Print this post Print this post

Trump, Poland, & Abortion

1,778 words

MotherReadingIt seems that Donald Trump has riled the waters yet again, this time, by being ideologically consistent on the issue of abortion. While not always having been pro-life (or Right-wing at all, for that matter) it appears that in attempting to appeal to the conservative crowd, The Donald has taken a pro-life stance, though as always, he has taken things a step further — perhaps even too far. Instead of merely paying lip service to the pro-lifers, Trump has taken the stance to the next level by concurring with the idea that women who get abortions should be punished.

While this has stirred up the perpetually offended as well as cuckservatives, Trump is just being consistent. If a crime is committed, there has to be a punishment or it is no crime at all. And of course, at least according to the Establishment, women are equal to men in every manner and are therefore capable of being active players and making thought-out decisions all by themselves. Therefore, they should be just as deserving of punishment as the doctor who performed the procedure.

Of course, it isn’t all that simple: despite decades of radical feminism, there exists a gross double standard in which women are to be treated as equal to men when it suits them (e.g., in affirmative action policies for nice, well paid air-conditioned office jobs) and to be treated differently whenever that suits them as well (such as having the first date paid for by the man).

But I digress.

Thankfully, like all Trump controversies, the whole thing seems to have blown over. While Trump seems to have at least partially backed down from, or at least ignored, the issue for the time being, it doesn’t seem to have affected his campaign too much. Chances are the national debate on abortion will remain in a stalemate for the time being, with neither side gaining much ground.

On the other side of the world, however, Europe’s newest “fascist state” looks to be taking a sharp turn to the right on the issue. I speak, of course, of Poland.

Poland’s ruling conservative-populist Law and Justice party (PiS) recently angered a large part of the country yet again by considering a total ban on abortion. To put things into perspective, abortion is currently prohibited in Poland with exceptions only for rape, incest, damaged fetuses, or when birth poses a danger to the life of the mother. This ban would effectively force women who, for example, have been raped by their fathers, to either give birth to the child or go to a country where abortion is legal to have the procedure done there.

The proposed ban has, predictably, caused outrage among not only leftists, but many people who are otherwise more politically neutral. This is a shame, because while PiS may be excessively Catholic (in Polish there is the term Katotalib, that is, Catholic Taliban), they are at least more sensible on the issue of immigration than the previous “liberal-conservative” Civic Platform (PO), a party that welcomed refugees, Westernization, and implemented anti-discriminatory legislation, like any good liberal-conservative party would.

This is important because immigration is a civilizational issue, and many Poles and whites in general know this on a visceral level. Poles can see that Western Europe is a mess, and nearly every Pole I have spoken to opposes the immigration of third-worlders and especially Muslims into Poland.

Of course, there are some delusional leftists who lament that Poland is “backwards” and wish for the day where homosexuals can get married, and they will see blacks and hear Arabic everywhere they go. These people are, for the time being, a minority. However, the idiotic ban of the PiS party will make a future election by the unprincipled PO more likely.

Yet the controversy does bring the highly sensitive issue of abortion into the spotlight, and it is an issue we nationalists need to discuss. Poland, like all other European nations, faces a declining birth rate. It is predicted that by 2050, some voivodships (counties) will have shrunken by 20 percent in terms of population, while retirees will make up 40 percent of the population, thus placing a heavy burden on the shrinking tax-paying demographic. Cue the arguments for mass immigration (insane arguments, given African/Islamic migrants’ low human capital and being an intergenerational net drain on welfare, police, and other resources).

However, Poland’s already strict abortion laws have not exactly improved the situation. The birth rate has been decreasing since the eighties, and has been below replacement level since the nineties. The fact of the matter is that even with abortion being heavily restricted, or even banned, it won’t do much to improve Poland’s demographic problem.

And this is why the PiS party’s (and Trump’s) stances are doomed to fail to improve birth rates. While PiS is certainly not a party of cuckservatives and are in fact capable of fighting the Left, they have the unfortunate tendency to attack the symptom instead of the cause, much like their conservative counterparts everywhere else in the world.

While abortion is a terrible thing, banning it outright will not solve the issue of why so many women aren’t having children in the first place. Only by tackling the root cause of the problem can we ever hope to reverse our nations’ catastrophic demographic trends. This leads me to my next point: women need to have their employment prospects restricted.

Ok, ok. I worded that sentence in an intentionally provocative manner. I did it for the lulz. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that a large part of the reason women aren’t having children is their obsession with careers. There is an undeniable correlation between female employment and declining birthrates, even in Middle Eastern countries.

Take Saudi Arabia, for example. While we in the West often see this country as some kind of oppressive, patriarchal state, women have, in fact, been “liberating” themselves by leaving the home and entering the workforce in surprisingly high numbers. Meanwhile, the birth rate has plummeted from just under eight children per woman back in the sixties to just under three children today. Similar trends can be found all over the world, including European countries such as Britain.

William Andrew Loomis (1892–1959)And the thing is, women generally want  children. It is a biological need that, if left unanswered, can lead to mental problems down the road, and, conversely, couples with children tend to be healthier. This shouldn’t be surprising, as reproduction — the act of passing on one’s genes and continuing one’s line — is one of the most fundamental biological drives. The consumerist and nihilistic society can interfere with it, but it cannot override it completely.

I have spoken to many women in their twenties, thirties, and even late thirties who want to have children, but still want to “do a lot of things” first. These “things” are, of course, career related. Meanwhile, they seem oblivious to the fact that they have already wasted their prime fertile years being “empowered” in an air-conditioned cubicle. They have sacrificed their ability to continue their genetic lineage and further their kind, and in return they have been given the privilege of working for some corporation that will make them redundant as soon as an opportunity to save some shekels appears.

In the absence of biological children, these women will likely satisfy their motherly instincts with pets or by jumping on some stupid humanitarian bandwagon. Meanwhile, their happiness will continue to decline, much to the bafflement of academics who cannot fathom why a woman would be miserable wasting her life away doing Excel spreadsheets instead of staying at home and looking after her offspring.

This dangerous and suicidal pattern will not be easy to reverse. However, in a white ethnostate (or at least an existing European country where a real ethno-nationalist/identitarian party gains power) many of the long-held and cherished liberal ideas will have to be thrown out the window. There will be some situations in which we will have to make drastic societal changes in order to create a stable ethno-state, and some of those changes will mean reversing the gains made by the feminist movement.

That doesn’t mean that women should be banned from working altogether. However, it does mean that the concept of motherhood must be promoted as the most important role a women can have. Employment for women should be either restricted to the most necessary jobs, while working from home should be made easier through various incentives.

This seems radical by today’s standards, and feminists would screech that this policy amounts to “sending women back to the kitchen.” However, feminists, in reality don’t care about women any more than the “Black Lives Matter” movement cares about blacks. Feminists hate womanhood and femininity. If they truly cared about women, then they would encourage women to do what they do best and what makes them happy, that is, have and raise children.

It seems absurd that in today’s age it is considered taboo for women to be encouraged to be mothers, but these are absurd times we are living in. And while it may be some time before we see real and smart nationalists take power and reverse the demographic trends of Europe and the West through sensible policies aimed at banning immigration and encouraging motherhood, we are not entirely powerless to do something even now. After all, we can have children.

The day we have the power to implement the changes we want may still be far away. But nationalists can start reversing negative demographic trends today by having as many children as they can and founding their own strong families as building blocks and models for a healthy society.

We can find comfort in the fact that feminists and other leftist idiots generally have few if any children. I remember distinctly that the two most radical leftist teachers in my high school were both childless. A gender-studies doctoral student I had as a lecturer some years back had one daughter and was unlikely to have any more as she was in the twilight of her fertile years. This is great for us, as it means our biggest enemies, white leftists, will eventually die out, childless. Perhaps we can grant them Darwin Awards for their trouble.

Meanwhile, if nationalists have at least three children (preferably more) we can ensure that a large portion of the whites who are left after the coming turbulent decades are our descendants, and as such they will be instilled with our values and our traditions, and presumably any genes predisposing people to nationalism. The period-smearing feminist, the self-loathing whigger, and the mentally unstable transsexual advocate will die out. Then we will reign supreme.


  1. Posted April 12, 2016 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    This essay caroms off into several different subjects, any one of which is deserving of lengthy treatment. There’s the description of the political condition of Poland, and also the excellent observation that ‘feminists, in reality don’t care about women any more than the “Black Lives Matter” movement cares about blacks. Feminists hate womanhood and femininity.’ And a few other things as well.

    But to go back to the opening point, that Donald Trump was merely following the pro-life stance to its logical conclusion—if there’s a crime here (abortion) then the criminal must be published: this is priceless.

    Trump was the little child in ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes.’ He simply spoke the truth. He should not have backed off. He should instead have expanded on his stance, telling how pro-life politicians were hypocritical for not making the same statement.

    And then he could have reminded the public that there was a time, say a hundred years ago, when in most of America and Europe we had a very simple solution to abortion. It was simply not allowed, except in cases of medical necessity, or rape (which meant miscegenation), or incest (also illegal, oddly enough). The medical-necessity rule, brought into the present day, could be expanded to permit abortion of non-viable or defective fetuses.

    I am glad Trump did not go that far, however. Because the whole issue is a tar baby the wise politician should never touch.

  2. Franklin Ryckaert
    Posted April 12, 2016 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

    Give women a salary for being a mother, but only if they are married. In this way they will be mother and “make a career” at the same time.

    At the same time the culture has to be changed. Cultural Marxism (including feminism) has to be rejected.

  3. Posted April 12, 2016 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    “…These are absurd times we are living in…” But cracks are appearing. The hysteria of our elites through their media megaphones is startling even to the most blase’ American social and political observer. Trump, constant witch hunts tracking ‘racists’, and hideous public-spectacle punishment for heretics of our new, preening morality is wearing thin. Very thin. Trump’s popularity springs from this. His poll numbers fly up after each media savaging. Our enemies are juggling and have too many apples in air. It’s getting to the point that one hard jostle – and they drop.

  4. c
    Posted April 12, 2016 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

    “This is great for us, as it means our biggest enemies, white leftists, will eventually die out, childless.”

    I agree with all but this point. The Baby-Boomers had ‘conservative’ parents. What is more likely is what you have now – a lot of single misfits with nothing to do but agitate until senility (though even senility doesn’t seem to preclude it). And a few friends at the top of pyramid encouraging them, allowing them an influence disproportionate to their numbers and real abilities. These people poison the entire water supply.

    Decent ‘conservative’ people are working hard for their multinational employers to raise their 1-2 children. The latter don’t have time for political subterfuge and if they did, would not choose a brand of politics that would potentially upset their short-term economic standing (e.g. job loss, divorce).

  5. Susan Fowler
    Posted April 13, 2016 at 5:15 am | Permalink

    I don’t think women are as enamored of careers as they would have us (and themselves) believe. They still begin falling in love early and often but the availability of contraception has taken away their sexual leverage which used to be the expectation of commitment (marriage) before risking pregnancy. With contraception sex has become trivialized, non-committal and expected. Women still think the “relationship” is about love and bonding, and are shocked and hurt when they find out otherwise. To further complicate the “relationship” the thwarting of their own sex cycle, which begins with ovulation and only ends with the weaning of a child, leads to dissatisfaction that they always misinterpret as a need for travel, novelty, career, or a new “relationship”. College for women should return to its former use – a place to get the education she needs to be a good wife, good mother, good teacher; and a place to find a good husband. Sex should be put on hold until it is part of the holistic system of family: love, bonding, marriage, sexual intercourse, childbearing, and child rearing. Men will have to take the lead rather than taking advantage.

  6. Chateau Nataliste
    Posted April 19, 2016 at 1:12 am | Permalink

    The state should give hiring preferences to mothers the same way veterans get them. Then women will say “I want to have another kid before I enter the competitive job market.” Then rather than degree inflation we’ll have people multiplication as they compete with each other with additional children born.

    I wish there was a way to immediately capture women’s DNA by heat censors or something because then I could, just in passing, merge their DNA with her husband’s and then radomnly display hologram children from phenotypes potentiated by our genes which would grow up in front of their eyes and die within seconds. If they were haunted by the souls of the unborn maybe they’d comply. Even better an array of likely phenotypes could be created, and you could accuse them of the destruction of these archetypes.

    Once a female lawyer was up in arms about the murder of a child. This was justified because child’s death is always tragic, but the lawyer herself was childless, and the difference in a century between her unborn child and that kid is nil. They’ll both be unremembered and necessarily unimpactful on the genepool.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted April 19, 2016 at 1:27 am | Permalink

      Great pen name/handle!

Post a Comment

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.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace