, who in turn invite more family members, and so on in an endless sequence. To top it off, every successive wave of illegal arrivals, numbering in the millions, is ultimately granted “amnesty” (citizenship).
“I can see my kitchen garden from my window of our apartment. I go to the garden as often as possible. In the summer my family and I spend most of our time there. It is like a small world in itself.” Rajah, born in Morocco, lives in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Projections are merely projections. The UN’s Replacement Migration report is important primarily for what it tells us about the anti-white, illiberal elites who promulgate and selectively enforce our racial laws. The report should be viewed in conjunction with “street-level” awareness of political, media, academic, and governmental hatred and rage against whites, a burning desire to eliminate us physically, as a people, through government and cultural fiat. This attitude, this fixation, this anti-white fury is far more important than any specific, dry projections contained in a globalist policy report promoting the genocidal agenda.
As the Left-wing Guardian (UK) newspaper sneers: “They cry free speech, as if that principle overrode issues of human rights [sic] and morality [sic]. . . . [M]any of us believe that immigration controls are inherently racist, and explicable only by racism.”
Yeah, sure.
Replacement migration, in one form another, is happening now. It is enforced by states everywhere. How about this instead? Stop immigration, and start deportation.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
37 comments
It won’t stop, jews want our extermination even if puts their criminal sandbox in the middle-east in danger, they’re building multistore bunkers with our money! Its called 911:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/163520
Very good article and so lucid on the replacement migration issue , ( even in our ranks , few autors have the courage to consider all its implications ).
As soon as the 80’s , it was not rare in Paris to walk along a main boulevard ( a prestigious one ,not in some already immigrants enclave ) , and not to see a single white face . As if you were in some north african slum transferred in haussmanian architecture .
In the list of all the ” tricks ” used to swamp us , you forget the adoption trick .
As soon as the late 50 ‘s , it was impossible , for infertile couples , in France , to adopt white children . Not a SINGLE ONE . Of course , there were white children , but , with the excuse of so called legal problems , a flood of vietnameses and black children were imposed .
All has been planified since a long time .
Sorry for the gallicisms .
Ten or more years ago a co-worker told me after a visit to London, England that her husband said that they would never return because the place was filled with foreigners which ruined the holiday for him – and they are East Indian!!!! He was expecting London to be filled with Brits?
Here in Canada I have heard the “foreigners” complain that the Canadians are ruining the place by flooding it with foreigners. Everyone seems to get the picture except Whitey.
Sandy wrote:
Ten or more years ago a co-worker told me after a visit to London, England that her husband said that they would never return because the place was filled with foreigners which ruined the holiday for him – and they are East Indian!!!! He was expecting London to be filled with Brits?
me: I was in London during an overnight stop in 1990. I visited Westminster Abbey – it was closed for public tours, but I went into its gift shop. I was shocked to see a Hindu as a cashier, as I wasn’t expecting to see a non-white working in such prestigious white landmark.
“Everyone seems to get the picture except Whitey.”
The ZOG brainwashing propaganda is directed toward Whites. Most of the Latinos, Blacks, Indians I had met are extremely Jew-wise.
It is critically necessary to prevent, contracept, and abort any development of communal autonomy (e.g.: Including but not limited to the glaring example of Poland’s Statute of Kalisz in the Thirteenth Century CE) among immigrants. One who seeks to migrate without swearing away prior affiliation, without intending to adjoin to the host population, should be turned back at the border.
On the other hand, your desire for separation whole and entire from the Jewish people, cannot be achieved until extraterrestrial emigration becomes feasable.
Don’t want immigrants to assimilate; want ’em to leave.
As for the other idea—load Jews onto rocket ships and propel them into space? Sounds like a plan!
Bingo, Andrew. I share your view.
It must be understood that any voice who claims to be on the same side as White Nationalists are, but who parrots that line of devious baloney – about how they just want to stop immigration temporarily, i.e, call a ‘time-out’ , in order for the current crop of non-white third worlders to ‘assimilate’ – is not being truly honest about what they mean by assimilation.
Deep inside the evil brains of these hymn singers is this: “Assimilation” means they want to give these dark skinned aliens time to race mix with the rapidly dwindling and racially endangered White Majority and help speed along the genocide and blending away of White European people.
Assimilation is just another devious code word for White genocide.
Racially aware (that is, conscious and thinking) Whites need to leave their countries and head to one of the eastern nations like Estonia or Belarus or somewhere.
We’re not going to save countries like England or Germany from the inside. Nationalists who try will simply be exterminated by the Jew-run governments who will justify it as them trying to stop “another Hitler” from coming to power or another world war from happening. Because of course, we all know evil nationalism led to the world wars, certainly not the international bankers and politicians, right?
So why Estonia and Belarus? For one these nations are still mostly White, so White in fact that they honor Waffen SS veterans. Secondly, they fall under the sphere of Russian influence. This is good because if a nation like France were to suddenly have a White nationalist revolution, Israel will simply respond with their Samson Option (with support from the US, of course). But the eastern nations are essentially protected by Russia, which has hundreds of nukes of its own. Israel and the US wouldn’t dare launch nukes at Russia or any nation near Russia, because Russia would respond in a very big way. Russia is untouchable.
The point is, the international left has actually given us an opportunity by throwing open the flood gates. Yes, blacks and other inferior races are allowed to go wherever they want in Europe, but that also means that we Whites can go wherever we want in Europe. Why don’t WN’s seize this opportunity and start a mass migration to establish a base of power somewhere?
Somewhere in the world we need to stand atop a mountain, place a Celtic cross or Swastika flag, and declare, “This is land is for Aryans!”
Excellent marshalling of facts for this article. One question we need to ask ourselves is *why* White birthrates began a precipitous decline. If we look at the level of comfort, prosperity and relative safety achieved in most predominantly White enclaves in the post-WWII years, you might expect to see an *increase* in fundamentally optimistic behaviors like bringing forth a new generation. Countervailing trends like galloping secularism, birth-control technologies, and material selfishness form part of the answer.
But is there a dynamic within evolutionary biology itself that works to limit a species when that species has accomplished a virtual monopoly on control of biological processes beyond the scope of it’s own maintenance? In other words, does arriving at a level of near total dominance over every kind of life-form on earth trigger a “suicide” default, in effect sacrificing the one too-dominant species for the sake of species type numbers and in service to bio-diversity?
An interesting concept. I don’t know if it’s biological or some higher mechanism. But there is no doubt great national success seems to lead to utter decadence. I’d say it is more psychological and sociological but I remain open to the biological premise as well. The factors may well come together in ways we don’t understand yet. We are designed for struggle. Without it we begin to twist and ferment.
#”But is there a dynamic within evolutionary biology itself that works to limit a species when that species has accomplished a virtual monopoly on control of biological processes beyond the scope of it’s own maintenance? In other words, ……..?#
Utter nonsense.
Natural Law does not punish a race for overbreeding. It’s indifferent to life and death.
A given territory even if arid can be adapted to allow for a growing population providing the race is of adequate intelligence levels to create and implement the necessary adaptations. If not, overbreeding will result in starvation. This is when the more efficient and advanced nations
become vulnerable to invasion by unsuccessful types, but only if their ruling elite commit treason and deliberately engineer such invasions.
#”does arriving at a level of near total dominance over every kind of life-form on earth trigger a “suicide” default, in effect sacrificing the one too-dominant species for the sake of species type numbers and in service to bio-diversity?”#
What you are hinting at and suggesting here is that former White colonial powers in relation to non-White countries may have mysteriously contracted a sort of death wish virus that prompts and wills their ancestral populations to commit suicide en masse through facilitating the
takeover of White homelands by non-Whites and supporting the more prolific breeding habits of such alien competitors in the interests of ‘bio-diversity’ – all of which is utter nonsense.
Are there any examples of animal and plant life engaging in such behaviour bearing in mind man is merely an elevated albeit highly evolved form of animal? I doubt it.
The causes of collapsing birth rates are almost always manmade as follows,
1) Aggressively promoting abortion and birth control aimed at the host population.
2) Alien swamping of the host population’s living space or breeding ground is another such cause as follows
3) Psychological bullying by the ruling elite in the form of blaming overpopulation on the host population whilst at the same time encouraging AND facilitating territorial swamping by racial and cultural aliens.
4) Aggressively promoting Multiculturalism (multiracialism) and DIEversity with the enactment of legal sanctions against justifiable objection.
5) The not wanting, on the part of the host population, to subject future offspring to an environment which has become saturated with myriad outgroups and cultures not of the native phenotype, has the effect of psychologically suppressing the host population’s desire to breed.
6) The innate human need to eat and survive ie, employment. Having extra children
lessens the ability to set aside the necessary number of hours required for working outside the family unit and exacerbates the financial burden.
7) When the cost of living is being artificially heightened year on year with no corresponding decreases when demand falls, rarely will a single income suffice which results in the female partner having to excessively curb her natural fertility urges and instead transfer her role to that of breadwinner which manifests in having fewer or no offspring at all.
8) In the meantime, the occupying alien races are encouraged, rewarded and congratulated for excessively exercising THEIR fertility urges.
Thanks for your response. Bear in mind, I’m posing a question here; if I had “proof” I’d certainly adduce it; alas, it’s more of a thought exercise. But let me respond at least in part to your response:
Many of the factors you list in numbered order are very real and demonstrable mechanisms for White decline. But they are MECHANISMS, not CAUSES. I don’t disagree with any of them, although they range from techniques of the enemies of the White race (e.g. #’s 1-4 and #8), to exigencies felt by individual members of the White race (e.g. #’s 5 -7).
You are certainly correct in your assessment of the deleterious effects of the mechanisms you cite. But what I’m trying to get at is what is operating in the “big picture”, if you’ll forgive the cliche’. Let’s assume that mankind is an operation of a natural force acting in the universe. We will omit God, as unknowable, from the equation. Let’s further assume that mankind is, so far, the most sophisticated *expression* of these natural forces mentioned above. Let’s further posit that the White race is the MOST sophisticated and accomplished expression of the force/will/life urge that we know of.
Now, whatever force is at work in nature can be shown to favor variety at the expense of longevity, relatively speaking. Look at the Dinosaurs: insane varieties that all arose and declined for we know not what “reason”; living millions of years, mutating almost endlessly. And while those millions of years seem impressive, to us, they really are only a brief period of the earth’s history. A chapter.
Fast-forward to the dominance of man, particularly Western European man; in a near heartbeat of geological time, he mastered the seas and the continents, drove certain species of life to extinction; reached into space; seemed on the brink of conquering the vagueries of disease and hunger. What if man truly unseated nature and natural processes to the point where all life on earth only continued at the pleasure of the White race? The *possibility* that natural evolution could in fact be husbanded or stopped completely by executive decision from a group of scientists and engineers?
Instead, let us say, for the sake of argument, that nature or whatever you want to call it “decided” (I know, highly problematic formulation) to stop supporting this upstart life-form? Perhaps in a preemptive strike, as an act of self-preservation? Suppose “Nature” as we’ll call it, doesn’t care for cathedrals or rocketships, but is more interested in the stuff crawling around in the mud, or worries more about the snail darter than the advancement of man’s knowledge. De-evolve man, go back to the infinite becoming that brought us man and dinosaurs and everything else that ever lived, because that “becoming” IS the purpose.
Your arguments make sense to me; I’ve heard them somewhere before and I found them appealing. For whatever that is worth.
No, Nature doesn’t give a hoot about the achievements of white people, not at all. We were quicker than any other race to move away from Nature and now it’s payback. However, we’ll be taking a whole bunch of others with us.
No, I don’t believe that Nature may have somehow ‘decided’ in the last century or so on a policy of eradication of the White race because Nature perceives this race to have become a threat to the dominance of Nature itself . LOL
Nature may be the creator of life and infinite varieties of life forms, but it’s ambivalent and indifferent to the survival of any or all of them. Furthermore, Man has been manipulating naturally-occurring genes for thousands of years to produce cross-breeds of various inter-fertile species particularly within the animal and plant kingdoms yet Nature has ‘tolerated’ this artificial engineering (interference) for the most part, throughout.
That ‘something’ at work which you allude to is inbuilt competition, ie, the striving by individual life forms for overall dominance on the planet and control of other life forms. There are always winners and losers in any competition and the fight for continued existence is no exception.
What has happened is that the White race has generally permitted more aggressive races to steal a march on its continued existence and progress, and is refusing to collectively fight fire with fire. The reason is that the White race has during its evolution incorporated into its psychic, the meme of ALTRUISM. This meme has laid it wide open to exploitation and eventual subjugation under the feet of more cunning, ruthless and vengeful race(s).
The only way to turn this problem around is to dispense with this meme and substitute it instead with one of selfishness and ruthlessness. This requires retuning the mental instincts of the White race. After all, its present near defeat has been caused by a multi-pronged genocide agenda unleashed by one particular tribe using primarily altruistic but equally traitorous White elements to do its bidding in the implementation of its programme as well as manipulating alien invaders empowered for the purpose to accelerate the cultural and physical Genocide of its most capable rivals – the Anglo-Saxon and Nordic branches of the White race.
For the aforementioned reasons, therefore, Nature, in my opinion, is not ‘involved’ in the demise of the White race. Such a notion is absurd.
Previous species perished because they failed to gradually adapt to or compete within a changing environment with more aggressive life forms or were wiped out as a result of natural disasters.
Simple!
Swain, I appreciate your points. The Jews (whom I believe you are alluding to), full of resentment, have worked diligently to break and dilute us. Blacks and browns exploit our altruistic nature. All true, and, as you say “Simple!”.
But there are darker things afoot in the White Decline scenario. Pure reproductive numbers should tell us that there is a deep-seated problem.
I’ll only point to a few things, perhaps unrelated phenomena, perhaps not:
1. Endangered species are often difficult to breed back into significant numbers. Even in optimal settings, with no predators, they simply won’t reproduce. As if nature itself has lost interest in them.
2. Masochism in the White race has reached epidemic proportions, with White people becoming more impassioned about the “rights” of blacks than their own. These people are not mere dupes, they are actively passionate. Examples of White people acting as bleeding heart weepers for any group except their own are so legion I think I need not bother belaboring this point further.
3. There exists a filthy branch of pornography that has as it’s sole focus white husbands facilitating, encouraging, and filming sex acts between blacks and their own White wives. Disgusting! I hate to even refer to it, but it cannot be explained by altruism or violent threat. There is even a sub-set of this vile “hobby” that celebrates impregnation by a black.
4. Species die-offs are not all explained by predator activity or natural disaster.
If you look around, you will see anomalous behaviors that defy even altruism, re-education, and Jewish subversion. Some things are “simple”; I don’t think the frightening velocity with which Whites are relinquishing control of their world is one of them.
The world is becoming very crowded, and in fact Europe did a long time ago, and exported its surplus population to the Americas and other parts of the world where they were exploring or running empires.
People talk about exploding third world populations, but there’s actually alot of land in Latin America, Africa, India, and China. Europe is comparatively smaller, North America is large but is overdeveloped.
Good God, this is overwhelming. And while this demographic decline is going on, those with empty wombs are doing this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2565045/Theyre-like-addicts-drug-pimp-The-heartbreaking-story-one-mothers-fight-save-prostitute-daughter-Las-Vegass-seedy-underbelly.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2565343/Female-teacher-spared-jail-having-sex-16-year-old-student-prom-party-wrote-letter-apology-mom.html
I want to ask Mr. Johnson if there are any articles on this excellent website (or any other he recommends) that deal with the crisis of White female weakness for black males. I have long seen the white female “gatekeeper” of reproduction decision-making as our weak link. Say what you will about “gelded” white males, the runaway problem is white girls and women having black babies.
I’ve been troubled by this phenomenon since it first became publically obvious where I live, back in the 1970’s….though it was rare indeed at that time by today’s standards.
White females seem to be fascinated and charmed by black men. It isn’t just the “dumb” or “ugly” ones either…I know some of the factors are media glorification of black males in entertainment and sports; media glorification of “interracial romances”; the urban “sexual superiority” image, and possibly the ever-ready talkativeness of black males compared to often reticent white males, and their ability to amuse and entertain white women.
I know some worthwhile women are part of the movement. Please accept my apologies for believing you are far too much in the minority. Ideally, we should have about half women and half men in the enlightened group, for maximum opportunity to battle the demographics issue. But who reading this website thinks our movement is comprised of 50% females??
Maybe the women simply need to see White men reassert themselves and they’ll come back over in droves. To circle back to my original question, are there relevent writings on the “female problem”?
@Jim
Do check out the story I linked to in my above comment Sir:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2565045/Theyre-like-addicts-drug-pimp-The-heartbreaking-story-one-mothers-fight-save-prostitute-daughter-Las-Vegass-seedy-underbelly.html
I can’t quite put my finger on it, but I think it goes a bit beyond simply social engineering and propaganda, there is something else at work here. In general, white women on the whole have largely abandoned and/or committed treason against white guys despite all that their men have done to keep them comfortable and safe (big mistake that turned out to be). At this point I don’t see an en masse ‘reasserting’ taking place nor would it reclaim anything if it took place; we are simply too far past the point of that working. It would require legislative control and media control to get anywhere now. Lots of white guys are assertive, 10s of millions- it has not achieved this result.
“Maybe the women simply need to see White men reassert themselves and they’ll come back over in droves. To circle back to my original question, are there relevent writings on the “female problem”?”
If they see it, will they just drop the catering they’ve gotten from liberal society and leave? Are we going to forget everything and treat them as the father of the prodigal son treated him? These women would be coming back heavily tainted (and I don’t mean just sluts and whores). The will have a lifetime of poor attitudes, bad behavior, etc. They would essentially be returning after collective treason- are you willing to just let them in without any consequences at all?
Some stuff to mull Jim, later.
@ Teddy Boy: you know, I did read that article….sad and disgusting. The mother deserves some share of blame for letting the daughter “date” a black and live under her roof. Pitiful.
Yes the “something else” you allude to in your second paragraph is what I sense….something gone horribly wrong in our women. A few years ago I saw something someone wrote about this topic, wish I could find it again; anyway he illustrated his remarks with pictures of White girls holding their mulatto offspring and noted the “defiant” looks on their faces.
As to your last point, I’m afraid I didn’t express myself clearly when talking about “them”-there were two groups of “thems”.
The White girls I’m still hopeful for are the ones who haven’t slept with the blacks yet, and are either simply ignorant on race or waiting to be won to our cause. Those lost souls that have lain down with blacks are not wanted back. Tainted and disgraced. But even White girls who are in monogamous relationships with White men tend to “hate racists” and express nothing but sympathy and a desire to “help” blacks. I’ve seen White girls turn on White men who expressed racialist views, even when the girl didn’t seem interested in being with a black; the blacks somehow always have their sympathies.
@Jim
Good points again Jim. Yes they are extremely quick to turn on us, far too quick. That cannot be dealt with in the future through any ‘democratic’ means that have been deployed thus far. That quickness to hardcore treason will have to be defanged by strict rules and consequences.
I think I read the same article or at least one similar. There’s something there I think. The look of triumph on their faces. They have gotten revenge on their Fathers and on all White Men.
And then there is the more mundane reasons: Blacks are glorified both as Alpha Males and as victims. So both sides of Feminine Nature are titillated, the sexual and the maternal. And in truth, Blacks are very extroverted and have a superficial charm. They are better with women than we are on this level on average.
In an ideal world all races ought to be educated in the vital importance of procreating only amongst their own kind. Any deviation from this norm would then automatically be treated with contempt and derision by all societies.
There is no reason why such an ideal world cannot again be resurrected and implemented across the globe. In fact, in almost all non-White homogeneous nations this natural inclination and survival instinct is supported and protected with aggression where necessary.
We already know who and what is preventing this natural development in White homelands and this is where we need to keep on with perpetual exposing and holding to account at every juncture.
White men marry Asian women 5 times more than white women marry black men.
Maybe you should start with that one, and look in the mirror.
ASIANS ARE NOT WHITE. Don’t pretend they are.
White Women have more babies with Blacks than White men do. So which sex produces more Non-White babies? Interesting question. In a deep sense it’s worse when women stray since there is no going back if pregnancy ensues. But your point is valid of course.
That is not relevant to what is being said here. Besides, with the state of white women being as it is, that is where they can find feminine women (or so they believe). There are nowhere near the numbers of white women who fit the proper description than there are men demanding it. Demand outstripped supply and apparently that meant Asians for a lot of guys. It is what it is.
This article gets to one of the basic issues behind the decline of the White world: low birth rates. The resulting population imbalance creates many other pathologies.
Third world demographics produce increasing numbers of non-white young men who move into first world territories and stake their own claims, backing them up with violence (as we see within many ancient European cities). Similarly, where large numbers of young third world females produce more children, they will inevitably flood the territories of less fertile first world populaces. As usual, some sort of ideology will be ginned up to justify the land grabs, though this seems to be prefabricated via multi-cultism.
For Western elites, this appears to not make much of a difference.
Globalized elites already rule many third world populaces via transnational corporations, NGOs, information age finance, military alliances, and etc. Replacing first world peoples in Europe and North America with third worlders makes not much of a difference from their perspective, and has the bonus of the old divide and conquer game, pitting low-IQ immigrants against the diminishing White middle classes.
A question here: does the first world really need third worlders to do the “jobs that Americans will not do?” Would some reorganization of the economic system make it desirable for White workers to man the assembly lines or whatever? Say, automation, reduced working hours, profit sharing, etc? Or has the situation gone beyond such alternatives?
What is behind the White population nosedive?
Go back a few decades and ZPG (zero population growth) was all the rage. The idea was to limit the size of populations and create an ecologically balanced and economically expanding future, glittering geodesic dome and all. The alternative was claimed to be an overpopulated dystopia (see the movie “Soylent Green” for one example). Well, the Western world did practice ZPG (actually, NPG, negative population growth) and we are ending up with the dystopia, anyway.
(ZPG might have worked if third world populaces also bought into it, but they didn’t. Hence, the invasions. )
I am not claiming that the ZPG movement is primarily responsible for today’s situation, simply that it was a manifestation of some deeper impulse in many White people.
We can see this in two of today’s reigning pseudo-ideologies: feminism and hedonism. The hedonism comes in with more White people wanting to live a consumer intensive lifestyle, including turning sex into a commodity of sorts. Raising a family is often postponed until too late. Many people chase the dream of an endless orgy of sex and electronic toys even into old age without stopping to consider the kind of society they will actually have to live in.
As for feminism, this removes many young White women from the genetic pool right at the height of their most fertile years. “Careers” become more important than having children. And yes, having children is important to keep society going. It is a reality that reflects an inherent biological difference between women and men, regardless of the delusions of women’s studies departments and equal opportunities commissars.
Feminism has generated two more negative effects. One is to create antipathy among women for men, the latter being considered “oppressors.” Another is to feminize men by convincing them that traditional masculinity is “toxic.” The result is a growing cohort of first world males who can not compete with the violence of third world men–thereby surrendering more territory.
Various attempts to control mass third world migration will not work very well unless we see White people having large families, and having them while still young to produce another generation within 2-3 decades. A baby boom would down the line would create the young White people who would stake out their own claims to territory–and perhaps turn against the hostile elites who have brought the Western world to its current sorry state.
Think of a 1960s youth revolt, but this time guided by the principles of nationalism.
This would require the Alternative Right to provide the cadre, the organization, the propaganda…and the vision of White peoples fulfilling their destinies.
@R_Moreland
Alas, hedonists can never defend their territory. They can’t even “fight for their right to party,” when the bad guys come they just shuffle on down the street.
If we are ever in a position to put the politicians and other elites on trial for genocide, they will literally have no defense. What does a term like “replacement migration” mean if not genocide? The overwhelming hatred for our race of the elites (Jewish and non-Jewish) is what allows them to accept this development. If they loved our people they would put a stop to it; they would probably put a stop to it even if they were indifferent to us. The only explanation is that this is deliberate willful genocide motivated by extreme hatred.
Lots of excellent comments here. On the issue of White men pairing with Asian females, I don’t endorse it, but the real crux of the problem is our White females. Every single White female, of predominantly European extraction, of sound mind and body, and of child-bearing age or near it, is a precious resource at this point. Every single one! Only a White woman can have a White baby…
There was a time when a White woman and black man could not be seen in public together. They would literally have been horse-whipped out of town (I’m speaking of the U.S. here-and for the black male, it might have ended in a lynch party). Society held grave consequences for females that crossed the “color barrier”. That barrier was comprised of violent consequences from the White males, and shunning by White females. When I spoke earlier of White men reasserting ourselves, I mean along these lines…reasserting our right to our own kind. Re-erecting that long gone “race barrier”.
It will take guts and unity to do it; the question is, can we exert ourselves in this direction? Because if we can’t, the only other solution would be massive population relocations, purges, and deportations-in effect removing the “temptation” from the eyes of the White females. And that ain’t exactly gonna be easy, either.
@Jim
Good comment. Reasserting however, must be following by codifying, restricting, etc. And the reassertion must be official and open, with consequences for challengers.
@TeddyBoy: You are correct. I suppose the “practical” way to do this is to either start in small communities where local LE might be somewhat cooperative, if any such small communities do still exist. The big machinery, i.e. Governmental agencies, establishment controlled Police, et al, will come down hard on any attempt to impose “roots-up” standards with real-world consequences. “Hate Crimes” and all that.
That leaves us with, in the short term, a need for large enough numbers to make a societal paradigm shift, or the utopian option of finding a geographic area to start over, bringing our few female converts with us to a region we can establish as ours.
In my experience, females will get away with whatever they aren’t too frightened to try. A certain amount of fear is good in society; it preserves time-honored norms. One of the big feminist lessons to women has been “don’t let fear restrain you”, and “he who makes you feel fear is your enemy”. Actually, women aren’t happy without boundaries, and they will push till they find them. White men need to give them some clear boundaries, and real-world consequences, my friend.
@Jim
That last paragraph was an excellent summation. Absolutely. Yes, they are unhappy without boundaries but seem unable to accept boundaries, even when acknowledging that they need them. It is odd, but no matter, if the time comes to remedy the situation there should be no asking or consulting, we do and they sit. The minority of WN type women can be their mentors.
Ivor Benson in Behind the News (1980s), quoted in John Tyndall’s ‘Eleventh Hour’, wrote:
“The continued importation of alien population elements into Europe and North America can now be clearly recognised as a gigantic, well planned and costly para-military operation, much of it routed through East Germany, the main staging post for bogus refugees flown in Soviet airliners from the Far East and elsewhere; from East Germany they are pushed out in busloads into West Germany, Denmark, Holland and Switzerland, and in boat-loads across the Baltic into Sweden and Norway, to be further distributed by all kinds of illegal means into Britain and across the Atlantic to Canada and the United States of America. Anyone who believes that this could be the result of an exercise of personal initiative by the migrants, and all at their own expense, would have to be naive to the point of weak-mindedness.”
Does anyone have any more information about the alleged Soviet role here? Why would the Soviets inflict this on their European cousins just for the sake of Cold War point scoring? Is the Jewish influence behind the Iron Curtain at least partly to blame here? Or was it just a case of “discomforting the West in return for the West’s attempts to embarrass the East by its open asylum policy for those from Communist countries”, as Charles B. Keely wrote?
It’s fascinating that Benson picked up on this. Clearly he and Keely were talking about the same thing. It was in retaliation for elite pressure on the East Bloc to let Soviet Jews emigrate and pollute the West, as well as for purely subversive purposes.
I wonder if the program has ever been written about in detail. It would seem odd if it hasn’t been. Evidently it was part of the very early push for replacement migration. Knowing Communism, it does not surprise me a bit.
“Anyone who believes that this could be the result of an exercise of personal initiative by the migrants, and all at their own expense, would have to be naive to the point of weak-mindedness.”
This is as true today as when Benson wrote it. The Somalis I see certainly did not get here on their own. They were deliberately imported. They drive new cars and live in nice housing. Everything—including the transportation to get here—was provided for them, facilitated by people at the top of our society.
Whites pay for it, though the mechanisms behind the malevolent operation are carefully concealed from public view.
I did not accept the monster; I simply knew that it was something to be feared.
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.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment