The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Scientific American: "Six Billion in Africa"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Scientific American:

Africa’s Population Will Soar Dangerously Unless Women Are More Empowered
Population projections for the continent are alarming. The solution: empower women
By Robert Engelman on February 1, 2016

By 2100 Africa’s population could be three billion to 6.1 billion, up sharply from 1.2 billion today, if birth rates remain stubbornly high. This unexpected rise will stress already fragile resources in Africa and around the world.

A significant fertility decline can be achieved only if women are empowered educationally, economically, socially and politically. They must also be given easy and affordable access to contraceptives. Following this integrated strategy, Mauritius has lowered its fertility rate from six to 1.5 children; Tunisia’s rate dropped from seven to two.

Men also have to relinquish sole control over the decision to have children and refrain from abusing wives or partners who seek birth control.

For such efforts to succeed ultimately, government leaders must encourage public and policy conversations about slower population growth.

Earth is a finite place. The more people who inhabit it, the more they must compete for its resources.

Although human population has grown steadily, developments in recent decades have been encouraging. Globally, women today give birth to an average of 2.5 children, half as many as in the early 1950s. …

Then there is Africa, where women give birth on average to 4.7 children and the population is rising nearly three times faster than in the rest of civilization. … By the end of this century, demographers now project, Africa’s inhabitants will triple or quadruple.

For years the prevailing projections put Africa’s population at around two billion in 2100. Those models assumed that fertility rates would fall fairly rapidly and consistently. Instead the rates have dropped slowly and only in fits and starts. The United Nations now forecasts three billion to 6.1 billion people—staggering numbers. Even conservative estimates, from places such as the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria, now see Africa at 2.6 billion. The U.N. has in recent years continually raised its midline projection for 2100 world population, from 9.1 billion in a 2004 estimate to 11.2 billion today. Almost all of the unanticipated increase comes from Africa.

Extreme growth threatens Africa’s development and stability. Many of its inhabitants live in countries that are not especially well endowed with fertile soils, abundant water or smoothly functioning governments. Mounting competition for nourishment and jobs in such places could cause strife across the region and, in turn, put significant pressure on food, water and natural resources around the world, especially if Africans leave their nations in droves, which is already happening. As many as 37 percent of young adults in sub-Saharan Africa say they want to move to another country, mostly because of a lack of employment.

Africa needs a new approach to slowing its population rise, to preserve peace and security, improve economic development and protect environmental sustainability. And the world needs to support such efforts. From the 1960s to 1990s, international foundations and aid agencies urged African governments to “do something” about escalating population growth. That “something” usually amounted to investing in family-planning programs without integrating them with other health care services, plus making government statements that “smaller is better” for family size.

From the mid-1990s onward, however, silence descended. Calling population growth a problem was seen as culturally insensitive and politically controversial. International donors shifted their focus to promoting general health care reform—including fighting HIV/AIDS and other deadly diseases. …

The prospect of a crowded, confrontational and urban continent has begun to worry Africa’s national leaders, most of whom have traditionally favored population growth. They are starting to speak up. …

It is not surprising that access to family planning is one of the steps receiving renewed attention. Today only 29 percent of married African women of childbearing age use modern contraception. On all other continents the rate is solidly more than 50 percent. Surveys also show that more than a third of African pregnancies are unintended; in sub-Saharan Africa 58 percent of women aged 15 to 49 who are sexually active but do not want to become pregnant are not using modern contraception.
Djenaba, a teenage girl whom I interviewed some years ago, testified to that tension in her remote village in Mali, a country where only one woman in 10 uses contraception. Just past her midteens, she was already the mother of two young children. When I first asked how many children she wanted to have, she responded, eyes downcast, “As many as I can.” But after half an hour of conversation she faced me directly, her eyes misting, and told me she wished she could take contraceptive pills to get some rest from childbearing and soon stop altogether. …

Niger in West Africa offers an example of why an integrated strategy for lowering population growth, combined with government involvement, is so critical. There, in one of the world’s poorest nations, the average fertility is 7.5 children per woman, and it has barely dipped since measurements began in 1950. Women and men surveyed say that the ideal family is even larger.

Demographers are a bit stumped as to why, but the high number probably stems from a combination of factors. They include religious beliefs, high death rates among young children, a large proportion of rural residents who depend on children to work poor land, large families being valued as a matter of status (especially for men), and women having low status (children prop up women’s value in marriages, which are often polygamous). Child-rearing is typically shared in extended families, notes demographer John Casterline of Ohio State University, easing the burden—and therefore easing the decision among parents to have another baby. Mamadou Tandja, president of Niger until 2010, used to spread his arms to denote the vast expanse of his country, bigger than Texas, telling visitors there was plenty of room for a much larger population. …

Whether Africa finishes the century with several billion people or something much closer to its current 1.2 billion could make all the difference in its development, prosperity and resilience in the face of inevitable challenges.

This article was originally published with the title “Six Billion in Africa”

One thing we need is more honest academic research into how African men and women think. Anthropologist Henry Harpending had a whole series of great stories about what his hosts told him during his years living with African tribes. But you’re not supposed to figure out the logic of sub-Saharan cultures the way Henry did. You’d have to listen to about a million hours of NPR shows set in Africa to figure out what’s really going on.

 
Hide 197 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. What, don’t we want more Shakespeares?

  2. South Africans are pretty dumb, but the fertility rate has plunged despite this. It’s extremely unlikely that the rest of Africa won’t follow suit. Although Idi Amin wannabe Julius Malema did recently say that African women should have more children, there was a chilly reception.

    • Replies: @5371
    If you think things are extremely unlikely, but they have already happened, you need to rethink.
    , @Cicerone
    Yes, but not only there. Africans in big cities all over the continent have lower than average fertility (but probably also above average IQs). While in Kenya TFR is raound 3.8, it is just 2.4 in Nairobi. Similar thing with Lagos in Nigeria (4 against 5.5 children per woman) or, in an extreme form, Addis Abeba in Ethiopia (with just 1.5 children per woman against 4.8).

    So the first step of slowing down population growth should be to foster urbanization in Africa. Regarding Africa, I am not one of those believers in inborn r and k strategies. Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas), while other circumstances encourage Whites to breed like rabbits (Amish, ultraorthodox Jews).
    , @TG
    Yes the native South African fertility rate was low - and that's why the South African governments, both white and black, have used massive immigration from African nations with higher fertility rates to cancel it out.

    Immigration does not just move people around - it maximizes total population growth by canceling the effects of low fertility in one place. Given the power of exponential growth, in a world with no borders just one Bangladesh or Niger could easily drag down the entire rest of the world…

    So yes to empowering women, and yes to available birth control, but the main issue is being missed.

    It the pro-population growth policies of the elites that are responsible. Remember, while Africa's population was starting to soar, we had all these esteemed western economists insisting that more people were ALWAYS better and that anyone saying different was a racist or fascist or something. Why are we blaming poor Africans for getting it wrong, when all the pundits at Harvard and Chicago and the New York Times etc. have spent the last half-century insisting that they were getting it right?

    Remember Syria: Assad insisted that more people were always better, and he made the sale and possession of any form of birth control illegal, and he got the population to double every 18 years… and that didn't work out so well. It is intrusive government policies that treat people like cattle, and push them to breed ever more in order to increase profits that is the main issue.

    Empower women? Sure. But first disempower governments. Only encourage people to be careful not to have more children than they can reasonably support. The population should be set by the individual decisions of the people themselves, not ivory-tower academics insisting that the world will end if people don't have 'enough' children as determined by their own warped economic models...
    , @Ed
    Using South Africa, the whitest African country, as a barometer for the rest of Africa is misguided. Black South Africans are best compared to US blacks. Both are African descended people's living in countries that are dominated at least economically by whites. The South African black has to navigate in at the very least a quasi European enviroment other Africans do not.
    , @tris
    During Apartheid, Desmond Tutu encouraged black women to have lots of children so that they could swamp the whites in order to pry the gov from them. Back then I think it actually worked, although the drivers were really the free universal medical care for blacks, good standards of nutrition, and elimination of diseases such as malaria by the white gov. So in a way the whites killed themselves by eliminating the 3 major components of early death amongst blacks in South Africa. The ANC gov introduced welfare for single mothers, so many black men, especially older ones, accumulate a number of girlfriends to have children with, and then skim some of the welfare for themselves. A pretty sneaky business model if can can handle the abject immorality of it.
  3. Some interesting racial commentary from Bill Maher —

    • Replies: @bomag
    This sort-of counts as one for our side, but it is still criticism of YT, so he's covered.
    , @AndrewR
    He thinks he's smarter than everyone alive.

    He did say "social justice warrior", which was nice.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Clearly Maher has been getting a whiff of alt-right Realtalk®, and has decided that it is time to bring his feebleminded followers back to within throwing distance of reality, before they (and he) drift into utter self-parody.
    , @Malcolm X-Lax
    I watched Maher this morning. This was interesting since he is particularly hard left in matters of race (psst...except for Israel) and generally propagandizes as such. Perhaps this signals a trend.
    , @candid_observer
    If you go to a place or an event, and there are no black people there to see it, does it really exist?
    , @Discard
    I think he reads alt right blogs. Who else says "SJWs"?
  4. Africa stumbles and bumbles from one crisis to the next, and westerners can do naught but wring their hands and fret about women’s rights. We’ll see how long that lasts.

  5. @Dave Sliny
    South Africans are pretty dumb, but the fertility rate has plunged despite this. It's extremely unlikely that the rest of Africa won't follow suit. Although Idi Amin wannabe Julius Malema did recently say that African women should have more children, there was a chilly reception.

    If you think things are extremely unlikely, but they have already happened, you need to rethink.

    • Agree: International Jew
    • Replies: @Dave Sliny
    I checked my calendar, it isn't 2100 yet.
  6. pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    • Replies: @Nico
    Prophylactics are most likely to be used effectively by the reasonably intelligent and educated (by world standards). Most Africans fall under neither rubric; intuitively a proliferation of condoms would worsen the already bad K-to-r ratio (yes, I know that's not a real concept, but bear with me). It is not at all clear that the continent can move forward into modernity unless some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population.
    , @markflag
    Yeah man, like Africans, a not necessarily Christian people to say nothing of Roman Catholic await the latest directives from Rome whether or not it is OK to pull out. Stop friggin' whining. It ain't that simple although you are.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    Contraception is not the primary factor that limits human fertility. European fertility began declining north and west of the Hajnal line as early as the 16th century. Demographers still argue the details of why but delayed age at marriage and various controls on sexual gratification clearly played a role. The only readily available contraceptive techniques during the first two hundred years or so of the European decline were abstinence and coitus interruptus.

    The article, of course, would not mention possible racial and genetic causes for sub-Saharan Africans' high fertility rates, e.g., Rushton's r-K theory. If the philoprogenitive characteristics of sub-Saharan Africans have even a partially inherited basis, barring a massive imposition of positive Malthusian checks, the rest of the world is doomed.

    Finally, anyone who has spent much time in central African villages has to laugh at the idea that women in these villages need further empowerment, at least as defined by today's first world feminists. In Bantu cultures the women do essentially all the real work and effectively control all the important resources. The men squat around all day playing Mancala and gambling imaginary possessions back and forth. Marriage is matrilocal. Households are often composed of three generations of women living together and visited by their current sexual partners. Women compete for men as sexual partners and dump them as soon as they get bored. Actually it's a lot like Negro underclass life in the developed world but sans gangs, firearms, and drugs.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Isn't the problem with abortion--aside from the whole killing babies aspect--I mean, the social problem with abortion, isn't it that it is the more cognitively capable who avail themselves of it, leading to their offspring being erased, while the cognitive underclass breeds ever more recklessly?

    As I recall, this was the essence of Sailer's debunking of Levitt's abortion-reduces-crime meme.
    , @ben tillman

    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.
     
    And "pro life morons" have no political power, so their actions are completely inconsequential.
    , @anon
    r selected people don't want contraception
  7. religious right has to take major blame for this.

    • Replies: @Discard
    I think you've got your continents mixed up.
    , @RKae
    I'm one of the pro-life religious right. So how is it I have managed to have ZERO unwanted children?
    , @Pericles
    The modern mystery is not so much who did it (we've all been told), but how.
    , @anon
    Latin America proves the opposite - it's genetics
  8. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    So you’re going to approach some african leaders and say “We have a big problem! If you don’t make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to expand, dwarf our entire civilization, and end up ruling the world! You must help us stop it!”

    How could they respond with anything other than some version of “Sounds good to me” ?

    Gee, don’t you think we could offer some other incentive? Or maybe find some way to make it their problem instead of our problem?

    • Agree: Nico
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Gee, don’t you think we could offer some other incentive? Or maybe find some way to make it their problem instead of our problem?

    The incentive is to shut off the pressure relief valve that is Europe and the greater Eurosphere. i.e. Prevent the ships arriving, the people from staying, and the wealth from being transferred from us to them. Then the Africans will have to deal with the problem themselves.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    I have seen the idea of a genetically targeted anti-fertility virus pop up on more than one web site recently. The topic has been raised -- definitely not by me -- in other venues during several exchanges I've recently had with persons who definitely cannot be characterized as conservative or racist. I think that this is as bad an idea as any other form of biological warfare, since ooner or later your side will be hoist by a similar petard.

    But if the Negro inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa and their "big man" leaders don't start getting their act together soon, I envision China's leaders, who are much more hard-headed and ultra-rational than the West's, deciding that enough is enough and good land should not be wasted on losers. The decline or demographic swamping of the West would probably influence such a decision. Probably too late for Europe and America but vae victis.
    , @ben tillman

    So you’re going to approach some african leaders and say “We have a big problem! If you don’t make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to expand, dwarf our entire civilization, and end up ruling the world! You must help us stop it!”

    How could they respond with anything other than some version of “Sounds good to me” ?
     
    You won't be writing his speeches, thank God. Another, smarter speechwriter would have him say, "“We have a big problem! If you don’t make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to die out."
    , @BB753
    It's more like: "millions will starve to death, or die from diseases or in war".
    Whether they stay put in Africa or emigrate in mass, the result will be the same.
  9. 2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?

    • Replies: @gokart-mozart
    "2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?"

    John Maynard Keynes, is that you? "In the long run, we'll all dead"?

    I won't be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.
    , @anon
    my grand-children (god willing)(and touch wood)
  10. What we are witnessing in Africa is simply the crossroads of modernity with the unmodernizable. Sadly, a good majority of Africans are not and cannot be adapted for modern civilization with its patterns of production and K selection families. Western medical and nutrition aid comes without Western TFRs, and THIS is what is causing the black rabbits to spread so wide. Frankly? Ebola and HIV might just be the big corrective the nutheads at Scientific American are looking for, though they’ll never admit it.

  11. @5371
    If you think things are extremely unlikely, but they have already happened, you need to rethink.

    I checked my calendar, it isn’t 2100 yet.

  12. By 2100, there will be massive White flight from Earth to Mars. Mars will be gentrified. Like Doug Quaid says in Total Recall, get your ass to Mars.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    As Justin Hayward might have sung on Jeff Wayne's classic, seminal album of 1978, 'The War of the Worlds'

    "The chances of Indians immigrating to Mars are a million to one each way".
    , @AnotherDad
    > By 2100, there will be massive White flight from Earth to Mars.

    Mars is a pit. Makes the Sahara or the arctic tundra look like Iowa farmland.

    And, of course, whites can live in really nice real estate at a maybe ten orders of magnitude cheaper by simply keeping the garbage out of the land they have.
    , @anon
    if the space missions hadn't been wound down since the 1960s then you'd probably be right - escape would have been seen as preferable to the alternative but that escape was blocked off.
  13. @fox
    religious right has to take major blame for this.

    I think you’ve got your continents mixed up.

  14. Africans will starve, and a more capable race will take over.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Despite rapid population growth Africa is getting less hungry every year.
    , @andy
    they move in hundreds of millions to Europe before starving...this is what we are seeing now, and is just the beginning
    , @anon
    No. They will move to the West; the West will be destroyed - and then they'll starve.
  15. One gets the impression that these demographic projections just assume that do-gooding Aryan ninnies will continuously, and increasingly, take the food out of their own kids’ mouths to feed these ungrateful swart masses. A dangerous assumption.

    Men also have to relinquish sole control over the decision to have children and refrain from abusing wives or partners who seek birth control.

    Lol, oh dear…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    By that time whites won't be a majority either in north America, or even their ancestral continent, Europe.
    So, basically, 'everything's up for grabs'.
    , @Clyde

    One gets the impression that these demographic projections just assume that do-gooding Aryan ninnies will continuously, and increasingly, take the food out of their own kids’ mouths to feed these ungrateful swart masses
     
    Only problem is that by the time it comes to food shortages too many third worlders, Muslims and Africans will have been let inside. These three groups already reproduce faster than the natives. Plus once they have left the third world and entered Europe, America etc. they feel wealthy (a wide array of social welfare benefits) and able to have more children than they would have had in Algeria, El Salvador and Lagos. Call this the third worlder's version of affordable family formation.

    The only illegals that are cheap and easy to deport are Mexicans. They are simply bussed back. All others are flown back which is expensive and belligerent singe males need to be shackled and or guarded. Just think of the logistics for Sweden if it decides to deport 100,000 failed Muslim asylum seekers which Sweden has already boasted they will do. These young Muslim males will riot and battle with the wimpified police and military who are average 15-20 years older than them, probably have families, and don't want to become permanently disabled street fighting with young Muslims who have nothing to lose.

    Europe's problems defending themselves from third world invaders is exemplified by that photo of the four pretty female defense ministers sitting together and giggling. Their militaries are equally ridiculous, plus are small. Euro-nations spend their money on health and social welfare programs, not armies.

  16. If Scientific American would ever start to overlap in what they write about with The Economist, it would be the clash of immovable object against the unstoppable force. The Economist preaches 24/7 that endless immigration is the solution to all economic problems, Scientific American calling for something that slows down the endless growth, how do these two left wingers reconcile their opposing views ?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The New Scientist magazine - a quirky, readable, general science British weekly magazine devoted its lead article to 'why immigration is so great' the other week.
    Curiously, there wasn't even the merest whiff of 'science' as generally understood in the whole article.
    , @Counterpoint
    The idea that the "Economist" is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.
  17. @Dave Sliny
    South Africans are pretty dumb, but the fertility rate has plunged despite this. It's extremely unlikely that the rest of Africa won't follow suit. Although Idi Amin wannabe Julius Malema did recently say that African women should have more children, there was a chilly reception.

    Yes, but not only there. Africans in big cities all over the continent have lower than average fertility (but probably also above average IQs). While in Kenya TFR is raound 3.8, it is just 2.4 in Nairobi. Similar thing with Lagos in Nigeria (4 against 5.5 children per woman) or, in an extreme form, Addis Abeba in Ethiopia (with just 1.5 children per woman against 4.8).

    So the first step of slowing down population growth should be to foster urbanization in Africa. Regarding Africa, I am not one of those believers in inborn r and k strategies. Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas), while other circumstances encourage Whites to breed like rabbits (Amish, ultraorthodox Jews).

    • Agree: Triumph104
    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    "Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas)"
    the point concerning the Americas is good, but Ethiopia is a bad example. Ethiopians are not really subsaharan Africans, but rather mixed people. In a way they are dark skinned caucasians.
    , @Santoculto
    Urbanization in Africa...

    goodbye (still existent) environment**

    Africans on avgr are not capable to produce a decent urban environment, still worst if they were incentived to destroy natural environment of their places.

    A ''half-urbanization'' could be the solution for Africa by now and one child policy, humane if possible. Create a ''urbanized'', fordist division labour in permanent transitional urban-countryside areas to reduce a fertility rates and without have the necessity to destroy the natural environment.
    , @LKM
    Good point, but two questions:

    1) How do you get them into the cities in the first place?

    People only urbanize when they perceive that there are greater opportunities for them in the cities than on the farm. Specifically, you want jobs that an average African woman is capable of doing without much training, like sewing garments for Nike or whoever in a sweatshop. This is what drove down fertility in Bangladesh, among other places. It wasn't the introduction of birth control in itself, it was the realization among husbands that their wife was worth more to them working in a sweatshop than staying at home with twelve kids. Once that epiphany occurred, the husbands were the ones pushing for birth control and smaller families as much as the wives.

    Of course in theory these sorts of jobs should have existed en mass in Africa for some time, but as far as I know, they don't. I don't know about you, but my closet contains plenty of stuff from Vietnam, Bangladesh etc, but nothing from sub-Saharan Africa. Maybe the African governments just aren't capable of maintaining the infrastructure necessary(ports etc) to make them attractive, despite the cheap cost of labour. Maybe there's too much corruption.

    Either way, if Africa doesn't have these sorts of jobs in 2016, why should they in 2040 or 2060? Do we need to wait until the price of labour in Asia and South America is equal to that of North America and Europe before companies are willing to invest in sub-Saharan Africa for something other than natural resources?

    2) With the population projects we're seeing, urbanization in Africa means Asia-style mega-cities. You can have cities of twenty million people when they're filled with Chinese, Japanese or Indians and they may be unpleasant but they can remain functional. Higher density of blacks mean a higher density of young black men, which leads to more violence. How large can a city populated exclusively by blacks be without turning into a sort of megapolis Baltimore? Who'd want to urbanize to that?
    , @5371
    Those stats are made up.
    , @anon
    You're reading massively disproportionate male migration to the cities (and South Africa) as lower fertility.

    It's like the different immigrant groups in Europe - on the surface the ones that are 2/3 male have a lower fertility rate than the ones which are 50/50 but it's just the disproportion messing with the stats.
  18. I wonder what the Chinese are thinking. I’m sure they already have a plan. They need Africa’s resources. They could also do with some land – what’s Mandarin for Lebensraum?

    • Replies: @John Derbyshire
    what’s Mandarin for Lebensraum?

    On a quick German-to-Chinese sentence translation via Google Translate, it's 棲息地, pinyin qixidi, pron. approx. "chee-shee-dee."

    I doubt you'll be needing it though. Chinese TFR is much disputed, but certainly <1.5.
    , @Expletive Deleted

    what’s Mandarin for Lebensraum?
     
    Awstrayria
    , @anon
    More likely the Chinese will try to do something sensible and the poisoned West will prevent it.
  19. Tucker Carlson was saying that Somalis do not culturally assimilate into Minnesota niceness because they practice a primitive form of Islam.

  20. @fox
    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    Prophylactics are most likely to be used effectively by the reasonably intelligent and educated (by world standards). Most Africans fall under neither rubric; intuitively a proliferation of condoms would worsen the already bad K-to-r ratio (yes, I know that’s not a real concept, but bear with me). It is not at all clear that the continent can move forward into modernity unless some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    'A proliferation of prophylaxis'.
    , @Anonymous
    'Retarded tier of the population'.

    Sorry. No.

    They are NOT retarded.
    Merely doing what every replicator has been doing since the dawn of time.
    Let's face - it's a wasteful strategy, but will be a 'successful' strategy in that they the 'meek' shall inherit the earth - by sheer force of numbers, if nothing else.

    No.
    The real 'retarded tier of the population' are Angela Merkel, the shitheads who run the EU, and last band least, The Economist magazine.
    , @epebble
    "some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population"

    No, that will lead to population reduction willy-nilly. What is needed is popularization of alcohol and narcotics. They are effective population filters based on experience in the rest of the world.
    , @unpc downunder
    Condoms and contraceptive pills probably do have a useful role to play in Africa, but not for rural population control. Rural people in Africa have little social or economic incentive to have fewer kids. Give them to urban slum dwellers and sex workers who don't want to have lots of offspring.
  21. One thing we need

    No, we don’t really “need” that — we don’t really need “honest academic research into how African men and women think” — I suppose if you’re into that kind of thing, it might be interesting — but what’s really necessary is that white people, particularly white Europeans, honestly face up to the reality of HBD, stop fearing being called names, and have the guts to keep this coming horde of “African men and women” out of their countries.

    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    that´s right. this "we" is pathetic. As if every western reader of such a journal would be part of some kind of global administration. To think they are is a kind hubris.
    , @Dave
    "stop fearing being called names"- The most depressing part about that is it's other white people doing the name calling.
    We're afraid of other white people calling us bad names, and thus the West collapses.
  22. @Anonymous
    So you're going to approach some african leaders and say "We have a big problem! If you don't make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to expand, dwarf our entire civilization, and end up ruling the world! You must help us stop it!"

    How could they respond with anything other than some version of "Sounds good to me" ?

    Gee, don't you think we could offer some other incentive? Or maybe find some way to make it their problem instead of our problem?

    Gee, don’t you think we could offer some other incentive? Or maybe find some way to make it their problem instead of our problem?

    The incentive is to shut off the pressure relief valve that is Europe and the greater Eurosphere. i.e. Prevent the ships arriving, the people from staying, and the wealth from being transferred from us to them. Then the Africans will have to deal with the problem themselves.

  23. @fox
    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    Yeah man, like Africans, a not necessarily Christian people to say nothing of Roman Catholic await the latest directives from Rome whether or not it is OK to pull out. Stop friggin’ whining. It ain’t that simple although you are.

  24. “Extreme growth threatens Africa’s development and stability”

    It cracks me up when writers repeat the lie that subsaharan Africa is “developing”, and that this or that thing “threatens development”.

    Subsaharan Africa is not developing, it is deteriorating relentlessly and has been for years. Some places, of course, are worse than others – Ghana is not the DRC and Senegal is not Sierra Leone. But, in general, 1960 was paradise in all those “nations” compared to 2016. In 1960, the Mama Yemo (now known as “Kinshasa General”) and Mulago hospitals were modern, clean, properly functioning places. Now they are like sets for a post-apocalyptic movie. In 1960 the cities in the Belgian Congo were connected by roads and railroads all of which have now been swallowed by the jungle.

    The only thing four billion Africans will be is a protein source for each other, that is, presuming Europe comes to its senses and closes the Mediterranean to migration.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.
    , @tris
    The only 2 Sub-Saharan African countries which had any development were Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa. Of course this realization is verboten for the western elite, so what they do is ignore the mess in Zimbabwe and assign any positive aspect of South Africa, which is usually a left-over from Apartheid or the result of economic activity by the few remaining whites, to the ANC gov.
  25. I like to ‘war game’ what happens in the world with the LW community. One of the ideas I have is to use the temporary dopamine fix gotten by smart phones/social media to affect population rates. Roughly speaking it involves using gamification to induce small steps that have massive results.

    As urbanization rises to above 50%, African governments will have to rely on western donors due to their lower IQ. This will give a major opportunity to affect change. Simply and slowly create programs where you can get $StupidTrinket in exchange for getting a quarterly injection. Lather, rinse and repeat and you have a falling TFR.

    I am not talking about political will to implement this program. Rather the possibility of it being feasible and successful. Considering that the average twitter user is a lower income black woman and you have some of the work done already. No complains about the simplicity of this scheme. If google can skew an election in the US, then a quarterly injection of a birth control has got to be much more feasible. Especially if the people get used to it.

    Example of a birth control shot.
    http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-depo-provera
    Example of how google could skew an election.
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548

    • Replies: @Triumph104

    As urbanization rises to above 50%, African governments will have to rely on western donors due to their lower IQ. This will give a major opportunity to affect change.
     
    It is already happening in education. Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, the UK government and others are investors in Bridge International Academies which provides schooling in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, India, and soon Liberia.

    Instead of paying more educated, experienced, qualified teachers, the company hires inexperienced people from the local communities (reportedly paying around $90 a month). It gives them a few weeks of training and handheld tablet computers loaded with pre-scripted lessons designed by the company's education experts. It then sends them into the classrooms to deliver the scripted content to the students.

    And when they say scripted lessons, they mean scripted. We're not talking a general outline of a lesson plan with a few bullet points here.
     
    http://www.vox.com/2016/4/8/11347796/liberia-outsourcing-schools
  26. @Jefferson
    2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?

    “2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?”

    John Maynard Keynes, is that you? “In the long run, we’ll all dead”?

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes

    Sure enough Keynes had no children. Wikipedia mentions that criticism being leveled at him.
    , @Stan d Mute

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.
     
    At some level, our "white guilt" is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it's an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening. Civilizationally the result is debt which enslaves future generations. Individually it is consumption rather than investment of private inheritance. In both macro and micro it is giving away and tearing down of culture and institutions to disadvantage one's own and favor the alien and invader. If our ancestors were evil then everything they built must be destroyed and/or given away to their "victims."

    How long before a place like Greenfield Village is shut down and bulldozed to build instead a temple to worship the greatness of Islam or Sub-Saharan Africa? That this would be the exact opposite of Henry's ideology (eg what he built in The Edison Institute schools) is the point. White heritage and culture is evil and must be demonized and destroyed. But since this is painful the more it can be forced onto the next generation, the better it is. Look at American elementary education today ... are any white cultural practices taught? When was the last elementary school square dance? When was the last class of kids taught that white abolitionists ended slavery? Or taught about "indentured servitude" and the relative monetary value of white versus negro slaves in the South? Again, by demonizing and destroying the past they can more easily control the future.
    , @Jefferson
    "I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn."

    You might not have any at the rate White people are producing children these days.
    , @ben tillman
    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be.
    , @ben tillman

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be.
     
    In my book, that means you're still alive.
  27. @Jefferson
    By 2100, there will be massive White flight from Earth to Mars. Mars will be gentrified. Like Doug Quaid says in Total Recall, get your ass to Mars.

    As Justin Hayward might have sung on Jeff Wayne’s classic, seminal album of 1978, ‘The War of the Worlds’

    “The chances of Indians immigrating to Mars are a million to one each way”.

  28. @Richard S
    One gets the impression that these demographic projections just assume that do-gooding Aryan ninnies will continuously, and increasingly, take the food out of their own kids' mouths to feed these ungrateful swart masses. A dangerous assumption.

    Men also have to relinquish sole control over the decision to have children and refrain from abusing wives or partners who seek birth control.
     
    Lol, oh dear...

    By that time whites won’t be a majority either in north America, or even their ancestral continent, Europe.
    So, basically, ‘everything’s up for grabs’.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Basically, politically speaking, there is a 'singularity point' at which the left party in virtually every western European state will hold unassailable permanent political power due to the sheer force of numbers of third world immigrant descended voters combined with the traditional lefty core vote.

    The UK is perilously close to that point - which uncontestably will be reached by 2050 at the very latest. New Labour came within an ace of achieving it prematurely.

    Now, *for certain* as a concession to the immigrants, and as part of general lefty dogma - which also, incidentally is shared by the The Economist/Kaplan/Merkel school of shitheadery, any vestige of 'immigration control' will be dissolved, and Africa can do what Africa is fated to do. So, it's goodbye Europa.

    It is exceedingly unlikely that this scenario will not come to pass.
  29. @neutral
    If Scientific American would ever start to overlap in what they write about with The Economist, it would be the clash of immovable object against the unstoppable force. The Economist preaches 24/7 that endless immigration is the solution to all economic problems, Scientific American calling for something that slows down the endless growth, how do these two left wingers reconcile their opposing views ?

    The New Scientist magazine – a quirky, readable, general science British weekly magazine devoted its lead article to ‘why immigration is so great’ the other week.
    Curiously, there wasn’t even the merest whiff of ‘science’ as generally understood in the whole article.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    New Scientist used to be good, went to the dogs at least 20 years ago, stopped reading it. It went on the Guardian trajectory, until it ended up as an SJW/Greenie/socialworker comic that nobody looks at, probably arriving there before the Graun did. Notoriously devoid of actual Science.
  30. @Nico
    Prophylactics are most likely to be used effectively by the reasonably intelligent and educated (by world standards). Most Africans fall under neither rubric; intuitively a proliferation of condoms would worsen the already bad K-to-r ratio (yes, I know that's not a real concept, but bear with me). It is not at all clear that the continent can move forward into modernity unless some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population.

    ‘A proliferation of prophylaxis’.

  31. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Nico
    Prophylactics are most likely to be used effectively by the reasonably intelligent and educated (by world standards). Most Africans fall under neither rubric; intuitively a proliferation of condoms would worsen the already bad K-to-r ratio (yes, I know that's not a real concept, but bear with me). It is not at all clear that the continent can move forward into modernity unless some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population.

    ‘Retarded tier of the population’.

    Sorry. No.

    They are NOT retarded.
    Merely doing what every replicator has been doing since the dawn of time.
    Let’s face – it’s a wasteful strategy, but will be a ‘successful’ strategy in that they the ‘meek’ shall inherit the earth – by sheer force of numbers, if nothing else.

    No.
    The real ‘retarded tier of the population’ are Angela Merkel, the shitheads who run the EU, and last band least, The Economist magazine.

    • Replies: @Nico
    "Retarded" in this case has a specific psychometric definition. Regrettably, the kind of stupidity you cite à la Merkel, the Eurocrats and The Economist does not currently correspond to any pathology in widely accepted psychiatric or psychological literature. (NB: I would personally be open to inventing a diagnosis specifically for them.)
  32. @gokart-mozart
    "Extreme growth threatens Africa’s development and stability"

    It cracks me up when writers repeat the lie that subsaharan Africa is "developing", and that this or that thing "threatens development".

    Subsaharan Africa is not developing, it is deteriorating relentlessly and has been for years. Some places, of course, are worse than others - Ghana is not the DRC and Senegal is not Sierra Leone. But, in general, 1960 was paradise in all those "nations" compared to 2016. In 1960, the Mama Yemo (now known as "Kinshasa General") and Mulago hospitals were modern, clean, properly functioning places. Now they are like sets for a post-apocalyptic movie. In 1960 the cities in the Belgian Congo were connected by roads and railroads all of which have now been swallowed by the jungle.

    The only thing four billion Africans will be is a protein source for each other, that is, presuming Europe comes to its senses and closes the Mediterranean to migration.

    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    "At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.".

    Who are they and why?

    , @2Mintzin1
    Interesting...which ones? And "better off" in what ways?
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Anonymous, The Wall Street Journal's list of the world's top 25 worst places to live includes 23 countries on the African continent. The two non African countries are Haiti and Afghanistan. The UN has a similar list with similar results.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    Name a dozen along with supporting 1960-1970 versus 2000-2010 statistics. And be sure to provide links/sources so we know you are not -- as I strongly suspect -- just pulling all this out from a smelly place where the sun don't shine.
    , @PV van der Byl
    A dozen? Botswana, yes. But, what other countries are better off?
    , @gokart-mozart
    "At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago"

    A dozen???

    Name 2.
    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    Table 2.4Life Expectancy at Birth for Sub-Saharan Africa and UN Subregions, 1960–2005
    Region, subregion -- 1980–89 -- 2000–04
    Sub-Saharan Africa -- 49.0 -- 45.9
    Eastern Africa -- 49.4 -- 45.7
    Middle Africa -- 47.0 -- 43.4
    Southern Africa -- 59.6 -- 47.7
    Western Africa -- 47.1 -- 46.3
  33. @Discard
    Africans will starve, and a more capable race will take over.

    Despite rapid population growth Africa is getting less hungry every year.

    • Replies: @bomag
    Food commodity prices are at historic lows, so we can feed even more people...for a while.
  34. @gokart-mozart
    "2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?"

    John Maynard Keynes, is that you? "In the long run, we'll all dead"?

    I won't be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes

    Sure enough Keynes had no children. Wikipedia mentions that criticism being leveled at him.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Keynes' wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter's rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli's wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

  35. @Richard S
    One gets the impression that these demographic projections just assume that do-gooding Aryan ninnies will continuously, and increasingly, take the food out of their own kids' mouths to feed these ungrateful swart masses. A dangerous assumption.

    Men also have to relinquish sole control over the decision to have children and refrain from abusing wives or partners who seek birth control.
     
    Lol, oh dear...

    One gets the impression that these demographic projections just assume that do-gooding Aryan ninnies will continuously, and increasingly, take the food out of their own kids’ mouths to feed these ungrateful swart masses

    Only problem is that by the time it comes to food shortages too many third worlders, Muslims and Africans will have been let inside. These three groups already reproduce faster than the natives. Plus once they have left the third world and entered Europe, America etc. they feel wealthy (a wide array of social welfare benefits) and able to have more children than they would have had in Algeria, El Salvador and Lagos. Call this the third worlder’s version of affordable family formation.

    The only illegals that are cheap and easy to deport are Mexicans. They are simply bussed back. All others are flown back which is expensive and belligerent singe males need to be shackled and or guarded. Just think of the logistics for Sweden if it decides to deport 100,000 failed Muslim asylum seekers which Sweden has already boasted they will do. These young Muslim males will riot and battle with the wimpified police and military who are average 15-20 years older than them, probably have families, and don’t want to become permanently disabled street fighting with young Muslims who have nothing to lose.

    Europe’s problems defending themselves from third world invaders is exemplified by that photo of the four pretty female defense ministers sitting together and giggling. Their militaries are equally ridiculous, plus are small. Euro-nations spend their money on health and social welfare programs, not armies.

    • Replies: @neutral
    Europe still does have armies that would still easily defeat most 3rd world nations. This phenomena has nothing to do with military strength, you can have the strongest army ever, but if you have no will to defend your own nation it is pretty much pointless to have one. Even if somehow an army in Europe decided to fight, the US regime would no doubt intervene to protect the rights of the 3rd world migrants.

    In many ways, Europe already died many decades ago, asking to defend itself is like asking a rotting carcass to defend itself from maggots.
    , @Expletive Deleted

    Europe’s problems defending themselves from third world invaders is exemplified by that photo of the four pretty female defense ministers sitting together and giggling.
     
    And the Russian Fed's currrent seat-warmer is a half-Turk who's never seen combat. He's a civil engineer who ascended the greasy pole through their version of FEMA. Likes a nice snazzy uniform or five, though. With plenty of scrambled egg.
  36. @Anonym
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes

    Sure enough Keynes had no children. Wikipedia mentions that criticism being leveled at him.

    Keynes’ wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter’s rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli’s wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

    • Replies: @Sailer has an interesting life
    I've sometimes wondered how many smarties would have more descendants had technology been better in the 20th century. Since higher IQ correlates with introspection and a more K selection for child-care, it stands to reason that *some* married couples were affected dearly when their offspring died during the nine months/first few years of birth. Enough to change the fertility rate in the old statistics perhaps?

    "Do my wife and I really want to go through the possible pain and anguish of losing another child? No. We shall not".

    Makes you wonder. :-(
    , @Anonymous
    David Gest died the other day.

    Apart from marrying Liza Minelli, what was he famous for?
    , @gda
    Actually, there is no evidence that Keynes' wife ever miscarried, only speculation from Keynes' biographer, which is pooh-poohed by the wife's biographer, who presumably would be more in the know.

    Keynes was not only gay, but an enthusiastic pedophile. To compound his contemptible character, he was also a communist sympathizer.

    Undoubtedly his continued hero worship in the social science arena owes much to his left wing leanings, and the fawning admiration of similarly deluded so-called "economists" and ideologues over the years. It's hard to come up with any other explanation why his economic theories, which have been proven to be crucially flawed, continue to walk the earth like zombies, despite having stakes driven through their hearts again and again.
    , @Anon
    A miscarriage is Nature's way of saying, "Something is wrong with the health of the mother or child, and this pregnancy is being terminated." People forget about this factor.

    Elites of that era could knock back enough booze to damage a fetus, or their own eggs or sperm. They often ate idiotic diets of caviar and oysters while forgetting about vegetables and fruits. In this day and age, elites have the ability to add enough hard drugs to the mix to destroy their fertility forever. Talent and IQ do nothing if you want to have a child and choose to eat, drug, or drink like an idiot or want to breed with someone else who does.
    , @5371
    [Cole Porter’s rich wife miscarried]

    But who was the father?
    , @Anonym
    And Liza Minelli, the only child of Judy Garland was the last of her line.

    There are a lot of gay men who father children, so it's obviously not impossible for them. I am somewhat surprised that it is not seen more. If gays are men with female type brains/drives but with the male hormone balance, then you would think that there would be some cluckiness involved. Maybe the male hormone balance overrides that factor in a lot of cases, and is a reason why male homosexual promiscuity is off the charts (and conversely why lesbians - male brains in female bodies and with female testosterone levels - suffer lesbian bed death). Anabolic steroids increase sex drive in both men and women. And female test levels are a lot lower than males... and they still have sex, on average, at a similar rate to males.

    My original implied point was that I shared the hypothesis that childless people are a lot more blasé and/or less risk averse about the future (see Angela Merkel, Hitler) and hence if you can find examples of people who notably have a careless attitude towards future generations, odds are they don't have children. It certainly worked that way in the case of Keynes.

  37. @Steve Sailer
    Keynes' wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter's rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli's wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

    I’ve sometimes wondered how many smarties would have more descendants had technology been better in the 20th century. Since higher IQ correlates with introspection and a more K selection for child-care, it stands to reason that *some* married couples were affected dearly when their offspring died during the nine months/first few years of birth. Enough to change the fertility rate in the old statistics perhaps?

    “Do my wife and I really want to go through the possible pain and anguish of losing another child? No. We shall not”.

    Makes you wonder. 🙁

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Fertility among the English upper middle class (e.g., Darwin's kids) was very low in the two generations after Galton started worrying about it, but then improved in the middle of the 20th Century. Perhaps that was related to the introduction of antibiotics around 1945?
    , @Stan d Mute

    “Do my wife and I really want to go through the possible pain and anguish of losing another child? No. We shall not”.
     
    Or for Gen-X, born after the 1965 Immigration Act, "How can we in good conscience create children who will be forced to live in some hellish South Africa type dystopia?" Western Civilization has already been murdered, it is analog to the brain dead patient kept alive artificially. In its place we see only a crude mimicry like the African Dandy who plays at civilization like a four year old playing "Doctor" while we watch the life support mechanisms fail.

    http://youtu.be/W27PnUuXR_A
  38. @Sailer has an interesting life
    I've sometimes wondered how many smarties would have more descendants had technology been better in the 20th century. Since higher IQ correlates with introspection and a more K selection for child-care, it stands to reason that *some* married couples were affected dearly when their offspring died during the nine months/first few years of birth. Enough to change the fertility rate in the old statistics perhaps?

    "Do my wife and I really want to go through the possible pain and anguish of losing another child? No. We shall not".

    Makes you wonder. :-(

    Fertility among the English upper middle class (e.g., Darwin’s kids) was very low in the two generations after Galton started worrying about it, but then improved in the middle of the 20th Century. Perhaps that was related to the introduction of antibiotics around 1945?

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Steve, Might also have to do with the division of property, as in, leave a generous estate to fewer, than a meager estate to many. Isn't part of the Dowton Abby series on PBS.
  39. This seems one of the rare cases where the progressive prescription would actually work–I don’t like feminism for obvious reasons, but it does drive down birth rates.

    • Replies: @Nico
    The problem is societal feminism won't take hold on a large scale over there. Most black men fall under the rubric of either raging heterosexual machines or extremely flaming homosexuals. There are very few intellectual heterosexual aesthetes (Laclos, Sade, Godwin), which seem to be prerequisites for true libertinism and therefore feminism to take hold, among them. The women of any society are not "liberated" without their menfolk's consent.
    , @Formerly CARealist
    It doesn't have to be Feminism, with the capital F. It just means women exercise an iron will when it comes to intercourse. There's still plenty of joy to be had in a marriage even if there's no transfer of male fluids. We had this discussion on a thread a few months ago about contraception and what wives and girlfriends did in the era before the pill/easy abortion/comfortable condoms/unmarried childbearing being acceptable, etc. It's the ability to say NO to the fluids entering. Please tell me you don't think that's the essence of feminism.

    Anyway, this all assumes that people are reasonably sober during the process. Perhaps that's the unmentioned variable in the mix.

    Also: could be that African women just really like babies. This American woman really likes them too. Just not an overwhelming number of them.
    , @Almost Missouri
    I think you've hit on a piece of a more general axiom:

    Conservatism at home; Progressiveism for your opponents/competitors.

    You know, sort of like the Eskimos do.

    Or to put it in Sailer/Derbyshire-speak: Conservatism in one country.
  40. @Diversity is Wrong
    Some interesting racial commentary from Bill Maher --

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLD2xzAX8Aw

    This sort-of counts as one for our side, but it is still criticism of YT, so he’s covered.

  41. Harpending is on the SPLC hate watch list therefore everything he ever said is wrong.

  42. @Anonymous
    Despite rapid population growth Africa is getting less hungry every year.

    Food commodity prices are at historic lows, so we can feed even more people…for a while.

  43. @Diversity is Wrong
    Some interesting racial commentary from Bill Maher --

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLD2xzAX8Aw

    He thinks he’s smarter than everyone alive.

    He did say “social justice warrior”, which was nice.

  44. @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    “At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.”.

    Who are they and why?

  45. @Cicerone
    Yes, but not only there. Africans in big cities all over the continent have lower than average fertility (but probably also above average IQs). While in Kenya TFR is raound 3.8, it is just 2.4 in Nairobi. Similar thing with Lagos in Nigeria (4 against 5.5 children per woman) or, in an extreme form, Addis Abeba in Ethiopia (with just 1.5 children per woman against 4.8).

    So the first step of slowing down population growth should be to foster urbanization in Africa. Regarding Africa, I am not one of those believers in inborn r and k strategies. Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas), while other circumstances encourage Whites to breed like rabbits (Amish, ultraorthodox Jews).

    “Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas)”
    the point concerning the Americas is good, but Ethiopia is a bad example. Ethiopians are not really subsaharan Africans, but rather mixed people. In a way they are dark skinned caucasians.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    Only the Amharic segment of the population, from which Haile Sellasie was derived, as well as the old emperors of Ethiopia. A large part of the population is Somali, acquired by imperial conquest.
    , @Jefferson
    "Ethiopians are not really subsaharan Africans, but rather mixed people. In a way they are dark skinned caucasians."

    Since Ethiopians they are racially mixed, how can they be dark skin Caucasians? Are African Americans dark skin Caucasians as well? After all they are not pure Sub Saharans.

    And if Ethiopians are dark skin Caucasians, why don't most of them have straightish hair like Indians? Ethiopian hair texture falls within the range of Negroid hair texture.

  46. @eah
    One thing we need

    No, we don't really "need" that -- we don't really need "honest academic research into how African men and women think" -- I suppose if you're into that kind of thing, it might be interesting -- but what's really necessary is that white people, particularly white Europeans, honestly face up to the reality of HBD, stop fearing being called names, and have the guts to keep this coming horde of "African men and women" out of their countries.

    that´s right. this “we” is pathetic. As if every western reader of such a journal would be part of some kind of global administration. To think they are is a kind hubris.

  47. Just like they use the mosquito nets for fishnets, they would likely use condoms for some unintended purpose…maybe fill them with helium and fly the first African space shuttle.

  48. Obama actually pointed out on Friday that uncontrolled immigration to the EU was a major security risk.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-obama-unity-idUKKCN0XJ28O

    “I wouldn’t describe European unity as in a crisis but I would say it is under strain,” Obama told a joint news conference in London with British Prime Minister David Cameron.

    “We consider (it) a major national security issue that you have uncontrolled migration into Europe, not because these folks are coming to the United States but because if it destabilises Europe, our largest … trading partner, it’s going to be bad for our economy,” he said.

    • Replies: @jill
    This from a person who has stopped all U.S. interior immigration enforcement and instituted catch and release on our border. Both a liar and a hypocrite.
    , @Nico
    Well, what that shows is that Obama understands the destabilizing effect of Third World immigration to the West while yet relentlessly championing it. I.e., he knows he is actively working to undo the West.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Hmm. Does that mean that Europeans can actually do something about it now that the Magic Negro said it is a major national security issue?
  49. @Cicerone
    Yes, but not only there. Africans in big cities all over the continent have lower than average fertility (but probably also above average IQs). While in Kenya TFR is raound 3.8, it is just 2.4 in Nairobi. Similar thing with Lagos in Nigeria (4 against 5.5 children per woman) or, in an extreme form, Addis Abeba in Ethiopia (with just 1.5 children per woman against 4.8).

    So the first step of slowing down population growth should be to foster urbanization in Africa. Regarding Africa, I am not one of those believers in inborn r and k strategies. Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas), while other circumstances encourage Whites to breed like rabbits (Amish, ultraorthodox Jews).

    Urbanization in Africa…

    goodbye (still existent) environment**

    Africans on avgr are not capable to produce a decent urban environment, still worst if they were incentived to destroy natural environment of their places.

    A ”half-urbanization” could be the solution for Africa by now and one child policy, humane if possible. Create a ”urbanized”, fordist division labour in permanent transitional urban-countryside areas to reduce a fertility rates and without have the necessity to destroy the natural environment.

  50. @Anonymous Nephew
    Obama actually pointed out on Friday that uncontrolled immigration to the EU was a major security risk.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-obama-unity-idUKKCN0XJ28O

    "I wouldn't describe European unity as in a crisis but I would say it is under strain," Obama told a joint news conference in London with British Prime Minister David Cameron.

    "We consider (it) a major national security issue that you have uncontrolled migration into Europe, not because these folks are coming to the United States but because if it destabilises Europe, our largest ... trading partner, it's going to be bad for our economy," he said.
     

    This from a person who has stopped all U.S. interior immigration enforcement and instituted catch and release on our border. Both a liar and a hypocrite.

  51. @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    Interesting…which ones? And “better off” in what ways?

    • Replies: @Merema
    Kenya
    Ethiopia
    Ghana
    Senegal
    Sudan
    Tanzania
    Uganda
    Gabon
    Guinea
    Zambia
    Botwana
    Mozambique
    Rwanda
    Burundi
  52. @Anonymous
    'Retarded tier of the population'.

    Sorry. No.

    They are NOT retarded.
    Merely doing what every replicator has been doing since the dawn of time.
    Let's face - it's a wasteful strategy, but will be a 'successful' strategy in that they the 'meek' shall inherit the earth - by sheer force of numbers, if nothing else.

    No.
    The real 'retarded tier of the population' are Angela Merkel, the shitheads who run the EU, and last band least, The Economist magazine.

    “Retarded” in this case has a specific psychometric definition. Regrettably, the kind of stupidity you cite à la Merkel, the Eurocrats and The Economist does not currently correspond to any pathology in widely accepted psychiatric or psychological literature. (NB: I would personally be open to inventing a diagnosis specifically for them.)

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    Suicidal?
  53. @Discard
    Africans will starve, and a more capable race will take over.

    they move in hundreds of millions to Europe before starving…this is what we are seeing now, and is just the beginning

  54. America has been able to turn some black women into childless cat ladies – Condie Rice, Oprah. Maybe they could import this mojo into Africa along with a lot of cats.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "America has been able to turn some black women into childless cat ladies – Condie Rice, Oprah. Maybe they could import this mojo into Africa along with a lot of cats."

    Japan has a lot of cats that can be imported to Africa, after all a high percentage of Japanese women over the age of 40 are not mothers.
  55. @gruff
    I wonder what the Chinese are thinking. I'm sure they already have a plan. They need Africa's resources. They could also do with some land - what's Mandarin for Lebensraum?

    what’s Mandarin for Lebensraum?

    On a quick German-to-Chinese sentence translation via Google Translate, it’s 棲息地, pinyin qixidi, pron. approx. “chee-shee-dee.”

    I doubt you’ll be needing it though. Chinese TFR is much disputed, but certainly <1.5.

  56. @gokart-mozart
    "2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?"

    John Maynard Keynes, is that you? "In the long run, we'll all dead"?

    I won't be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.

    At some level, our “white guilt” is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it’s an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening. Civilizationally the result is debt which enslaves future generations. Individually it is consumption rather than investment of private inheritance. In both macro and micro it is giving away and tearing down of culture and institutions to disadvantage one’s own and favor the alien and invader. If our ancestors were evil then everything they built must be destroyed and/or given away to their “victims.”

    How long before a place like Greenfield Village is shut down and bulldozed to build instead a temple to worship the greatness of Islam or Sub-Saharan Africa? That this would be the exact opposite of Henry’s ideology (eg what he built in The Edison Institute schools) is the point. White heritage and culture is evil and must be demonized and destroyed. But since this is painful the more it can be forced onto the next generation, the better it is. Look at American elementary education today … are any white cultural practices taught? When was the last elementary school square dance? When was the last class of kids taught that white abolitionists ended slavery? Or taught about “indentured servitude” and the relative monetary value of white versus negro slaves in the South? Again, by demonizing and destroying the past they can more easily control the future.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    At some level, our “white guilt” is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it’s an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening.
     
    Stan, this is the best cogent, pithy description of this issue i've ever read. Very well done.

    While obviously prosperity, birth control technology changed the dynamic just on their own, i think 90% of the issue is just that white people have had their culture and pride ripped from them ... and hence stopped caring viscerally about reproducing themselves.

    You either *feel*, deep in your bones that you are passing on something great--your race and culture--to your children and the meaning of life is wrapped up in that civilizational baton passing exercise ... or it's all just a trivial "lifestyle" choice, in which case many people think "why bother".
    , @Drake

    At some level, our “white guilt” is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it’s an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening.
     
    I echo what AnotherDad said, this is well-put.
  57. @Clyde

    One gets the impression that these demographic projections just assume that do-gooding Aryan ninnies will continuously, and increasingly, take the food out of their own kids’ mouths to feed these ungrateful swart masses
     
    Only problem is that by the time it comes to food shortages too many third worlders, Muslims and Africans will have been let inside. These three groups already reproduce faster than the natives. Plus once they have left the third world and entered Europe, America etc. they feel wealthy (a wide array of social welfare benefits) and able to have more children than they would have had in Algeria, El Salvador and Lagos. Call this the third worlder's version of affordable family formation.

    The only illegals that are cheap and easy to deport are Mexicans. They are simply bussed back. All others are flown back which is expensive and belligerent singe males need to be shackled and or guarded. Just think of the logistics for Sweden if it decides to deport 100,000 failed Muslim asylum seekers which Sweden has already boasted they will do. These young Muslim males will riot and battle with the wimpified police and military who are average 15-20 years older than them, probably have families, and don't want to become permanently disabled street fighting with young Muslims who have nothing to lose.

    Europe's problems defending themselves from third world invaders is exemplified by that photo of the four pretty female defense ministers sitting together and giggling. Their militaries are equally ridiculous, plus are small. Euro-nations spend their money on health and social welfare programs, not armies.

    Europe still does have armies that would still easily defeat most 3rd world nations. This phenomena has nothing to do with military strength, you can have the strongest army ever, but if you have no will to defend your own nation it is pretty much pointless to have one. Even if somehow an army in Europe decided to fight, the US regime would no doubt intervene to protect the rights of the 3rd world migrants.

    In many ways, Europe already died many decades ago, asking to defend itself is like asking a rotting carcass to defend itself from maggots.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    "Europe" is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won't. We can already see this in the very different responses the different nations have made towards the "migrant crisis" (i.e. the invasion of settlers from Africa and the Middle East).

    Same is true of western nations as a whole. I don't see the US making it (in terms of non-white percentage of population, it's far past the point of any nation in Europe) but I do see Australia and New Zealand surviving as predominantly white countries.
  58. @Sailer has an interesting life
    I've sometimes wondered how many smarties would have more descendants had technology been better in the 20th century. Since higher IQ correlates with introspection and a more K selection for child-care, it stands to reason that *some* married couples were affected dearly when their offspring died during the nine months/first few years of birth. Enough to change the fertility rate in the old statistics perhaps?

    "Do my wife and I really want to go through the possible pain and anguish of losing another child? No. We shall not".

    Makes you wonder. :-(

    “Do my wife and I really want to go through the possible pain and anguish of losing another child? No. We shall not”.

    Or for Gen-X, born after the 1965 Immigration Act, “How can we in good conscience create children who will be forced to live in some hellish South Africa type dystopia?” Western Civilization has already been murdered, it is analog to the brain dead patient kept alive artificially. In its place we see only a crude mimicry like the African Dandy who plays at civilization like a four year old playing “Doctor” while we watch the life support mechanisms fail.

    http://youtu.be/W27PnUuXR_A

    • Agree: Triumph104
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.
  59. @SFG
    This seems one of the rare cases where the progressive prescription would actually work--I don't like feminism for obvious reasons, but it does drive down birth rates.

    The problem is societal feminism won’t take hold on a large scale over there. Most black men fall under the rubric of either raging heterosexual machines or extremely flaming homosexuals. There are very few intellectual heterosexual aesthetes (Laclos, Sade, Godwin), which seem to be prerequisites for true libertinism and therefore feminism to take hold, among them. The women of any society are not “liberated” without their menfolk’s consent.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Precisely what I came here to say. Feminism can only exist when the make population allows it. Western women often forget that when it really comes down to it their physical inferiority makes them everyone's bitch, and that they depend on men protecting any and all of their freedoms.
  60. @Anonymous Nephew
    Obama actually pointed out on Friday that uncontrolled immigration to the EU was a major security risk.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-obama-unity-idUKKCN0XJ28O

    "I wouldn't describe European unity as in a crisis but I would say it is under strain," Obama told a joint news conference in London with British Prime Minister David Cameron.

    "We consider (it) a major national security issue that you have uncontrolled migration into Europe, not because these folks are coming to the United States but because if it destabilises Europe, our largest ... trading partner, it's going to be bad for our economy," he said.
     

    Well, what that shows is that Obama understands the destabilizing effect of Third World immigration to the West while yet relentlessly championing it. I.e., he knows he is actively working to undo the West.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Well, what that shows is that Obama understands the destabilizing effect of Third World immigration to the West while yet relentlessly championing it. I.e., he knows he is actively working to undo the West.
     
    In perhaps the greatest irony in all human existence, whites will be a minority by the time the African exodus ramps up to Camp of the Saints human tsunami level. And since non-whites are blissfully free of whites' universalist altruism, it's highly probable they'll repel the African invasion. White Christians and SJW's will bleat and wail about the poor hungry and diseased Africans while the coalition of (by then) majority Latinos, along with Asians and American negroes use every tool at their disposal to keep America's declining resources and wealth for themselves.

    Just as Europe's Jews are demanding Europe admit the Muslims who will eventually destroy them, today American negroes demand open borders and admittance of the Latinos and Arabs who will return them to the bondage from which the whites freed them. Hard to believe that their blind hatred for whites and western civilization burns so brightly that it prevents seeing the inevitable end consequence of their behavior, but there we are regardless.
  61. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Paragraph by paragraph REALTALK(tm):

    Africans are fucking a lot, and very soon there will be too many of them in Africa.

    We’ve got to get their women to adopt feminism, look how well it’s worked for Mauritius and Tunisia.

    The aforementioned feminism must also target the fact that in Africa men are still not under their wives’ control, as in the enlightened West.

    The government must get involved.

    The Africans will be like a plague of locusts, consuming all in their path, unless they follow global trends and stop fucking, and soon.

    All the “experts” we’ve consulted up till now have been too scared of “RAYCISSSS” to give us the real numbers if the Africans keep fucking.

    The African continent is a shithole from every possible point, and the Africans therein will not hesitate to leave and settle elsewhere, once again like locusts, consuming all civilization (not to mention food and water!) in their path.

    We were wrong about giving them aid, it only helped them fuck more, leading to the current situation. Even their own “leaders” (read “tribal strongmen”) are worried about how bad things are.

    They’re uneducated about our Western ways, and we must help them reach enlightenment and 1become more like us.

    Demographers are too scared of “RAYCISS” to give anyone the straight numbers on their population, but they know exactly why the increase has happened.

    If they don’t stop fucking, we’re all screwed.

    Sounds downright reasonable when you put it this way, huh?

  62. If you can contribute just one dollar a day to African birth control, you can save thousands of lions, rhinos, giraffes,and many more helpless animals.

  63. @Steve Sailer
    Keynes' wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter's rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli's wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

    David Gest died the other day.

    Apart from marrying Liza Minelli, what was he famous for?

  64. To a lesbian with a hammer, every problem is a nail. Yes, I’m sure we can fix Africa’s problems with Feminism.

    OT: Every cartoon in the April 25th issue of The New Yorker is about Donald Trump (and vary in their degree of being ant-Trump). He really monopolizes the conversation.

  65. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    There’s this automatic assumption that women naturally don’t want many children at all. But is this true of African women? What’s the mentality of Africans? Africa had a natural balance of a primitive birth-death ratio that’s been upset by white missionary busybodies who’ve tilted the balance. Good intentions have created unforeseen consequences.
    By the way, has Bill Gates located his African Einstein by now?

  66. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    By that time whites won't be a majority either in north America, or even their ancestral continent, Europe.
    So, basically, 'everything's up for grabs'.

    Basically, politically speaking, there is a ‘singularity point’ at which the left party in virtually every western European state will hold unassailable permanent political power due to the sheer force of numbers of third world immigrant descended voters combined with the traditional lefty core vote.

    The UK is perilously close to that point – which uncontestably will be reached by 2050 at the very latest. New Labour came within an ace of achieving it prematurely.

    Now, *for certain* as a concession to the immigrants, and as part of general lefty dogma – which also, incidentally is shared by the The Economist/Kaplan/Merkel school of shitheadery, any vestige of ‘immigration control’ will be dissolved, and Africa can do what Africa is fated to do. So, it’s goodbye Europa.

    It is exceedingly unlikely that this scenario will not come to pass.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    The Economist/Kaplan/Merkel school of shitheadery, any vestige of ‘immigration control’ will be dissolved, and Africa can do what Africa is fated to do. So, it’s goodbye Europa.
     
    What remains remarkable to me is that in this day of YouTube and other lesser controlled media, when anybody having an Internet connection can see for themselves how Africans choose to live despite billions of foreign aid dollars and western blueprints, so many expend so much time and energy trying to convince (themselves?) others that "Africans are just exactly like us except for dark skin tone." You can see for yourself their tech prowess in building aircraft from pig iron and lawnmower motors (along with their shock when such contraptions fail to take flight). You can see their public health expertise with open sewers they send their children to play in and from which they draw drinking water. You can observe their medical brilliance as they try to get high from HIV/AIDS drugs then rape infants or ingest albino parts to cure their disease. Witness how they manage agriculture by destroying all the productive (white owned) farms. Marvel at their efficient markets as tons of (white donated) food rots and becomes infested with vermin while they squeeze out starving infant after starving infant. And year after year the evidence mountain grows higher while the SJW's scream louder and louder that anyone who notices a cognitive deficiency is an evil racist. Anyone suggesting curbs on reproduction to prevent the inevitable starvation and disease of billions is a racist who must be silenced while those who enable and ensure the impending catastrophe (like Bill Gates) is a Saint.

    We truly live in an age of insanity. The best case scenario for any realist is to hope that northeast Asia and Eurasia may somehow survive when Western Europe and North America are utterly destroyed.
    , @celt darnell
    The UK is perilously close to that point – which uncontestably will be reached by 2050 at the very latest. New Labour came within an ace of achieving it prematurely.

    Speaking as someone who actually lives in the UK, there is nothing "uncontestable" about the thesis the UK will reach the "tipping point" where there are too many traditional left-wing voters and ethnic minorities to prevent the permanent dominance of the left.

    One, if immigration is either halted or even sharply reduced, the immigrant population's (whose reproduction rates start to decline the longer they are in the UK) numbers will stabilize and decline.

    Two, the traditional left-wing voters are not a rock-solid monolith -- UKIP has peeled off a significant number of them -- to everyone's surprise.

    Three, there is increasing opposition to immigration in the UK (just as there is in the US, which is much further down the road). Past trends are not necessarily true in the present or in the future.

    Though yes, as with the rest of the West the British electorate needs to wake up.

    Come June 23 we'll find out how many of us are actually awake.

  67. @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    Anonymous, The Wall Street Journal’s list of the world’s top 25 worst places to live includes 23 countries on the African continent. The two non African countries are Haiti and Afghanistan. The UN has a similar list with similar results.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Anonymous, The Wall Street Journal’s list of the world’s top 25 worst places to live includes 23 countries on the African continent. The two non African countries are Haiti and Afghanistan. The UN has a similar list with similar results."

    24 out of the 25 worst countries to live in are Negroid nations and the remaining 1 is a Muslim nation.

    And what are the two demographic groups that Europe lets in the most? Muslims and Negroids.

    It's like the European elites got together to brainstorm who are the most primitive and unassimilable Nonwhite groups in the world and how do we get as many of them into Europe as possible.
  68. @Steve Sailer
    Fertility among the English upper middle class (e.g., Darwin's kids) was very low in the two generations after Galton started worrying about it, but then improved in the middle of the 20th Century. Perhaps that was related to the introduction of antibiotics around 1945?

    Steve, Might also have to do with the division of property, as in, leave a generous estate to fewer, than a meager estate to many. Isn’t part of the Dowton Abby series on PBS.

  69. @Steve Sailer
    Keynes' wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter's rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli's wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

    Actually, there is no evidence that Keynes’ wife ever miscarried, only speculation from Keynes’ biographer, which is pooh-poohed by the wife’s biographer, who presumably would be more in the know.

    Keynes was not only gay, but an enthusiastic pedophile. To compound his contemptible character, he was also a communist sympathizer.

    Undoubtedly his continued hero worship in the social science arena owes much to his left wing leanings, and the fawning admiration of similarly deluded so-called “economists” and ideologues over the years. It’s hard to come up with any other explanation why his economic theories, which have been proven to be crucially flawed, continue to walk the earth like zombies, despite having stakes driven through their hearts again and again.

    • Replies: @anon

    It’s hard to come up with any other explanation why his economic theories, which have been proven to be crucially flawed, continue to walk the earth like zombies, despite having stakes driven through their hearts again and again.
     
    Nonsense.

    The level of demand in the economy being critical is simply obvious. The banking mafia don't like that aspect because it points so directly at the flaw in their desire for subsistence level wages.

    The things wrong with Keynsianism are that he accepts the consequences of the banking mafia's control of money i.e.
    a) he's speaking to how to manage boom and bust when boom and bust is a function of fractional reserve banking
    b) govts borrowing imaginary money from banks and paying it back with interest is ludicrous when they could simply create the money themselves (like the constitution says).

    As usual the banking mafia want it both ways. They want Keynesianism as an excuse for govt borrowing and at the same time attack it for silently pointing a big fat finger at why the cheap labor lobby is wrecking the economy.
  70. Europe’s weakening resolve to keep Africans out could, perversely, encourage Africans to have more children: have as many as possible so as to maximize the chance that at least one makes it to Europe, from where he can send money back to support the clan.

    The sea turtle strategy.

  71. @SFG
    This seems one of the rare cases where the progressive prescription would actually work--I don't like feminism for obvious reasons, but it does drive down birth rates.

    It doesn’t have to be Feminism, with the capital F. It just means women exercise an iron will when it comes to intercourse. There’s still plenty of joy to be had in a marriage even if there’s no transfer of male fluids. We had this discussion on a thread a few months ago about contraception and what wives and girlfriends did in the era before the pill/easy abortion/comfortable condoms/unmarried childbearing being acceptable, etc. It’s the ability to say NO to the fluids entering. Please tell me you don’t think that’s the essence of feminism.

    Anyway, this all assumes that people are reasonably sober during the process. Perhaps that’s the unmentioned variable in the mix.

    Also: could be that African women just really like babies. This American woman really likes them too. Just not an overwhelming number of them.

  72. It’s gonna be a real hard sell with millions of elderly around the globe pushed unto the streets and left to die because their respective governments stole their pensions, the same pensions that were supposed to protect the elderly in old age were stolen for corporate growth of 3rd world immigrant subsidies.

    Or in Africa -your local UN approved dictator.

    Africans won’t buy that annuity, they’ll take the security of many children upfront instead because government is a proven liar.

    To fix the endless African population explosion, the US and EU should boot all their African invaders and build a wall.

  73. @gruff
    I wonder what the Chinese are thinking. I'm sure they already have a plan. They need Africa's resources. They could also do with some land - what's Mandarin for Lebensraum?

    what’s Mandarin for Lebensraum?

    Awstrayria

  74. @fox
    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    Contraception is not the primary factor that limits human fertility. European fertility began declining north and west of the Hajnal line as early as the 16th century. Demographers still argue the details of why but delayed age at marriage and various controls on sexual gratification clearly played a role. The only readily available contraceptive techniques during the first two hundred years or so of the European decline were abstinence and coitus interruptus.

    The article, of course, would not mention possible racial and genetic causes for sub-Saharan Africans’ high fertility rates, e.g., Rushton’s r-K theory. If the philoprogenitive characteristics of sub-Saharan Africans have even a partially inherited basis, barring a massive imposition of positive Malthusian checks, the rest of the world is doomed.

    Finally, anyone who has spent much time in central African villages has to laugh at the idea that women in these villages need further empowerment, at least as defined by today’s first world feminists. In Bantu cultures the women do essentially all the real work and effectively control all the important resources. The men squat around all day playing Mancala and gambling imaginary possessions back and forth. Marriage is matrilocal. Households are often composed of three generations of women living together and visited by their current sexual partners. Women compete for men as sexual partners and dump them as soon as they get bored. Actually it’s a lot like Negro underclass life in the developed world but sans gangs, firearms, and drugs.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "Households are often composed of three generations of women living together and visited by their current sexual partners. Women compete for men as sexual partners and dump them as soon as they get bored. Actually it’s a lot like Negro underclass life in the developed world but sans gangs, firearms, and drugs."
     
    It's not just the developed world's Negro underclass life that is like that now. Seen the white underclass lately?

    It's been a while since I was in Africa, but when I was I do recall seeing one woman who lived as you describe, but she was something of an outcast living at the fringe of the village. But as with so many things nowadays, the fringe has become the core, so maybe whole villages are like that now. Well, anyway if this is the new female-empowered/liberated Africa, then for purposes of our discussion, the real question is how does the TFR compare to the old male-empowered/patriarchal Africa?
  75. Steve, am I just flattering myself to think it I’m the one who tipped you off to this article?

    If so, you might have incorrectly assumed that my 16 billion…

    Africa’s current rate of population growth implies not four billion Africans by 2100 but 16 billion

    …was a typo. But it was not. The paper version of this article has a graph that shows several forecasts for Africa’s population in 2100. 16 billion is the forecast that assumes today’s annual rate of growth persists.

    • Replies: @Abelard Lindsey
    16 billion Africans??!! Good God!

    If so, African is like a human volcano that spews out an infinite number of human beings. Good lord!

    , @Jefferson
    "Steve, am I just flattering myself to think it I’m the one who tipped you off to this article?

    If so, you might have incorrectly assumed that my 16 billion…

    Africa’s current rate of population growth implies not four billion Africans by 2100 but 16 billion

    …was a typo. But it was not. The paper version of this article has a graph that shows several forecasts for Africa’s population in 2100. 16 billion is the forecast that assumes today’s annual rate of growth persists."

    So the average Sub Saharan family is producing more children than the average Mormon family, the average Hasidic family, the average Orthodox family, and the average ultra religious Evangelical family.

    When White people produce a shitload of kids, 9 times out of 10 they are religious on steroids.

    Black people do not have to be motivated by religion at all to produce a shitload of kids. Even the most secular Agnostic/Atheist Blacks produce a shitload of kids.

    This is why I wish Europeans were more religious and less Agnostic/Atheist, because only religion motivates White people to start YUGE families.

  76. @Clyde

    One gets the impression that these demographic projections just assume that do-gooding Aryan ninnies will continuously, and increasingly, take the food out of their own kids’ mouths to feed these ungrateful swart masses
     
    Only problem is that by the time it comes to food shortages too many third worlders, Muslims and Africans will have been let inside. These three groups already reproduce faster than the natives. Plus once they have left the third world and entered Europe, America etc. they feel wealthy (a wide array of social welfare benefits) and able to have more children than they would have had in Algeria, El Salvador and Lagos. Call this the third worlder's version of affordable family formation.

    The only illegals that are cheap and easy to deport are Mexicans. They are simply bussed back. All others are flown back which is expensive and belligerent singe males need to be shackled and or guarded. Just think of the logistics for Sweden if it decides to deport 100,000 failed Muslim asylum seekers which Sweden has already boasted they will do. These young Muslim males will riot and battle with the wimpified police and military who are average 15-20 years older than them, probably have families, and don't want to become permanently disabled street fighting with young Muslims who have nothing to lose.

    Europe's problems defending themselves from third world invaders is exemplified by that photo of the four pretty female defense ministers sitting together and giggling. Their militaries are equally ridiculous, plus are small. Euro-nations spend their money on health and social welfare programs, not armies.

    Europe’s problems defending themselves from third world invaders is exemplified by that photo of the four pretty female defense ministers sitting together and giggling.

    And the Russian Fed’s currrent seat-warmer is a half-Turk who’s never seen combat. He’s a civil engineer who ascended the greasy pole through their version of FEMA. Likes a nice snazzy uniform or five, though. With plenty of scrambled egg.

    • Replies: @5371
    Tuva isn't Turkish in any sense.
  77. @Anonymous
    So you're going to approach some african leaders and say "We have a big problem! If you don't make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to expand, dwarf our entire civilization, and end up ruling the world! You must help us stop it!"

    How could they respond with anything other than some version of "Sounds good to me" ?

    Gee, don't you think we could offer some other incentive? Or maybe find some way to make it their problem instead of our problem?

    I have seen the idea of a genetically targeted anti-fertility virus pop up on more than one web site recently. The topic has been raised — definitely not by me — in other venues during several exchanges I’ve recently had with persons who definitely cannot be characterized as conservative or racist. I think that this is as bad an idea as any other form of biological warfare, since ooner or later your side will be hoist by a similar petard.

    But if the Negro inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa and their “big man” leaders don’t start getting their act together soon, I envision China’s leaders, who are much more hard-headed and ultra-rational than the West’s, deciding that enough is enough and good land should not be wasted on losers. The decline or demographic swamping of the West would probably influence such a decision. Probably too late for Europe and America but vae victis.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    I envision China’s leaders, who are much more hard-headed and ultra-rational than the West’s, deciding that enough is enough and good land should not be wasted on losers.
     
    I've had the same thought. While Europe is destroying itself importing Africans the Chinese won't be doing anything other than what they need to do to extract the resources they need. But when the West declines into irrelevance, the Chinese will be free to "organize" Africa however they see fit. That doesn't necessarily mean taking it over, colonization, genocide or anything else--though all those are on the table. They'll just do whatever they need to do for the goals they have.
  78. @Anonymous
    The New Scientist magazine - a quirky, readable, general science British weekly magazine devoted its lead article to 'why immigration is so great' the other week.
    Curiously, there wasn't even the merest whiff of 'science' as generally understood in the whole article.

    New Scientist used to be good, went to the dogs at least 20 years ago, stopped reading it. It went on the Guardian trajectory, until it ended up as an SJW/Greenie/socialworker comic that nobody looks at, probably arriving there before the Graun did. Notoriously devoid of actual Science.

  79. @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    Name a dozen along with supporting 1960-1970 versus 2000-2010 statistics. And be sure to provide links/sources so we know you are not — as I strongly suspect — just pulling all this out from a smelly place where the sun don’t shine.

  80. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Keynes' wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter's rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli's wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

    A miscarriage is Nature’s way of saying, “Something is wrong with the health of the mother or child, and this pregnancy is being terminated.” People forget about this factor.

    Elites of that era could knock back enough booze to damage a fetus, or their own eggs or sperm. They often ate idiotic diets of caviar and oysters while forgetting about vegetables and fruits. In this day and age, elites have the ability to add enough hard drugs to the mix to destroy their fertility forever. Talent and IQ do nothing if you want to have a child and choose to eat, drug, or drink like an idiot or want to breed with someone else who does.

  81. @fox
    religious right has to take major blame for this.

    I’m one of the pro-life religious right. So how is it I have managed to have ZERO unwanted children?

  82. @Diversity is Wrong
    Some interesting racial commentary from Bill Maher --

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLD2xzAX8Aw

    Clearly Maher has been getting a whiff of alt-right Realtalk®, and has decided that it is time to bring his feebleminded followers back to within throwing distance of reality, before they (and he) drift into utter self-parody.

  83. African-decent people in Brazil and the Caribbean have relatively low fertility rates, around 2.1 in most cases. Whatever has happened in these society perhaps can be transplanted into African societies.

  84. @Anonymous Nephew
    Obama actually pointed out on Friday that uncontrolled immigration to the EU was a major security risk.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-obama-unity-idUKKCN0XJ28O

    "I wouldn't describe European unity as in a crisis but I would say it is under strain," Obama told a joint news conference in London with British Prime Minister David Cameron.

    "We consider (it) a major national security issue that you have uncontrolled migration into Europe, not because these folks are coming to the United States but because if it destabilises Europe, our largest ... trading partner, it's going to be bad for our economy," he said.
     

    Hmm. Does that mean that Europeans can actually do something about it now that the Magic Negro said it is a major national security issue?

  85. @International Jew
    Steve, am I just flattering myself to think it I'm the one who tipped you off to this article?

    If so, you might have incorrectly assumed that my 16 billion...

    Africa’s current rate of population growth implies not four billion Africans by 2100 but 16 billion
     
    ...was a typo. But it was not. The paper version of this article has a graph that shows several forecasts for Africa's population in 2100. 16 billion is the forecast that assumes today's annual rate of growth persists.

    16 billion Africans??!! Good God!

    If so, African is like a human volcano that spews out an infinite number of human beings. Good lord!

  86. “2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?”

    “No need for us to work on this cathedral folks. You can all go home. We’d all be dead by the time we could finish it.”

    Perhaps an important perspective to lose.

  87. “Anti-racist” conditioning has completely captured the western mind. For example, it is remarkable to me that liberals cannot comprehend that open immigration from the third world means the end of their social welfare state. Together the two are bankruptcy. “But Anti-racist” impulses are now so strong that they cannot be overcome by thought. Actually helping invaders destroy your life work is as much of a reflex action now as was the salivation of Pavlov’s dogs.

  88. @fox
    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    Isn’t the problem with abortion–aside from the whole killing babies aspect–I mean, the social problem with abortion, isn’t it that it is the more cognitively capable who avail themselves of it, leading to their offspring being erased, while the cognitive underclass breeds ever more recklessly?

    As I recall, this was the essence of Sailer’s debunking of Levitt’s abortion-reduces-crime meme.

    • Replies: @Triumph104
    Abortions are due to sheer laziness and cultural acceptance. In the US black women account for 36 percent of all abortions.

    In 1974 Austria implemented abortion laws that were nearly identical to the US after the 1973 Roe v Wade decision. Austria has an abortion rate of 3 percent and fertility rate of 1.44 children per woman. The US has an abortion rate of 22 percent and 1.88 children per women. Austrian women control pregnancies with birth control.

    Heck, abortion is illegal in Brazil and most of Latin America and the fertility rate is 1.81 for Brazil and under 2.5 for Latin America.

  89. @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    A dozen? Botswana, yes. But, what other countries are better off?

  90. TG says:
    @Dave Sliny
    South Africans are pretty dumb, but the fertility rate has plunged despite this. It's extremely unlikely that the rest of Africa won't follow suit. Although Idi Amin wannabe Julius Malema did recently say that African women should have more children, there was a chilly reception.

    Yes the native South African fertility rate was low – and that’s why the South African governments, both white and black, have used massive immigration from African nations with higher fertility rates to cancel it out.

    Immigration does not just move people around – it maximizes total population growth by canceling the effects of low fertility in one place. Given the power of exponential growth, in a world with no borders just one Bangladesh or Niger could easily drag down the entire rest of the world…

    So yes to empowering women, and yes to available birth control, but the main issue is being missed.

    It the pro-population growth policies of the elites that are responsible. Remember, while Africa’s population was starting to soar, we had all these esteemed western economists insisting that more people were ALWAYS better and that anyone saying different was a racist or fascist or something. Why are we blaming poor Africans for getting it wrong, when all the pundits at Harvard and Chicago and the New York Times etc. have spent the last half-century insisting that they were getting it right?

    Remember Syria: Assad insisted that more people were always better, and he made the sale and possession of any form of birth control illegal, and he got the population to double every 18 years… and that didn’t work out so well. It is intrusive government policies that treat people like cattle, and push them to breed ever more in order to increase profits that is the main issue.

    Empower women? Sure. But first disempower governments. Only encourage people to be careful not to have more children than they can reasonably support. The population should be set by the individual decisions of the people themselves, not ivory-tower academics insisting that the world will end if people don’t have ‘enough’ children as determined by their own warped economic models…

    • Replies: @tris

    Yes the native South African fertility rate was low – and that’s why the South African governments, both white and black, have used massive immigration from African nations with higher fertility rates to cancel it out.
     
    The white South African gov was serving the interests of mostly Tribe-run mines, who wanted cheap, compliant labor without family issues. They sourced their laborers from other southern African countries in order to undercut South African labor rates, and housed them in giant worker hostels, which were a cesspit of crime and illegal activities. I'm guessing that employing foreign laborers also helped reduce any liability issues due to the high rate of mine-related deaths, a result of those mining bosses minimizing safety for profits. The mines have unfortunately been one of the most destructive political, economic, and social forces in South Africa since forever. Apart from cheap labor for mines, the white gov would have been insane to import masses of blacks.

    The black gov allowed massive numbers of blacks to cross into South Africa simply because they were no longer able to maintain the effective border protection force which existed under white South Africa, having gutted the once formidable army. In addition to that, it was a continuation of the policy advocated by Desmond Tutu, to flood the country with blacks in order to render whites irrelevant.
  91. @gokart-mozart
    "2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?"

    John Maynard Keynes, is that you? "In the long run, we'll all dead"?

    I won't be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.

    “I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.”

    You might not have any at the rate White people are producing children these days.

  92. @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    “At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago”

    A dozen???

    Name 2.

  93. @Buffalo Joe
    Anonymous, The Wall Street Journal's list of the world's top 25 worst places to live includes 23 countries on the African continent. The two non African countries are Haiti and Afghanistan. The UN has a similar list with similar results.

    “Anonymous, The Wall Street Journal’s list of the world’s top 25 worst places to live includes 23 countries on the African continent. The two non African countries are Haiti and Afghanistan. The UN has a similar list with similar results.”

    24 out of the 25 worst countries to live in are Negroid nations and the remaining 1 is a Muslim nation.

    And what are the two demographic groups that Europe lets in the most? Muslims and Negroids.

    It’s like the European elites got together to brainstorm who are the most primitive and unassimilable Nonwhite groups in the world and how do we get as many of them into Europe as possible.

  94. @SFG
    This seems one of the rare cases where the progressive prescription would actually work--I don't like feminism for obvious reasons, but it does drive down birth rates.

    I think you’ve hit on a piece of a more general axiom:

    Conservatism at home; Progressiveism for your opponents/competitors.

    You know, sort of like the Eskimos do.

    Or to put it in Sailer/Derbyshire-speak: Conservatism in one country.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    A corollary of the Conservative-at-home-Progressive-abroad axiom is that in reality, everyone is Conservative about themselves. The only difference between Progs and Conservatives is that Conservatives allow others to be Conservatives about themselves as well; Progs insist everyone else be Progressive while they remain self-conservative (usually while trying to camouflage their own conservative actions, as Steve has documented so thoroughly in real estate).

    Incidentally, I think this explains the apparent "leapfrogging loyalties" of Liberals/Progressives that has appeared as a baffling theme on this blog and elsewhere. In reality, Libs/Progs don't have any loyalty at all. Their only "loyalty" is hyper-selfish. Their leapfrogging "concern" for others is just a put-on meant to extort more self-destructively Proggish behavior from their near competitors. As with any game of brinkmanship, occasionally a participant goes too far and falls over the brink, but don't let that distract you from what is actually going on.

    Liberals are notorious back-stabbers.
  95. @International Jew
    Steve, am I just flattering myself to think it I'm the one who tipped you off to this article?

    If so, you might have incorrectly assumed that my 16 billion...

    Africa’s current rate of population growth implies not four billion Africans by 2100 but 16 billion
     
    ...was a typo. But it was not. The paper version of this article has a graph that shows several forecasts for Africa's population in 2100. 16 billion is the forecast that assumes today's annual rate of growth persists.

    “Steve, am I just flattering myself to think it I’m the one who tipped you off to this article?

    If so, you might have incorrectly assumed that my 16 billion…

    Africa’s current rate of population growth implies not four billion Africans by 2100 but 16 billion

    …was a typo. But it was not. The paper version of this article has a graph that shows several forecasts for Africa’s population in 2100. 16 billion is the forecast that assumes today’s annual rate of growth persists.”

    So the average Sub Saharan family is producing more children than the average Mormon family, the average Hasidic family, the average Orthodox family, and the average ultra religious Evangelical family.

    When White people produce a shitload of kids, 9 times out of 10 they are religious on steroids.

    Black people do not have to be motivated by religion at all to produce a shitload of kids. Even the most secular Agnostic/Atheist Blacks produce a shitload of kids.

    This is why I wish Europeans were more religious and less Agnostic/Atheist, because only religion motivates White people to start YUGE families.

    • Replies: @bomag

    ...because only religion motivates White people to start YUGE families.
     
    I'd like to win the War of the Cradle, but I'd more rather have some elbow room.
  96. Ed says:
    @Dave Sliny
    South Africans are pretty dumb, but the fertility rate has plunged despite this. It's extremely unlikely that the rest of Africa won't follow suit. Although Idi Amin wannabe Julius Malema did recently say that African women should have more children, there was a chilly reception.

    Using South Africa, the whitest African country, as a barometer for the rest of Africa is misguided. Black South Africans are best compared to US blacks. Both are African descended people’s living in countries that are dominated at least economically by whites. The South African black has to navigate in at the very least a quasi European enviroment other Africans do not.

    • Replies: @tris

    The South African black has to navigate in at the very least a quasi European enviroment other Africans do not.
     
    The ANC gov is doing everything in its power to remove that European influence through its various forms of indigenization, known as BEE, BBBEE, and other economically destructive and utterly racist affirmative action programs. Even the code of law is now officially being changed from Roman-Dutch to African, whatever that means. Basically the blacks want the economic goodies, but loathe the cultural framework/message which accompanies them.
  97. 6 billion Africans is nothing to worry about for Africans. They know they can always just take over the nerd frathouses–i.e. Europe and North America–and the nerds will offer no resistance.

  98. @Diversity is Wrong
    Some interesting racial commentary from Bill Maher --

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLD2xzAX8Aw

    I watched Maher this morning. This was interesting since he is particularly hard left in matters of race (psst…except for Israel) and generally propagandizes as such. Perhaps this signals a trend.

  99. @Nico
    Prophylactics are most likely to be used effectively by the reasonably intelligent and educated (by world standards). Most Africans fall under neither rubric; intuitively a proliferation of condoms would worsen the already bad K-to-r ratio (yes, I know that's not a real concept, but bear with me). It is not at all clear that the continent can move forward into modernity unless some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population.

    “some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population”

    No, that will lead to population reduction willy-nilly. What is needed is popularization of alcohol and narcotics. They are effective population filters based on experience in the rest of the world.

  100. @Almost Missouri
    I think you've hit on a piece of a more general axiom:

    Conservatism at home; Progressiveism for your opponents/competitors.

    You know, sort of like the Eskimos do.

    Or to put it in Sailer/Derbyshire-speak: Conservatism in one country.

    A corollary of the Conservative-at-home-Progressive-abroad axiom is that in reality, everyone is Conservative about themselves. The only difference between Progs and Conservatives is that Conservatives allow others to be Conservatives about themselves as well; Progs insist everyone else be Progressive while they remain self-conservative (usually while trying to camouflage their own conservative actions, as Steve has documented so thoroughly in real estate).

    Incidentally, I think this explains the apparent “leapfrogging loyalties” of Liberals/Progressives that has appeared as a baffling theme on this blog and elsewhere. In reality, Libs/Progs don’t have any loyalty at all. Their only “loyalty” is hyper-selfish. Their leapfrogging “concern” for others is just a put-on meant to extort more self-destructively Proggish behavior from their near competitors. As with any game of brinkmanship, occasionally a participant goes too far and falls over the brink, but don’t let that distract you from what is actually going on.

    Liberals are notorious back-stabbers.

  101. all the world’s problems could be solved with condoms. if that doesn’t work. an acceptance of nuclear energy. i’m not convinced japan is in a death spiral. we don’t need 7 billion people to provide for 7 billion people. why all the hand wringing about global warming? sure. we probably can feed 10 billion people. but is that desirable?

    • Agree: Triumph104
  102. @Erik Sieven
    "Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas)"
    the point concerning the Americas is good, but Ethiopia is a bad example. Ethiopians are not really subsaharan Africans, but rather mixed people. In a way they are dark skinned caucasians.

    Only the Amharic segment of the population, from which Haile Sellasie was derived, as well as the old emperors of Ethiopia. A large part of the population is Somali, acquired by imperial conquest.

  103. @eah
    One thing we need

    No, we don't really "need" that -- we don't really need "honest academic research into how African men and women think" -- I suppose if you're into that kind of thing, it might be interesting -- but what's really necessary is that white people, particularly white Europeans, honestly face up to the reality of HBD, stop fearing being called names, and have the guts to keep this coming horde of "African men and women" out of their countries.

    “stop fearing being called names”- The most depressing part about that is it’s other white people doing the name calling.
    We’re afraid of other white people calling us bad names, and thus the West collapses.

  104. The “great stories” of Prof Harpending – were they only verbal or were they written down and if so where?

  105. @Nico
    Well, what that shows is that Obama understands the destabilizing effect of Third World immigration to the West while yet relentlessly championing it. I.e., he knows he is actively working to undo the West.

    Well, what that shows is that Obama understands the destabilizing effect of Third World immigration to the West while yet relentlessly championing it. I.e., he knows he is actively working to undo the West.

    In perhaps the greatest irony in all human existence, whites will be a minority by the time the African exodus ramps up to Camp of the Saints human tsunami level. And since non-whites are blissfully free of whites’ universalist altruism, it’s highly probable they’ll repel the African invasion. White Christians and SJW’s will bleat and wail about the poor hungry and diseased Africans while the coalition of (by then) majority Latinos, along with Asians and American negroes use every tool at their disposal to keep America’s declining resources and wealth for themselves.

    Just as Europe’s Jews are demanding Europe admit the Muslims who will eventually destroy them, today American negroes demand open borders and admittance of the Latinos and Arabs who will return them to the bondage from which the whites freed them. Hard to believe that their blind hatred for whites and western civilization burns so brightly that it prevents seeing the inevitable end consequence of their behavior, but there we are regardless.

    • Replies: @Nico
    Most of that hatred was cultivated by white liberals (and not only Jews, as some would argue). Although I have to say you might be surprised at the number of PJs who would be happy never to hear Spanish spoken north of the Rio Grande again.
  106. @Erik Sieven
    "Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas)"
    the point concerning the Americas is good, but Ethiopia is a bad example. Ethiopians are not really subsaharan Africans, but rather mixed people. In a way they are dark skinned caucasians.

    “Ethiopians are not really subsaharan Africans, but rather mixed people. In a way they are dark skinned caucasians.”

    Since Ethiopians they are racially mixed, how can they be dark skin Caucasians? Are African Americans dark skin Caucasians as well? After all they are not pure Sub Saharans.

    And if Ethiopians are dark skin Caucasians, why don’t most of them have straightish hair like Indians? Ethiopian hair texture falls within the range of Negroid hair texture.

    • Replies: @anon
    If people with Caucasian bone structure and light skin moved too far south for long enough they might get darker over time if both the bone structure and darker skin were selected for.
  107. @Cicerone
    Yes, but not only there. Africans in big cities all over the continent have lower than average fertility (but probably also above average IQs). While in Kenya TFR is raound 3.8, it is just 2.4 in Nairobi. Similar thing with Lagos in Nigeria (4 against 5.5 children per woman) or, in an extreme form, Addis Abeba in Ethiopia (with just 1.5 children per woman against 4.8).

    So the first step of slowing down population growth should be to foster urbanization in Africa. Regarding Africa, I am not one of those believers in inborn r and k strategies. Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas), while other circumstances encourage Whites to breed like rabbits (Amish, ultraorthodox Jews).

    Good point, but two questions:

    1) How do you get them into the cities in the first place?

    People only urbanize when they perceive that there are greater opportunities for them in the cities than on the farm. Specifically, you want jobs that an average African woman is capable of doing without much training, like sewing garments for Nike or whoever in a sweatshop. This is what drove down fertility in Bangladesh, among other places. It wasn’t the introduction of birth control in itself, it was the realization among husbands that their wife was worth more to them working in a sweatshop than staying at home with twelve kids. Once that epiphany occurred, the husbands were the ones pushing for birth control and smaller families as much as the wives.

    Of course in theory these sorts of jobs should have existed en mass in Africa for some time, but as far as I know, they don’t. I don’t know about you, but my closet contains plenty of stuff from Vietnam, Bangladesh etc, but nothing from sub-Saharan Africa. Maybe the African governments just aren’t capable of maintaining the infrastructure necessary(ports etc) to make them attractive, despite the cheap cost of labour. Maybe there’s too much corruption.

    Either way, if Africa doesn’t have these sorts of jobs in 2016, why should they in 2040 or 2060? Do we need to wait until the price of labour in Asia and South America is equal to that of North America and Europe before companies are willing to invest in sub-Saharan Africa for something other than natural resources?

    2) With the population projects we’re seeing, urbanization in Africa means Asia-style mega-cities. You can have cities of twenty million people when they’re filled with Chinese, Japanese or Indians and they may be unpleasant but they can remain functional. Higher density of blacks mean a higher density of young black men, which leads to more violence. How large can a city populated exclusively by blacks be without turning into a sort of megapolis Baltimore? Who’d want to urbanize to that?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I have shirts sewn in Africa.
    , @Triumph104

    Maybe the African governments just aren’t capable of maintaining the infrastructure necessary(ports etc) to make them attractive, despite the cheap cost of labour. Maybe there’s too much corruption.
     
    Besides corruption many African countries have problems with basic services like water, electricity, and roads, also disease, tribalism, Muslim insurgents, unstable governments, etc. However, during the recent economic crisis many white Portuguese moved to Angola and Mozambique for better opportunities so there might be a few bright spots.

    African countries seem to lack the entrepreneurial talent to make a network of businesses run smoothly. In 1972, Idi Amin kicked out all of the Indians, the successful merchant class of Uganda. Years later, after the economy had been run into the ground, the new leader of Uganda asked the Indians to come back.

    https://youtu.be/L4abS0PhRzQ?t=133

  108. @Anonymous
    Basically, politically speaking, there is a 'singularity point' at which the left party in virtually every western European state will hold unassailable permanent political power due to the sheer force of numbers of third world immigrant descended voters combined with the traditional lefty core vote.

    The UK is perilously close to that point - which uncontestably will be reached by 2050 at the very latest. New Labour came within an ace of achieving it prematurely.

    Now, *for certain* as a concession to the immigrants, and as part of general lefty dogma - which also, incidentally is shared by the The Economist/Kaplan/Merkel school of shitheadery, any vestige of 'immigration control' will be dissolved, and Africa can do what Africa is fated to do. So, it's goodbye Europa.

    It is exceedingly unlikely that this scenario will not come to pass.

    The Economist/Kaplan/Merkel school of shitheadery, any vestige of ‘immigration control’ will be dissolved, and Africa can do what Africa is fated to do. So, it’s goodbye Europa.

    What remains remarkable to me is that in this day of YouTube and other lesser controlled media, when anybody having an Internet connection can see for themselves how Africans choose to live despite billions of foreign aid dollars and western blueprints, so many expend so much time and energy trying to convince (themselves?) others that “Africans are just exactly like us except for dark skin tone.” You can see for yourself their tech prowess in building aircraft from pig iron and lawnmower motors (along with their shock when such contraptions fail to take flight). You can see their public health expertise with open sewers they send their children to play in and from which they draw drinking water. You can observe their medical brilliance as they try to get high from HIV/AIDS drugs then rape infants or ingest albino parts to cure their disease. Witness how they manage agriculture by destroying all the productive (white owned) farms. Marvel at their efficient markets as tons of (white donated) food rots and becomes infested with vermin while they squeeze out starving infant after starving infant. And year after year the evidence mountain grows higher while the SJW’s scream louder and louder that anyone who notices a cognitive deficiency is an evil racist. Anyone suggesting curbs on reproduction to prevent the inevitable starvation and disease of billions is a racist who must be silenced while those who enable and ensure the impending catastrophe (like Bill Gates) is a Saint.

    We truly live in an age of insanity. The best case scenario for any realist is to hope that northeast Asia and Eurasia may somehow survive when Western Europe and North America are utterly destroyed.

  109. @Jack D
    America has been able to turn some black women into childless cat ladies - Condie Rice, Oprah. Maybe they could import this mojo into Africa along with a lot of cats.

    “America has been able to turn some black women into childless cat ladies – Condie Rice, Oprah. Maybe they could import this mojo into Africa along with a lot of cats.”

    Japan has a lot of cats that can be imported to Africa, after all a high percentage of Japanese women over the age of 40 are not mothers.

  110. @Jefferson
    By 2100, there will be massive White flight from Earth to Mars. Mars will be gentrified. Like Doug Quaid says in Total Recall, get your ass to Mars.

    > By 2100, there will be massive White flight from Earth to Mars.

    Mars is a pit. Makes the Sahara or the arctic tundra look like Iowa farmland.

    And, of course, whites can live in really nice real estate at a maybe ten orders of magnitude cheaper by simply keeping the garbage out of the land they have.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    Mars is a pit. Makes the Sahara or the arctic tundra look like Iowa farmland.

    This is very much true. I think Mars is worth a colonization attempt, but anyone thinking that Mars is an area to divert surplus population rather than a small, colony seeding exercise, is dreaming.
  111. @Steve Sailer
    Keynes' wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter's rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli's wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

    [Cole Porter’s rich wife miscarried]

    But who was the father?

  112. @Expletive Deleted

    Europe’s problems defending themselves from third world invaders is exemplified by that photo of the four pretty female defense ministers sitting together and giggling.
     
    And the Russian Fed's currrent seat-warmer is a half-Turk who's never seen combat. He's a civil engineer who ascended the greasy pole through their version of FEMA. Likes a nice snazzy uniform or five, though. With plenty of scrambled egg.

    Tuva isn’t Turkish in any sense.

  113. @Cicerone
    Yes, but not only there. Africans in big cities all over the continent have lower than average fertility (but probably also above average IQs). While in Kenya TFR is raound 3.8, it is just 2.4 in Nairobi. Similar thing with Lagos in Nigeria (4 against 5.5 children per woman) or, in an extreme form, Addis Abeba in Ethiopia (with just 1.5 children per woman against 4.8).

    So the first step of slowing down population growth should be to foster urbanization in Africa. Regarding Africa, I am not one of those believers in inborn r and k strategies. Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas), while other circumstances encourage Whites to breed like rabbits (Amish, ultraorthodox Jews).

    Those stats are made up.

  114. @Dave Sliny
    South Africans are pretty dumb, but the fertility rate has plunged despite this. It's extremely unlikely that the rest of Africa won't follow suit. Although Idi Amin wannabe Julius Malema did recently say that African women should have more children, there was a chilly reception.

    During Apartheid, Desmond Tutu encouraged black women to have lots of children so that they could swamp the whites in order to pry the gov from them. Back then I think it actually worked, although the drivers were really the free universal medical care for blacks, good standards of nutrition, and elimination of diseases such as malaria by the white gov. So in a way the whites killed themselves by eliminating the 3 major components of early death amongst blacks in South Africa. The ANC gov introduced welfare for single mothers, so many black men, especially older ones, accumulate a number of girlfriends to have children with, and then skim some of the welfare for themselves. A pretty sneaky business model if can can handle the abject immorality of it.

  115. @Ed
    Using South Africa, the whitest African country, as a barometer for the rest of Africa is misguided. Black South Africans are best compared to US blacks. Both are African descended people's living in countries that are dominated at least economically by whites. The South African black has to navigate in at the very least a quasi European enviroment other Africans do not.

    The South African black has to navigate in at the very least a quasi European enviroment other Africans do not.

    The ANC gov is doing everything in its power to remove that European influence through its various forms of indigenization, known as BEE, BBBEE, and other economically destructive and utterly racist affirmative action programs. Even the code of law is now officially being changed from Roman-Dutch to African, whatever that means. Basically the blacks want the economic goodies, but loathe the cultural framework/message which accompanies them.

    • Replies: @Dave Sliny
    "The code of law is officially being changed from Roman-Dutch to African" Citation?

    Affirmative action in South Africa is largely bemoaned by low-IQ white types who can't compete against the hopeless and incompetent tokens it favors. Smart whites manage to thrive cleaning up the messes it creates.
  116. @gokart-mozart
    "Extreme growth threatens Africa’s development and stability"

    It cracks me up when writers repeat the lie that subsaharan Africa is "developing", and that this or that thing "threatens development".

    Subsaharan Africa is not developing, it is deteriorating relentlessly and has been for years. Some places, of course, are worse than others - Ghana is not the DRC and Senegal is not Sierra Leone. But, in general, 1960 was paradise in all those "nations" compared to 2016. In 1960, the Mama Yemo (now known as "Kinshasa General") and Mulago hospitals were modern, clean, properly functioning places. Now they are like sets for a post-apocalyptic movie. In 1960 the cities in the Belgian Congo were connected by roads and railroads all of which have now been swallowed by the jungle.

    The only thing four billion Africans will be is a protein source for each other, that is, presuming Europe comes to its senses and closes the Mediterranean to migration.

    The only 2 Sub-Saharan African countries which had any development were Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa. Of course this realization is verboten for the western elite, so what they do is ignore the mess in Zimbabwe and assign any positive aspect of South Africa, which is usually a left-over from Apartheid or the result of economic activity by the few remaining whites, to the ANC gov.

  117. @neutral
    If Scientific American would ever start to overlap in what they write about with The Economist, it would be the clash of immovable object against the unstoppable force. The Economist preaches 24/7 that endless immigration is the solution to all economic problems, Scientific American calling for something that slows down the endless growth, how do these two left wingers reconcile their opposing views ?

    The idea that the “Economist” is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    The idea that the “Economist” is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.
     
    And apparently we have nit-wits commenting on this blog. The Economist is undeniably leftist.
    , @Pericles
    The global elite is left wing, why should their favorite paper be right wing?
    , @Clyde

    The idea that the “Economist” is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.
     
    It is left wing when it comes to open immigration & open borders and ruinous trade policies and this is enough for me. Are you blind or a blockhead?
    , @random observer
    The Economist is the ghost of early 19th century British Free Trade Liberalism that lived long enough to become late 20th century neoliberalism and then early 21st century globalism.

    It's earliest incarnation was the progressive/liberal/radical ideology of the time- remember that early British Liberalism had some fairly radical social content on issues like marriage, the law, social reform, policing, prisons, and so forth, included then especially radical subsets like Benthamite utilitarianism, etc. Free Trade was its flagship policy, not all of it. And all that made some sense as a descendant of fairly libertine Whiggism, as well. It had its upside when applied in the context of an all-white society undergoing rapid demographic and economic expansion and taking on the world.

    Neoliberalism and globalism today are considered right-wing if one is coming at things from a Marxist or post-Marxist perspective, sure. It could be considered the centre-right wing of globalist technocracy, where others want more state planning.

    But if your definition of 'right' includes any element at all of nationalism, national sovereignty, traditionalism, cultural or ethnic identity, or social conservatism, all of which I would consider valid markers of a right-wing, then the Economist is left. One world, all the time, under a multicultural, multilingual class of social progressives.

    Plus there's that emblematic masthead slogan of theirs, which unites the arrogant progressivism of their first days with that of today, under which the Economist was founded in 1843 to "take part in a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress."
  118. @Diversity is Wrong
    Some interesting racial commentary from Bill Maher --

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLD2xzAX8Aw

    If you go to a place or an event, and there are no black people there to see it, does it really exist?

    • Replies: @Pericles
    Good one. Also, if you do something and nobody is victimized, did it really happen?
  119. @Stan d Mute

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.
     
    At some level, our "white guilt" is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it's an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening. Civilizationally the result is debt which enslaves future generations. Individually it is consumption rather than investment of private inheritance. In both macro and micro it is giving away and tearing down of culture and institutions to disadvantage one's own and favor the alien and invader. If our ancestors were evil then everything they built must be destroyed and/or given away to their "victims."

    How long before a place like Greenfield Village is shut down and bulldozed to build instead a temple to worship the greatness of Islam or Sub-Saharan Africa? That this would be the exact opposite of Henry's ideology (eg what he built in The Edison Institute schools) is the point. White heritage and culture is evil and must be demonized and destroyed. But since this is painful the more it can be forced onto the next generation, the better it is. Look at American elementary education today ... are any white cultural practices taught? When was the last elementary school square dance? When was the last class of kids taught that white abolitionists ended slavery? Or taught about "indentured servitude" and the relative monetary value of white versus negro slaves in the South? Again, by demonizing and destroying the past they can more easily control the future.

    At some level, our “white guilt” is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it’s an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening.

    Stan, this is the best cogent, pithy description of this issue i’ve ever read. Very well done.

    While obviously prosperity, birth control technology changed the dynamic just on their own, i think 90% of the issue is just that white people have had their culture and pride ripped from them … and hence stopped caring viscerally about reproducing themselves.

    You either *feel*, deep in your bones that you are passing on something great–your race and culture–to your children and the meaning of life is wrapped up in that civilizational baton passing exercise … or it’s all just a trivial “lifestyle” choice, in which case many people think “why bother”.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Stan, this is the best cogent, pithy description of this issue i’ve ever read. Very well done.
     
    Yes, he did well, but there's more to it. It's part of a comprehensive plan of atomization.

    We're disconnected from our past (ancestors), future (descendants), and present (racial cousins).
  120. @Jus' Sayin'...
    I have seen the idea of a genetically targeted anti-fertility virus pop up on more than one web site recently. The topic has been raised -- definitely not by me -- in other venues during several exchanges I've recently had with persons who definitely cannot be characterized as conservative or racist. I think that this is as bad an idea as any other form of biological warfare, since ooner or later your side will be hoist by a similar petard.

    But if the Negro inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa and their "big man" leaders don't start getting their act together soon, I envision China's leaders, who are much more hard-headed and ultra-rational than the West's, deciding that enough is enough and good land should not be wasted on losers. The decline or demographic swamping of the West would probably influence such a decision. Probably too late for Europe and America but vae victis.

    I envision China’s leaders, who are much more hard-headed and ultra-rational than the West’s, deciding that enough is enough and good land should not be wasted on losers.

    I’ve had the same thought. While Europe is destroying itself importing Africans the Chinese won’t be doing anything other than what they need to do to extract the resources they need. But when the West declines into irrelevance, the Chinese will be free to “organize” Africa however they see fit. That doesn’t necessarily mean taking it over, colonization, genocide or anything else–though all those are on the table. They’ll just do whatever they need to do for the goals they have.

  121. @Sailer has an interesting life
    I like to 'war game' what happens in the world with the LW community. One of the ideas I have is to use the temporary dopamine fix gotten by smart phones/social media to affect population rates. Roughly speaking it involves using gamification to induce small steps that have massive results.

    As urbanization rises to above 50%, African governments will have to rely on western donors due to their lower IQ. This will give a major opportunity to affect change. Simply and slowly create programs where you can get $StupidTrinket in exchange for getting a quarterly injection. Lather, rinse and repeat and you have a falling TFR.

    I am not talking about political will to implement this program. Rather the possibility of it being feasible and successful. Considering that the average twitter user is a lower income black woman and you have some of the work done already. No complains about the simplicity of this scheme. If google can skew an election in the US, then a quarterly injection of a birth control has got to be much more feasible. Especially if the people get used to it.

    Example of a birth control shot.
    http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-depo-provera
    Example of how google could skew an election.
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548

    As urbanization rises to above 50%, African governments will have to rely on western donors due to their lower IQ. This will give a major opportunity to affect change.

    It is already happening in education. Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, the UK government and others are investors in Bridge International Academies which provides schooling in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, India, and soon Liberia.

    Instead of paying more educated, experienced, qualified teachers, the company hires inexperienced people from the local communities (reportedly paying around $90 a month). It gives them a few weeks of training and handheld tablet computers loaded with pre-scripted lessons designed by the company’s education experts. It then sends them into the classrooms to deliver the scripted content to the students.

    And when they say scripted lessons, they mean scripted. We’re not talking a general outline of a lesson plan with a few bullet points here.

    http://www.vox.com/2016/4/8/11347796/liberia-outsourcing-schools

    • Replies: @Pericles
    Great news. I sure hope the level of education provided by those tablets is not racistly low. I also hope the educational outcomes will be thoroughly evaluated.

    Okay, so it's not great news for those with an education being replaced by the uneducated in order to provide an education for other uneducateds. Might make them question the value of that degree.
  122. @neutral
    Europe still does have armies that would still easily defeat most 3rd world nations. This phenomena has nothing to do with military strength, you can have the strongest army ever, but if you have no will to defend your own nation it is pretty much pointless to have one. Even if somehow an army in Europe decided to fight, the US regime would no doubt intervene to protect the rights of the 3rd world migrants.

    In many ways, Europe already died many decades ago, asking to defend itself is like asking a rotting carcass to defend itself from maggots.

    “Europe” is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won’t. We can already see this in the very different responses the different nations have made towards the “migrant crisis” (i.e. the invasion of settlers from Africa and the Middle East).

    Same is true of western nations as a whole. I don’t see the US making it (in terms of non-white percentage of population, it’s far past the point of any nation in Europe) but I do see Australia and New Zealand surviving as predominantly white countries.

    • Replies: @Flip
    The US is a continent sized country though. The demographics of Idaho are quite different than New Jersey or California.
    , @ben tillman

    “Europe” is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won’t.
     
    How is that possible? If one nation goes down, but another doesn't, wouldn't the other just kick out the invaders and take over themselves? It's all or nothing, surely.
    , @Anonymous
    New Zealand is not significantly whiter than the US.
  123. Men also have to relinquish sole control over the decision to have children and refrain from abusing wives or partners who seek birth control.

    Sure, comin’ right up!

    That ol’ western “cultural confidence” everyone here says is dead, is still very much alive in one of its aspects — the conviction that non-western people will, given the chance, instantly recognize our ways as superior and adopt them.

    I’ve tried (and of course failed) to impress the absurdity of this on liberal friends by saying: How can you dream of converting far-away Africans and Muslims to your liberal ways, when you’ve failed so abjectly to divest 50% of your own fellow Americans of their repulsive racist, misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic, Republican-voting ways?

  124. @Nico
    "Retarded" in this case has a specific psychometric definition. Regrettably, the kind of stupidity you cite à la Merkel, the Eurocrats and The Economist does not currently correspond to any pathology in widely accepted psychiatric or psychological literature. (NB: I would personally be open to inventing a diagnosis specifically for them.)

    Suicidal?

  125. @Almost Missouri
    Isn't the problem with abortion--aside from the whole killing babies aspect--I mean, the social problem with abortion, isn't it that it is the more cognitively capable who avail themselves of it, leading to their offspring being erased, while the cognitive underclass breeds ever more recklessly?

    As I recall, this was the essence of Sailer's debunking of Levitt's abortion-reduces-crime meme.

    Abortions are due to sheer laziness and cultural acceptance. In the US black women account for 36 percent of all abortions.

    In 1974 Austria implemented abortion laws that were nearly identical to the US after the 1973 Roe v Wade decision. Austria has an abortion rate of 3 percent and fertility rate of 1.44 children per woman. The US has an abortion rate of 22 percent and 1.88 children per women. Austrian women control pregnancies with birth control.

    Heck, abortion is illegal in Brazil and most of Latin America and the fertility rate is 1.81 for Brazil and under 2.5 for Latin America.

  126. @Anonymous
    Basically, politically speaking, there is a 'singularity point' at which the left party in virtually every western European state will hold unassailable permanent political power due to the sheer force of numbers of third world immigrant descended voters combined with the traditional lefty core vote.

    The UK is perilously close to that point - which uncontestably will be reached by 2050 at the very latest. New Labour came within an ace of achieving it prematurely.

    Now, *for certain* as a concession to the immigrants, and as part of general lefty dogma - which also, incidentally is shared by the The Economist/Kaplan/Merkel school of shitheadery, any vestige of 'immigration control' will be dissolved, and Africa can do what Africa is fated to do. So, it's goodbye Europa.

    It is exceedingly unlikely that this scenario will not come to pass.

    The UK is perilously close to that point – which uncontestably will be reached by 2050 at the very latest. New Labour came within an ace of achieving it prematurely.

    Speaking as someone who actually lives in the UK, there is nothing “uncontestable” about the thesis the UK will reach the “tipping point” where there are too many traditional left-wing voters and ethnic minorities to prevent the permanent dominance of the left.

    One, if immigration is either halted or even sharply reduced, the immigrant population’s (whose reproduction rates start to decline the longer they are in the UK) numbers will stabilize and decline.

    Two, the traditional left-wing voters are not a rock-solid monolith — UKIP has peeled off a significant number of them — to everyone’s surprise.

    Three, there is increasing opposition to immigration in the UK (just as there is in the US, which is much further down the road). Past trends are not necessarily true in the present or in the future.

    Though yes, as with the rest of the West the British electorate needs to wake up.

    Come June 23 we’ll find out how many of us are actually awake.

  127. One thing to grasp is that Africans *will not* take over the world.

    The reason is that Africans simply can *not* beat white people (or Asian people) in a conflict. The unique African package of mental traits–relative to other people in the world–is lower IQ, extroversion, high time preference, low conscientiousness and low cooperation. This just isn’t a winning package for any sort of conflict, beyond a quick smash+grab or mob beating.

    Where white people “lose” or cede power to African people, it is because they are stopped by … other white people. For example, left on their own, i have zero doubt that a bunch of Sicilian men could and would organize and successfully prevent any Africans from landing on their turf and surviving. But they are stopped from doing basic territorial self-defense by the Italian state and EU. Same story across all the white nations including the US. White guys are more than capable of seeing off all these problems. But the establishment left is in control of all these governments (save maybe Hungary) and have organized state power–other white guys–to stop white guys from organizing to protect their nations ad hoc.

    *But* when a society has become sufficiently Africanized, the wheels come off. State power will lose its “legitimacy” with most of the white guys, and will be saddled with African incompetence. As state legitimacy and competence break down and conflict becomes direct and open … the white guys are just going to kick ass. It won’t be pretty–genocide never is–but that’s the way it will roll. The competence gap is just too huge.

    (If you want to avoid this ugliness, then don’t let people immigrate into white lands. Diversity always generates unhappiness and conflict.)

    This isn’t to say “whites triumph” or even “whites survive” … we may all be genocided while we’re weak from our bout with abject silliness and stupidity. It’s only to say that *Africans* can’t win. Pretty much every other race–whites, Chinese, Jews, Japanese, Indians, Latins, SE Asians, even Arabs–can organize much better and will defeat Africans when push comes to shove, which it inevitably will.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    The reason is that Africans simply can *not* beat white people (or Asian people) in a conflict. The unique African package of mental traits–relative to other people in the world–is lower IQ, extroversion, high time preference, low conscientiousness and low cooperation. This just isn’t a winning package for any sort of conflict, beyond a quick smash+grab or mob beating.

    Where white people “lose” or cede power to African people, it is because they are stopped by … other white people. For example, left on their own, i have zero doubt that a bunch of Sicilian men could and would organize and successfully prevent any Africans from landing on their turf and surviving. But they are stopped from doing basic territorial self-defense by the Italian state and EU. Same story across all the white nations including the US. White guys are more than capable of seeing off all these problems. But the establishment left is in control of all these governments (save maybe Hungary) and have organized state power–other white guys–to stop white guys from organizing to protect their nations ad hoc.

    I agree with this 100%. I think we are seeing the beginning of changing attitudes towards this. The Bill Maher video that someone linked to recently... he is a smart guy, a liberal, and realizes that liberals have overreached, and still wants the liberals to maintain control. That's pretty rare, for someone steeped in PC to have that much self awareness and intellectual honesty, but unfortunately it has taken Trump to reveal that it would get to this stage. Maher knows it needs to be walked back. If it were walked back earlier, maybe in the 2000s or even early 2010s, we wouldn't be in this situation. However, it's no longer at the finger in the dyke stage of containment. Everywhere you look online, there are voices, in many cases a majority, where people are incensed at what is happening and not afraid of saying it. It's getting to be like the attitudes of Americans after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

    Remember the Cronulla riots? Remember the donut eating cop that brought it to the white Australians rioting? Where were he and his compatriots during the years of Lebanese and other Muslim violence and sexual predation that provoked the riots, or in the reprisals by the Lebanese immediately after?

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/hero-cop-craig-campbell-left-behind-by-the-cronulla-riots-20160117-gm7j5r.html

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/muslims-back-excronulla-riot-cop-craig-campbell/news-story/8209896a1fec85e72187c81811308bc7

    This traitor has been kicked from the force, lost his bravery medal, had his marriage fail and can't hold down a job. As natural justice goes, it's a fairly damp squib but it's more than we usually see in these days of seeing Tony Blair receiving speaking fees and million dollar contracts, along with other traitors. Anyway, it's an indication that those higher up on the force know the score and have done the right thing. (Police see more race reality than probably any other profession.)

    I've said for years now that the non-whites who have been immigrating to the Eurosphere have been like the idiots who go out and pick up fish when the sea levels suddenly drop. They think it's normal and don't see the potential for the tsunami coming their way. PC is an aberration. Look back over the last thousand years in Europe and try and find anything like it. History ain't over.

  128. @Nico
    The problem is societal feminism won't take hold on a large scale over there. Most black men fall under the rubric of either raging heterosexual machines or extremely flaming homosexuals. There are very few intellectual heterosexual aesthetes (Laclos, Sade, Godwin), which seem to be prerequisites for true libertinism and therefore feminism to take hold, among them. The women of any society are not "liberated" without their menfolk's consent.

    Precisely what I came here to say. Feminism can only exist when the make population allows it. Western women often forget that when it really comes down to it their physical inferiority makes them everyone’s bitch, and that they depend on men protecting any and all of their freedoms.

  129. @Jus' Sayin'...
    Contraception is not the primary factor that limits human fertility. European fertility began declining north and west of the Hajnal line as early as the 16th century. Demographers still argue the details of why but delayed age at marriage and various controls on sexual gratification clearly played a role. The only readily available contraceptive techniques during the first two hundred years or so of the European decline were abstinence and coitus interruptus.

    The article, of course, would not mention possible racial and genetic causes for sub-Saharan Africans' high fertility rates, e.g., Rushton's r-K theory. If the philoprogenitive characteristics of sub-Saharan Africans have even a partially inherited basis, barring a massive imposition of positive Malthusian checks, the rest of the world is doomed.

    Finally, anyone who has spent much time in central African villages has to laugh at the idea that women in these villages need further empowerment, at least as defined by today's first world feminists. In Bantu cultures the women do essentially all the real work and effectively control all the important resources. The men squat around all day playing Mancala and gambling imaginary possessions back and forth. Marriage is matrilocal. Households are often composed of three generations of women living together and visited by their current sexual partners. Women compete for men as sexual partners and dump them as soon as they get bored. Actually it's a lot like Negro underclass life in the developed world but sans gangs, firearms, and drugs.

    “Households are often composed of three generations of women living together and visited by their current sexual partners. Women compete for men as sexual partners and dump them as soon as they get bored. Actually it’s a lot like Negro underclass life in the developed world but sans gangs, firearms, and drugs.”

    It’s not just the developed world’s Negro underclass life that is like that now. Seen the white underclass lately?

    It’s been a while since I was in Africa, but when I was I do recall seeing one woman who lived as you describe, but she was something of an outcast living at the fringe of the village. But as with so many things nowadays, the fringe has become the core, so maybe whole villages are like that now. Well, anyway if this is the new female-empowered/liberated Africa, then for purposes of our discussion, the real question is how does the TFR compare to the old male-empowered/patriarchal Africa?

    • Replies: @anon

    Well, anyway if this is the new female-empowered/liberated Africa
     
    It's not new it's been that far since forever because of the nature of farming there.

    It’s not just the developed world’s Negro underclass life that is like that now. Seen the white underclass lately?
     
    Yes because the welfare underclass environment mimics that African environment where the women don't need male help to feed their kids.

    The white underclass is evolving African behavior through selection.
  130. @TG
    Yes the native South African fertility rate was low - and that's why the South African governments, both white and black, have used massive immigration from African nations with higher fertility rates to cancel it out.

    Immigration does not just move people around - it maximizes total population growth by canceling the effects of low fertility in one place. Given the power of exponential growth, in a world with no borders just one Bangladesh or Niger could easily drag down the entire rest of the world…

    So yes to empowering women, and yes to available birth control, but the main issue is being missed.

    It the pro-population growth policies of the elites that are responsible. Remember, while Africa's population was starting to soar, we had all these esteemed western economists insisting that more people were ALWAYS better and that anyone saying different was a racist or fascist or something. Why are we blaming poor Africans for getting it wrong, when all the pundits at Harvard and Chicago and the New York Times etc. have spent the last half-century insisting that they were getting it right?

    Remember Syria: Assad insisted that more people were always better, and he made the sale and possession of any form of birth control illegal, and he got the population to double every 18 years… and that didn't work out so well. It is intrusive government policies that treat people like cattle, and push them to breed ever more in order to increase profits that is the main issue.

    Empower women? Sure. But first disempower governments. Only encourage people to be careful not to have more children than they can reasonably support. The population should be set by the individual decisions of the people themselves, not ivory-tower academics insisting that the world will end if people don't have 'enough' children as determined by their own warped economic models...

    Yes the native South African fertility rate was low – and that’s why the South African governments, both white and black, have used massive immigration from African nations with higher fertility rates to cancel it out.

    The white South African gov was serving the interests of mostly Tribe-run mines, who wanted cheap, compliant labor without family issues. They sourced their laborers from other southern African countries in order to undercut South African labor rates, and housed them in giant worker hostels, which were a cesspit of crime and illegal activities. I’m guessing that employing foreign laborers also helped reduce any liability issues due to the high rate of mine-related deaths, a result of those mining bosses minimizing safety for profits. The mines have unfortunately been one of the most destructive political, economic, and social forces in South Africa since forever. Apart from cheap labor for mines, the white gov would have been insane to import masses of blacks.

    The black gov allowed massive numbers of blacks to cross into South Africa simply because they were no longer able to maintain the effective border protection force which existed under white South Africa, having gutted the once formidable army. In addition to that, it was a continuation of the policy advocated by Desmond Tutu, to flood the country with blacks in order to render whites irrelevant.

  131. @Steve Sailer
    Keynes' wife actually miscarried, which is pretty impressive for somebody who struck all his Bloomsbury friends as not the philoprogenitive type.

    Similarly, Cole Porter's rich wife miscarried.

    MGM musical director Vicente Minelli's wife, Judy Garland, bore Liza Minelli.

    And Liza Minelli, the only child of Judy Garland was the last of her line.

    There are a lot of gay men who father children, so it’s obviously not impossible for them. I am somewhat surprised that it is not seen more. If gays are men with female type brains/drives but with the male hormone balance, then you would think that there would be some cluckiness involved. Maybe the male hormone balance overrides that factor in a lot of cases, and is a reason why male homosexual promiscuity is off the charts (and conversely why lesbians – male brains in female bodies and with female testosterone levels – suffer lesbian bed death). Anabolic steroids increase sex drive in both men and women. And female test levels are a lot lower than males… and they still have sex, on average, at a similar rate to males.

    My original implied point was that I shared the hypothesis that childless people are a lot more blasé and/or less risk averse about the future (see Angela Merkel, Hitler) and hence if you can find examples of people who notably have a careless attitude towards future generations, odds are they don’t have children. It certainly worked that way in the case of Keynes.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "My original implied point was that I shared the hypothesis that childless people are a lot more blasé and/or less risk averse about the future (see Angela Merkel, Hitler) and hence if you can find examples of people who notably have a careless attitude towards future generations, odds are they don’t have children. It certainly worked that way in the case of Keynes."

    Even though Adolf Hitler never created Master Race offsprings in order to increase the number of Nordics in the world, no one on Stormfront holds it against him.

    Adolf was only about taking lives, not creating lives. He was too busy mass murdering people, so he had no time to start an Aryan family.

    The irony that The White Nationalist Movement worships a man who did not do his part in helping increase the number of Whites in the world.

    Hildabeast has created more White people than Adolf Hitler and Hildabeast is a Left Wing Lesbian. The icon of the White Nationalist movement had created less White children than a Left Wing Lesbian.

  132. @2Mintzin1
    Interesting...which ones? And "better off" in what ways?

    Kenya
    Ethiopia
    Ghana
    Senegal
    Sudan
    Tanzania
    Uganda
    Gabon
    Guinea
    Zambia
    Botwana
    Mozambique
    Rwanda
    Burundi

  133. @LKM
    Good point, but two questions:

    1) How do you get them into the cities in the first place?

    People only urbanize when they perceive that there are greater opportunities for them in the cities than on the farm. Specifically, you want jobs that an average African woman is capable of doing without much training, like sewing garments for Nike or whoever in a sweatshop. This is what drove down fertility in Bangladesh, among other places. It wasn't the introduction of birth control in itself, it was the realization among husbands that their wife was worth more to them working in a sweatshop than staying at home with twelve kids. Once that epiphany occurred, the husbands were the ones pushing for birth control and smaller families as much as the wives.

    Of course in theory these sorts of jobs should have existed en mass in Africa for some time, but as far as I know, they don't. I don't know about you, but my closet contains plenty of stuff from Vietnam, Bangladesh etc, but nothing from sub-Saharan Africa. Maybe the African governments just aren't capable of maintaining the infrastructure necessary(ports etc) to make them attractive, despite the cheap cost of labour. Maybe there's too much corruption.

    Either way, if Africa doesn't have these sorts of jobs in 2016, why should they in 2040 or 2060? Do we need to wait until the price of labour in Asia and South America is equal to that of North America and Europe before companies are willing to invest in sub-Saharan Africa for something other than natural resources?

    2) With the population projects we're seeing, urbanization in Africa means Asia-style mega-cities. You can have cities of twenty million people when they're filled with Chinese, Japanese or Indians and they may be unpleasant but they can remain functional. Higher density of blacks mean a higher density of young black men, which leads to more violence. How large can a city populated exclusively by blacks be without turning into a sort of megapolis Baltimore? Who'd want to urbanize to that?

    I have shirts sewn in Africa.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    I do too.

    I believe they are usually produced in Chinese-owned factories using Chinese labor. They exploit the tax regime and lower US import tariffs of the host country.

    , @LKM
    So I can lower African fertility and expand my wardrobe? Well now I clearly have no excuse for wearing the same grubby shirts for the last ten years.
    , @Jefferson
    "I have shirts sewn in Africa."

    I have zero clothes that were made in Africa. All of my Non Donald Trump and Non Wounded Warriors Project clothes were made in either Asia or Central America.

    Africans are punching below their weight even by 3rd World standards.
  134. I find it fascinating how feminist lingo is used for promoting birth control. The high birth rate in Africa is not NOT due to female disempowerment..contrary to what feminists claim, it is the mother in laws and grand mothers that push young women to have more children-not the husbands.

    What does wonders for birth control is urbanization-even poor illiterate women in the cities have less children because the urban economy is or cash based, and parents can feel very directly the financial stress of having more mouths to feed and house. So the incentive is to have less children. In rural areas, having two or three more children is not going to make much difference when you don’t have to pay rent (family owned hut), or pay for water (river is free), nor worry about school fees (kids don’t got to school) or transportation (walk). Farmers in Africa do okay and can feed -say-5 children, but no way can the average slum dweller in the city earn enough to feed and house 4 to 5 kids.

    Besides in the country, kids are not a burden at all, and in fact are a financial asset as they do a lot or productive farm work such as looking after the cattle, weeding etc.

    Unfortunately, urbanization is not happening fast enough in Africa-not sure if it ever will.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Immigration and urbanization compete: For example, Alan Rider's 1986 book on Mexico, Distant Neighbors, assumed that Mexico City's population would reach 30 million because where else were they going to go?

    Instead, they went to the United States, where they averaged more children than if they'd moved to Mexico City.

    , @unpc downunder
    Exactly, urbanisation is the biggest factor in falling birth rates. If falling birth rates were primarily due to feminism, then Russian and Japanese birth rates would be significantly higher than those of ultra-feminist Sweden.

    We need to find more ways for middle class westerners to move out of big cities, and more ways for backward Africans to move into them. Perhaps if western aid agencies only handed out aid and assistance to city dwellers, and ignored the countryside it might help with population control - build more drains in urban slums and fewer wells in rural villages. However, that's probably not a very romantic idea to the average western aid worker.

  135. @AnotherDad
    One thing to grasp is that Africans *will not* take over the world.

    The reason is that Africans simply can *not* beat white people (or Asian people) in a conflict. The unique African package of mental traits--relative to other people in the world--is lower IQ, extroversion, high time preference, low conscientiousness and low cooperation. This just isn't a winning package for any sort of conflict, beyond a quick smash+grab or mob beating.

    Where white people "lose" or cede power to African people, it is because they are stopped by ... other white people. For example, left on their own, i have zero doubt that a bunch of Sicilian men could and would organize and successfully prevent any Africans from landing on their turf and surviving. But they are stopped from doing basic territorial self-defense by the Italian state and EU. Same story across all the white nations including the US. White guys are more than capable of seeing off all these problems. But the establishment left is in control of all these governments (save maybe Hungary) and have organized state power--other white guys--to stop white guys from organizing to protect their nations ad hoc.

    *But* when a society has become sufficiently Africanized, the wheels come off. State power will lose its "legitimacy" with most of the white guys, and will be saddled with African incompetence. As state legitimacy and competence break down and conflict becomes direct and open ... the white guys are just going to kick ass. It won't be pretty--genocide never is--but that's the way it will roll. The competence gap is just too huge.

    (If you want to avoid this ugliness, then don't let people immigrate into white lands. Diversity always generates unhappiness and conflict.)

    This isn't to say "whites triumph" or even "whites survive" ... we may all be genocided while we're weak from our bout with abject silliness and stupidity. It's only to say that *Africans* can't win. Pretty much every other race--whites, Chinese, Jews, Japanese, Indians, Latins, SE Asians, even Arabs--can organize much better and will defeat Africans when push comes to shove, which it inevitably will.

    The reason is that Africans simply can *not* beat white people (or Asian people) in a conflict. The unique African package of mental traits–relative to other people in the world–is lower IQ, extroversion, high time preference, low conscientiousness and low cooperation. This just isn’t a winning package for any sort of conflict, beyond a quick smash+grab or mob beating.

    Where white people “lose” or cede power to African people, it is because they are stopped by … other white people. For example, left on their own, i have zero doubt that a bunch of Sicilian men could and would organize and successfully prevent any Africans from landing on their turf and surviving. But they are stopped from doing basic territorial self-defense by the Italian state and EU. Same story across all the white nations including the US. White guys are more than capable of seeing off all these problems. But the establishment left is in control of all these governments (save maybe Hungary) and have organized state power–other white guys–to stop white guys from organizing to protect their nations ad hoc.

    I agree with this 100%. I think we are seeing the beginning of changing attitudes towards this. The Bill Maher video that someone linked to recently… he is a smart guy, a liberal, and realizes that liberals have overreached, and still wants the liberals to maintain control. That’s pretty rare, for someone steeped in PC to have that much self awareness and intellectual honesty, but unfortunately it has taken Trump to reveal that it would get to this stage. Maher knows it needs to be walked back. If it were walked back earlier, maybe in the 2000s or even early 2010s, we wouldn’t be in this situation. However, it’s no longer at the finger in the dyke stage of containment. Everywhere you look online, there are voices, in many cases a majority, where people are incensed at what is happening and not afraid of saying it. It’s getting to be like the attitudes of Americans after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

    Remember the Cronulla riots? Remember the donut eating cop that brought it to the white Australians rioting? Where were he and his compatriots during the years of Lebanese and other Muslim violence and sexual predation that provoked the riots, or in the reprisals by the Lebanese immediately after?

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/hero-cop-craig-campbell-left-behind-by-the-cronulla-riots-20160117-gm7j5r.html

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/muslims-back-excronulla-riot-cop-craig-campbell/news-story/8209896a1fec85e72187c81811308bc7

    This traitor has been kicked from the force, lost his bravery medal, had his marriage fail and can’t hold down a job. As natural justice goes, it’s a fairly damp squib but it’s more than we usually see in these days of seeing Tony Blair receiving speaking fees and million dollar contracts, along with other traitors. Anyway, it’s an indication that those higher up on the force know the score and have done the right thing. (Police see more race reality than probably any other profession.)

    I’ve said for years now that the non-whites who have been immigrating to the Eurosphere have been like the idiots who go out and pick up fish when the sea levels suddenly drop. They think it’s normal and don’t see the potential for the tsunami coming their way. PC is an aberration. Look back over the last thousand years in Europe and try and find anything like it. History ain’t over.

    • Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "This traitor has been kicked from the force, lost his bravery medal, had his marriage fail and can’t hold down a job."
    Thanks for those links. I remember that fat so and so flogging Cronulla surfers like they were black South Africans.
    Hard to feel sorry for him.
    , @Anonymous
    I only have one problem with this analysis - the sheer force and speed with which the lefties - and The Economist types - are forcing through the immigration tsunami.
    This is done deliberately, and with cunning, in order to simply overwhelm the opposition, to blind-side it, if you will, and 'sweep the rug from under the feet'.
    One has to remember that once the indigenous population has reached minority status - which is 'just around the corner' then it really is game-over.
    , @RonaldB
    I can't agree that a mob of youths bashing and possibly killing two lone Middle Eastern youth is an expression of white superiority.

    I think the cop did a good job. I think he should have been brought up on real charges if he had stood back and let two non-offensive boys be killed for no reason.

    There are better ways to express your superior fighting skills: the South African army repelling the invasion from Namibia against numerically-superior forces backed by Cuba and other Communist countries is an example. But killing two lone, outnumbered boys?...No.
  136. @AnotherDad
    > By 2100, there will be massive White flight from Earth to Mars.

    Mars is a pit. Makes the Sahara or the arctic tundra look like Iowa farmland.

    And, of course, whites can live in really nice real estate at a maybe ten orders of magnitude cheaper by simply keeping the garbage out of the land they have.

    Mars is a pit. Makes the Sahara or the arctic tundra look like Iowa farmland.

    This is very much true. I think Mars is worth a colonization attempt, but anyone thinking that Mars is an area to divert surplus population rather than a small, colony seeding exercise, is dreaming.

  137. @Merema
    I find it fascinating how feminist lingo is used for promoting birth control. The high birth rate in Africa is not NOT due to female disempowerment..contrary to what feminists claim, it is the mother in laws and grand mothers that push young women to have more children-not the husbands.

    What does wonders for birth control is urbanization-even poor illiterate women in the cities have less children because the urban economy is or cash based, and parents can feel very directly the financial stress of having more mouths to feed and house. So the incentive is to have less children. In rural areas, having two or three more children is not going to make much difference when you don't have to pay rent (family owned hut), or pay for water (river is free), nor worry about school fees (kids don't got to school) or transportation (walk). Farmers in Africa do okay and can feed -say-5 children, but no way can the average slum dweller in the city earn enough to feed and house 4 to 5 kids.

    Besides in the country, kids are not a burden at all, and in fact are a financial asset as they do a lot or productive farm work such as looking after the cattle, weeding etc.

    Unfortunately, urbanization is not happening fast enough in Africa-not sure if it ever will.

    Immigration and urbanization compete: For example, Alan Rider’s 1986 book on Mexico, Distant Neighbors, assumed that Mexico City’s population would reach 30 million because where else were they going to go?

    Instead, they went to the United States, where they averaged more children than if they’d moved to Mexico City.

  138. @celt darnell
    "Europe" is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won't. We can already see this in the very different responses the different nations have made towards the "migrant crisis" (i.e. the invasion of settlers from Africa and the Middle East).

    Same is true of western nations as a whole. I don't see the US making it (in terms of non-white percentage of population, it's far past the point of any nation in Europe) but I do see Australia and New Zealand surviving as predominantly white countries.

    The US is a continent sized country though. The demographics of Idaho are quite different than New Jersey or California.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    I concede the point that, like Europe, parts of the U.S. may hang on while other parts go under.

    That would still, however, mean the dismembering of a nation state (the U.S.) with it's national identity and culture.

    By contrast, Europe has never been united, let alone been politically unified with a common culture in its entire existence. A Europe divided into Muslim parts and non-Muslim parts would be pretty much par for the course.

    Hell, it's happened in Europe's past.

  139. A slightly bit OT, but of likely interest to the folks who read Steve. An African economist says For God’s Sake, Please Stop the Aid!

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Dambisa Moyo has been saying the same thing for years. Of course it doesn't fit the Narrative, so she's not well known.

    She also pointed out that if a country's GDP growth rate is alleged to be say, 4% (not unusual in subsaharan Africa), that is not really "developing" when the population growth rate is say 6% (also not unusual in SSA).
  140. @Anonym
    And Liza Minelli, the only child of Judy Garland was the last of her line.

    There are a lot of gay men who father children, so it's obviously not impossible for them. I am somewhat surprised that it is not seen more. If gays are men with female type brains/drives but with the male hormone balance, then you would think that there would be some cluckiness involved. Maybe the male hormone balance overrides that factor in a lot of cases, and is a reason why male homosexual promiscuity is off the charts (and conversely why lesbians - male brains in female bodies and with female testosterone levels - suffer lesbian bed death). Anabolic steroids increase sex drive in both men and women. And female test levels are a lot lower than males... and they still have sex, on average, at a similar rate to males.

    My original implied point was that I shared the hypothesis that childless people are a lot more blasé and/or less risk averse about the future (see Angela Merkel, Hitler) and hence if you can find examples of people who notably have a careless attitude towards future generations, odds are they don't have children. It certainly worked that way in the case of Keynes.

    “My original implied point was that I shared the hypothesis that childless people are a lot more blasé and/or less risk averse about the future (see Angela Merkel, Hitler) and hence if you can find examples of people who notably have a careless attitude towards future generations, odds are they don’t have children. It certainly worked that way in the case of Keynes.”

    Even though Adolf Hitler never created Master Race offsprings in order to increase the number of Nordics in the world, no one on Stormfront holds it against him.

    Adolf was only about taking lives, not creating lives. He was too busy mass murdering people, so he had no time to start an Aryan family.

    The irony that The White Nationalist Movement worships a man who did not do his part in helping increase the number of Whites in the world.

    Hildabeast has created more White people than Adolf Hitler and Hildabeast is a Left Wing Lesbian. The icon of the White Nationalist movement had created less White children than a Left Wing Lesbian.

  141. Trouble is they won’t STAY in Africa. Having made a disaster out of their continent, they will then go to Europe and make a disaster out of that continent too. Eventually there will be no decent place left for anyone as there is only ONE Europe.

    • Replies: @Clyde

    Trouble is they won’t STAY in Africa. Having made a disaster out of their continent, they will then go to Europe and make a disaster out of that continent too. Eventually there will be no decent place left for anyone as there is only ONE Europe.
     
    All Africans are bad news when it comes to their mass immigration invasion of Europe. Not just the sub -Saharan Muslims (and Christians) but the North African Muslims (Algeria, Tunisia etc) such as the ones in Belgium and France who were behind the two recent mass murders in Paris and Brussels.
  142. @LKM
    Good point, but two questions:

    1) How do you get them into the cities in the first place?

    People only urbanize when they perceive that there are greater opportunities for them in the cities than on the farm. Specifically, you want jobs that an average African woman is capable of doing without much training, like sewing garments for Nike or whoever in a sweatshop. This is what drove down fertility in Bangladesh, among other places. It wasn't the introduction of birth control in itself, it was the realization among husbands that their wife was worth more to them working in a sweatshop than staying at home with twelve kids. Once that epiphany occurred, the husbands were the ones pushing for birth control and smaller families as much as the wives.

    Of course in theory these sorts of jobs should have existed en mass in Africa for some time, but as far as I know, they don't. I don't know about you, but my closet contains plenty of stuff from Vietnam, Bangladesh etc, but nothing from sub-Saharan Africa. Maybe the African governments just aren't capable of maintaining the infrastructure necessary(ports etc) to make them attractive, despite the cheap cost of labour. Maybe there's too much corruption.

    Either way, if Africa doesn't have these sorts of jobs in 2016, why should they in 2040 or 2060? Do we need to wait until the price of labour in Asia and South America is equal to that of North America and Europe before companies are willing to invest in sub-Saharan Africa for something other than natural resources?

    2) With the population projects we're seeing, urbanization in Africa means Asia-style mega-cities. You can have cities of twenty million people when they're filled with Chinese, Japanese or Indians and they may be unpleasant but they can remain functional. Higher density of blacks mean a higher density of young black men, which leads to more violence. How large can a city populated exclusively by blacks be without turning into a sort of megapolis Baltimore? Who'd want to urbanize to that?

    Maybe the African governments just aren’t capable of maintaining the infrastructure necessary(ports etc) to make them attractive, despite the cheap cost of labour. Maybe there’s too much corruption.

    Besides corruption many African countries have problems with basic services like water, electricity, and roads, also disease, tribalism, Muslim insurgents, unstable governments, etc. However, during the recent economic crisis many white Portuguese moved to Angola and Mozambique for better opportunities so there might be a few bright spots.

    African countries seem to lack the entrepreneurial talent to make a network of businesses run smoothly. In 1972, Idi Amin kicked out all of the Indians, the successful merchant class of Uganda. Years later, after the economy had been run into the ground, the new leader of Uganda asked the Indians to come back.

  143. @Steve Sailer
    I have shirts sewn in Africa.

    I do too.

    I believe they are usually produced in Chinese-owned factories using Chinese labor. They exploit the tax regime and lower US import tariffs of the host country.

    • Replies: @Triumph104
    That's exactly what is happening.

    Even though Sun and his partner plan on using materials and equipment imported from China, all of his factory staff will be Ethiopian. “It’s about adding value locally,” he explained. “Once we hit the 20 or 30 percent mark, our clothes will officially be ‘Made in Ethiopia.’ Then it will be easier for us to sell to the US and EU.” The west puts limits on commodity imports from China. Production relocation to Africa and South America have allowed Chinese enterprises to circumvent trade caps.
     
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/23/made-in-china-now-being-made-in-africa.html

    In addition, I saw a British documentary on Chinese counterfeiting. The Chinese would ship watch parts to Mexico, then they would smuggle Chinese factory workers into Mexco to assemble the parts in an apartment. The watches would then be sent to the US as Made in Mexico.
  144. @Merema
    I find it fascinating how feminist lingo is used for promoting birth control. The high birth rate in Africa is not NOT due to female disempowerment..contrary to what feminists claim, it is the mother in laws and grand mothers that push young women to have more children-not the husbands.

    What does wonders for birth control is urbanization-even poor illiterate women in the cities have less children because the urban economy is or cash based, and parents can feel very directly the financial stress of having more mouths to feed and house. So the incentive is to have less children. In rural areas, having two or three more children is not going to make much difference when you don't have to pay rent (family owned hut), or pay for water (river is free), nor worry about school fees (kids don't got to school) or transportation (walk). Farmers in Africa do okay and can feed -say-5 children, but no way can the average slum dweller in the city earn enough to feed and house 4 to 5 kids.

    Besides in the country, kids are not a burden at all, and in fact are a financial asset as they do a lot or productive farm work such as looking after the cattle, weeding etc.

    Unfortunately, urbanization is not happening fast enough in Africa-not sure if it ever will.

    Exactly, urbanisation is the biggest factor in falling birth rates. If falling birth rates were primarily due to feminism, then Russian and Japanese birth rates would be significantly higher than those of ultra-feminist Sweden.

    We need to find more ways for middle class westerners to move out of big cities, and more ways for backward Africans to move into them. Perhaps if western aid agencies only handed out aid and assistance to city dwellers, and ignored the countryside it might help with population control – build more drains in urban slums and fewer wells in rural villages. However, that’s probably not a very romantic idea to the average western aid worker.

  145. @Tracy
    A slightly bit OT, but of likely interest to the folks who read Steve. An African economist says "For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!"

    Dambisa Moyo has been saying the same thing for years. Of course it doesn’t fit the Narrative, so she’s not well known.

    She also pointed out that if a country’s GDP growth rate is alleged to be say, 4% (not unusual in subsaharan Africa), that is not really “developing” when the population growth rate is say 6% (also not unusual in SSA).

  146. @Anonymous
    At least a dozen countries in sub-sahara africa are much better off now than 50 years ago.

    Table 2.4Life Expectancy at Birth for Sub-Saharan Africa and UN Subregions, 1960–2005
    Region, subregion — 1980–89 — 2000–04
    Sub-Saharan Africa — 49.0 — 45.9
    Eastern Africa — 49.4 — 45.7
    Middle Africa — 47.0 — 43.4
    Southern Africa — 59.6 — 47.7
    Western Africa — 47.1 — 46.3

  147. @Steve Sailer
    I have shirts sewn in Africa.

    So I can lower African fertility and expand my wardrobe? Well now I clearly have no excuse for wearing the same grubby shirts for the last ten years.

  148. @Almost Missouri
    I do too.

    I believe they are usually produced in Chinese-owned factories using Chinese labor. They exploit the tax regime and lower US import tariffs of the host country.

    That’s exactly what is happening.

    Even though Sun and his partner plan on using materials and equipment imported from China, all of his factory staff will be Ethiopian. “It’s about adding value locally,” he explained. “Once we hit the 20 or 30 percent mark, our clothes will officially be ‘Made in Ethiopia.’ Then it will be easier for us to sell to the US and EU.” The west puts limits on commodity imports from China. Production relocation to Africa and South America have allowed Chinese enterprises to circumvent trade caps.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/23/made-in-china-now-being-made-in-africa.html

    In addition, I saw a British documentary on Chinese counterfeiting. The Chinese would ship watch parts to Mexico, then they would smuggle Chinese factory workers into Mexco to assemble the parts in an apartment. The watches would then be sent to the US as Made in Mexico.

  149. @Stan d Mute

    “Do my wife and I really want to go through the possible pain and anguish of losing another child? No. We shall not”.
     
    Or for Gen-X, born after the 1965 Immigration Act, "How can we in good conscience create children who will be forced to live in some hellish South Africa type dystopia?" Western Civilization has already been murdered, it is analog to the brain dead patient kept alive artificially. In its place we see only a crude mimicry like the African Dandy who plays at civilization like a four year old playing "Doctor" while we watch the life support mechanisms fail.

    http://youtu.be/W27PnUuXR_A

    Thanks.

  150. @Jefferson
    "Steve, am I just flattering myself to think it I’m the one who tipped you off to this article?

    If so, you might have incorrectly assumed that my 16 billion…

    Africa’s current rate of population growth implies not four billion Africans by 2100 but 16 billion

    …was a typo. But it was not. The paper version of this article has a graph that shows several forecasts for Africa’s population in 2100. 16 billion is the forecast that assumes today’s annual rate of growth persists."

    So the average Sub Saharan family is producing more children than the average Mormon family, the average Hasidic family, the average Orthodox family, and the average ultra religious Evangelical family.

    When White people produce a shitload of kids, 9 times out of 10 they are religious on steroids.

    Black people do not have to be motivated by religion at all to produce a shitload of kids. Even the most secular Agnostic/Atheist Blacks produce a shitload of kids.

    This is why I wish Europeans were more religious and less Agnostic/Atheist, because only religion motivates White people to start YUGE families.

    …because only religion motivates White people to start YUGE families.

    I’d like to win the War of the Cradle, but I’d more rather have some elbow room.

  151. By 2100 Africa’s population could be three billion to 6.1 billion, up sharply from 1.2 billion today, if birth rates remain stubbornly high. This unexpected rise will stress already fragile resources in Africa and around the world.

    A significant fertility decline can be achieved only if women are empowered educationally, economically, socially and politically.

    This is so stupid I don’t know how to respond. The “unexpected rise” is in not just expected but a mathematical certainty. If you pay people to have babies, they will do so. And what sort of lunatic would think that men want children and women don’t?

  152. @Nico
    Prophylactics are most likely to be used effectively by the reasonably intelligent and educated (by world standards). Most Africans fall under neither rubric; intuitively a proliferation of condoms would worsen the already bad K-to-r ratio (yes, I know that's not a real concept, but bear with me). It is not at all clear that the continent can move forward into modernity unless some sort of Malthusian catastrophe wipes out the functionally retarded larger tier of its population.

    Condoms and contraceptive pills probably do have a useful role to play in Africa, but not for rural population control. Rural people in Africa have little social or economic incentive to have fewer kids. Give them to urban slum dwellers and sex workers who don’t want to have lots of offspring.

    • Replies: @Nico
    That will only work if white taxpayers demand an end to subsidies for colored bastard children.
  153. @Stan d Mute

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.
     
    At some level, our "white guilt" is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it's an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening. Civilizationally the result is debt which enslaves future generations. Individually it is consumption rather than investment of private inheritance. In both macro and micro it is giving away and tearing down of culture and institutions to disadvantage one's own and favor the alien and invader. If our ancestors were evil then everything they built must be destroyed and/or given away to their "victims."

    How long before a place like Greenfield Village is shut down and bulldozed to build instead a temple to worship the greatness of Islam or Sub-Saharan Africa? That this would be the exact opposite of Henry's ideology (eg what he built in The Edison Institute schools) is the point. White heritage and culture is evil and must be demonized and destroyed. But since this is painful the more it can be forced onto the next generation, the better it is. Look at American elementary education today ... are any white cultural practices taught? When was the last elementary school square dance? When was the last class of kids taught that white abolitionists ended slavery? Or taught about "indentured servitude" and the relative monetary value of white versus negro slaves in the South? Again, by demonizing and destroying the past they can more easily control the future.

    At some level, our “white guilt” is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it’s an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening.

    I echo what AnotherDad said, this is well-put.

  154. @Anonymous
    So you're going to approach some african leaders and say "We have a big problem! If you don't make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to expand, dwarf our entire civilization, and end up ruling the world! You must help us stop it!"

    How could they respond with anything other than some version of "Sounds good to me" ?

    Gee, don't you think we could offer some other incentive? Or maybe find some way to make it their problem instead of our problem?

    So you’re going to approach some african leaders and say “We have a big problem! If you don’t make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to expand, dwarf our entire civilization, and end up ruling the world! You must help us stop it!”

    How could they respond with anything other than some version of “Sounds good to me” ?

    You won’t be writing his speeches, thank God. Another, smarter speechwriter would have him say, ““We have a big problem! If you don’t make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to die out.”

  155. @gokart-mozart
    "2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?"

    John Maynard Keynes, is that you? "In the long run, we'll all dead"?

    I won't be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be.

  156. @gokart-mozart
    "2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?"

    John Maynard Keynes, is that you? "In the long run, we'll all dead"?

    I won't be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be. So, yes, I give a damn.

    I won’t be alive, but my grandsons may be and my great-grandsons probably will be.

    In my book, that means you’re still alive.

  157. @fox
    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    And “pro life morons” have no political power, so their actions are completely inconsequential.

  158. @Counterpoint
    The idea that the "Economist" is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.

    The idea that the “Economist” is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.

    And apparently we have nit-wits commenting on this blog. The Economist is undeniably leftist.

  159. @AnotherDad

    At some level, our “white guilt” is surely a deliberate ploy to engender ancestor hatred. Once you convince a people to hate their wicked ancestors, it’s an easy thing to imagine them not caring about their progeny. They no longer view themselves as just a temporary cog in the machinery of their people, whose greatest responsibility is to pass along the legacy they themselves inherited, but instead to simply consume as much as they can as part of their status preening.
     
    Stan, this is the best cogent, pithy description of this issue i've ever read. Very well done.

    While obviously prosperity, birth control technology changed the dynamic just on their own, i think 90% of the issue is just that white people have had their culture and pride ripped from them ... and hence stopped caring viscerally about reproducing themselves.

    You either *feel*, deep in your bones that you are passing on something great--your race and culture--to your children and the meaning of life is wrapped up in that civilizational baton passing exercise ... or it's all just a trivial "lifestyle" choice, in which case many people think "why bother".

    Stan, this is the best cogent, pithy description of this issue i’ve ever read. Very well done.

    Yes, he did well, but there’s more to it. It’s part of a comprehensive plan of atomization.

    We’re disconnected from our past (ancestors), future (descendants), and present (racial cousins).

  160. @celt darnell
    "Europe" is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won't. We can already see this in the very different responses the different nations have made towards the "migrant crisis" (i.e. the invasion of settlers from Africa and the Middle East).

    Same is true of western nations as a whole. I don't see the US making it (in terms of non-white percentage of population, it's far past the point of any nation in Europe) but I do see Australia and New Zealand surviving as predominantly white countries.

    “Europe” is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won’t.

    How is that possible? If one nation goes down, but another doesn’t, wouldn’t the other just kick out the invaders and take over themselves? It’s all or nothing, surely.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    Why should it be all or nothing?

    "Europe" has never been united in its history.

    I can see parts of Europe being under Muslim rule and other parts not being under Muslim rule.

    Hell, I find Vox Day's unlikely prediction of another reconquista taking place in Europe far more credible than the idea of Eurabia.
  161. @Diversity is Wrong
    Some interesting racial commentary from Bill Maher --

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLD2xzAX8Aw

    I think he reads alt right blogs. Who else says “SJWs”?

  162. @Anonym
    The reason is that Africans simply can *not* beat white people (or Asian people) in a conflict. The unique African package of mental traits–relative to other people in the world–is lower IQ, extroversion, high time preference, low conscientiousness and low cooperation. This just isn’t a winning package for any sort of conflict, beyond a quick smash+grab or mob beating.

    Where white people “lose” or cede power to African people, it is because they are stopped by … other white people. For example, left on their own, i have zero doubt that a bunch of Sicilian men could and would organize and successfully prevent any Africans from landing on their turf and surviving. But they are stopped from doing basic territorial self-defense by the Italian state and EU. Same story across all the white nations including the US. White guys are more than capable of seeing off all these problems. But the establishment left is in control of all these governments (save maybe Hungary) and have organized state power–other white guys–to stop white guys from organizing to protect their nations ad hoc.

    I agree with this 100%. I think we are seeing the beginning of changing attitudes towards this. The Bill Maher video that someone linked to recently... he is a smart guy, a liberal, and realizes that liberals have overreached, and still wants the liberals to maintain control. That's pretty rare, for someone steeped in PC to have that much self awareness and intellectual honesty, but unfortunately it has taken Trump to reveal that it would get to this stage. Maher knows it needs to be walked back. If it were walked back earlier, maybe in the 2000s or even early 2010s, we wouldn't be in this situation. However, it's no longer at the finger in the dyke stage of containment. Everywhere you look online, there are voices, in many cases a majority, where people are incensed at what is happening and not afraid of saying it. It's getting to be like the attitudes of Americans after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

    Remember the Cronulla riots? Remember the donut eating cop that brought it to the white Australians rioting? Where were he and his compatriots during the years of Lebanese and other Muslim violence and sexual predation that provoked the riots, or in the reprisals by the Lebanese immediately after?

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/hero-cop-craig-campbell-left-behind-by-the-cronulla-riots-20160117-gm7j5r.html

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/muslims-back-excronulla-riot-cop-craig-campbell/news-story/8209896a1fec85e72187c81811308bc7

    This traitor has been kicked from the force, lost his bravery medal, had his marriage fail and can't hold down a job. As natural justice goes, it's a fairly damp squib but it's more than we usually see in these days of seeing Tony Blair receiving speaking fees and million dollar contracts, along with other traitors. Anyway, it's an indication that those higher up on the force know the score and have done the right thing. (Police see more race reality than probably any other profession.)

    I've said for years now that the non-whites who have been immigrating to the Eurosphere have been like the idiots who go out and pick up fish when the sea levels suddenly drop. They think it's normal and don't see the potential for the tsunami coming their way. PC is an aberration. Look back over the last thousand years in Europe and try and find anything like it. History ain't over.

    “This traitor has been kicked from the force, lost his bravery medal, had his marriage fail and can’t hold down a job.”
    Thanks for those links. I remember that fat so and so flogging Cronulla surfers like they were black South Africans.
    Hard to feel sorry for him.

  163. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonym
    The reason is that Africans simply can *not* beat white people (or Asian people) in a conflict. The unique African package of mental traits–relative to other people in the world–is lower IQ, extroversion, high time preference, low conscientiousness and low cooperation. This just isn’t a winning package for any sort of conflict, beyond a quick smash+grab or mob beating.

    Where white people “lose” or cede power to African people, it is because they are stopped by … other white people. For example, left on their own, i have zero doubt that a bunch of Sicilian men could and would organize and successfully prevent any Africans from landing on their turf and surviving. But they are stopped from doing basic territorial self-defense by the Italian state and EU. Same story across all the white nations including the US. White guys are more than capable of seeing off all these problems. But the establishment left is in control of all these governments (save maybe Hungary) and have organized state power–other white guys–to stop white guys from organizing to protect their nations ad hoc.

    I agree with this 100%. I think we are seeing the beginning of changing attitudes towards this. The Bill Maher video that someone linked to recently... he is a smart guy, a liberal, and realizes that liberals have overreached, and still wants the liberals to maintain control. That's pretty rare, for someone steeped in PC to have that much self awareness and intellectual honesty, but unfortunately it has taken Trump to reveal that it would get to this stage. Maher knows it needs to be walked back. If it were walked back earlier, maybe in the 2000s or even early 2010s, we wouldn't be in this situation. However, it's no longer at the finger in the dyke stage of containment. Everywhere you look online, there are voices, in many cases a majority, where people are incensed at what is happening and not afraid of saying it. It's getting to be like the attitudes of Americans after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

    Remember the Cronulla riots? Remember the donut eating cop that brought it to the white Australians rioting? Where were he and his compatriots during the years of Lebanese and other Muslim violence and sexual predation that provoked the riots, or in the reprisals by the Lebanese immediately after?

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/hero-cop-craig-campbell-left-behind-by-the-cronulla-riots-20160117-gm7j5r.html

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/muslims-back-excronulla-riot-cop-craig-campbell/news-story/8209896a1fec85e72187c81811308bc7

    This traitor has been kicked from the force, lost his bravery medal, had his marriage fail and can't hold down a job. As natural justice goes, it's a fairly damp squib but it's more than we usually see in these days of seeing Tony Blair receiving speaking fees and million dollar contracts, along with other traitors. Anyway, it's an indication that those higher up on the force know the score and have done the right thing. (Police see more race reality than probably any other profession.)

    I've said for years now that the non-whites who have been immigrating to the Eurosphere have been like the idiots who go out and pick up fish when the sea levels suddenly drop. They think it's normal and don't see the potential for the tsunami coming their way. PC is an aberration. Look back over the last thousand years in Europe and try and find anything like it. History ain't over.

    I only have one problem with this analysis – the sheer force and speed with which the lefties – and The Economist types – are forcing through the immigration tsunami.
    This is done deliberately, and with cunning, in order to simply overwhelm the opposition, to blind-side it, if you will, and ‘sweep the rug from under the feet’.
    One has to remember that once the indigenous population has reached minority status – which is ‘just around the corner’ then it really is game-over.

  164. @unpc downunder
    Condoms and contraceptive pills probably do have a useful role to play in Africa, but not for rural population control. Rural people in Africa have little social or economic incentive to have fewer kids. Give them to urban slum dwellers and sex workers who don't want to have lots of offspring.

    That will only work if white taxpayers demand an end to subsidies for colored bastard children.

  165. @fox
    religious right has to take major blame for this.

    The modern mystery is not so much who did it (we’ve all been told), but how.

  166. @Counterpoint
    The idea that the "Economist" is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.

    The global elite is left wing, why should their favorite paper be right wing?

  167. @candid_observer
    If you go to a place or an event, and there are no black people there to see it, does it really exist?

    Good one. Also, if you do something and nobody is victimized, did it really happen?

  168. @Triumph104

    As urbanization rises to above 50%, African governments will have to rely on western donors due to their lower IQ. This will give a major opportunity to affect change.
     
    It is already happening in education. Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, the UK government and others are investors in Bridge International Academies which provides schooling in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, India, and soon Liberia.

    Instead of paying more educated, experienced, qualified teachers, the company hires inexperienced people from the local communities (reportedly paying around $90 a month). It gives them a few weeks of training and handheld tablet computers loaded with pre-scripted lessons designed by the company's education experts. It then sends them into the classrooms to deliver the scripted content to the students.

    And when they say scripted lessons, they mean scripted. We're not talking a general outline of a lesson plan with a few bullet points here.
     
    http://www.vox.com/2016/4/8/11347796/liberia-outsourcing-schools

    Great news. I sure hope the level of education provided by those tablets is not racistly low. I also hope the educational outcomes will be thoroughly evaluated.

    Okay, so it’s not great news for those with an education being replaced by the uneducated in order to provide an education for other uneducateds. Might make them question the value of that degree.

  169. @Stan d Mute

    Well, what that shows is that Obama understands the destabilizing effect of Third World immigration to the West while yet relentlessly championing it. I.e., he knows he is actively working to undo the West.
     
    In perhaps the greatest irony in all human existence, whites will be a minority by the time the African exodus ramps up to Camp of the Saints human tsunami level. And since non-whites are blissfully free of whites' universalist altruism, it's highly probable they'll repel the African invasion. White Christians and SJW's will bleat and wail about the poor hungry and diseased Africans while the coalition of (by then) majority Latinos, along with Asians and American negroes use every tool at their disposal to keep America's declining resources and wealth for themselves.

    Just as Europe's Jews are demanding Europe admit the Muslims who will eventually destroy them, today American negroes demand open borders and admittance of the Latinos and Arabs who will return them to the bondage from which the whites freed them. Hard to believe that their blind hatred for whites and western civilization burns so brightly that it prevents seeing the inevitable end consequence of their behavior, but there we are regardless.

    Most of that hatred was cultivated by white liberals (and not only Jews, as some would argue). Although I have to say you might be surprised at the number of PJs who would be happy never to hear Spanish spoken north of the Rio Grande again.

  170. @anon
    Trouble is they won't STAY in Africa. Having made a disaster out of their continent, they will then go to Europe and make a disaster out of that continent too. Eventually there will be no decent place left for anyone as there is only ONE Europe.

    Trouble is they won’t STAY in Africa. Having made a disaster out of their continent, they will then go to Europe and make a disaster out of that continent too. Eventually there will be no decent place left for anyone as there is only ONE Europe.

    All Africans are bad news when it comes to their mass immigration invasion of Europe. Not just the sub -Saharan Muslims (and Christians) but the North African Muslims (Algeria, Tunisia etc) such as the ones in Belgium and France who were behind the two recent mass murders in Paris and Brussels.

  171. @Counterpoint
    The idea that the "Economist" is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.

    The idea that the “Economist” is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.

    It is left wing when it comes to open immigration & open borders and ruinous trade policies and this is enough for me. Are you blind or a blockhead?

  172. @Anonymous
    So you're going to approach some african leaders and say "We have a big problem! If you don't make some major changes soon, your tribe is going to expand, dwarf our entire civilization, and end up ruling the world! You must help us stop it!"

    How could they respond with anything other than some version of "Sounds good to me" ?

    Gee, don't you think we could offer some other incentive? Or maybe find some way to make it their problem instead of our problem?

    It’s more like: “millions will starve to death, or die from diseases or in war”.
    Whether they stay put in Africa or emigrate in mass, the result will be the same.

  173. r selected populations won’t control their fertility; they let the environment control it – so they’ll continue until the West is destroyed and the world’s carrying capacity plummets

  174. @fox
    pro life morons continue to oppose contraception.

    r selected people don’t want contraception

  175. @fox
    religious right has to take major blame for this.

    Latin America proves the opposite – it’s genetics

  176. @Jefferson
    2100, who gives a damn. Will anybody here on The Unz still be alive by than?

    my grand-children (god willing)(and touch wood)

  177. @Jefferson
    By 2100, there will be massive White flight from Earth to Mars. Mars will be gentrified. Like Doug Quaid says in Total Recall, get your ass to Mars.

    if the space missions hadn’t been wound down since the 1960s then you’d probably be right – escape would have been seen as preferable to the alternative but that escape was blocked off.

  178. @Discard
    Africans will starve, and a more capable race will take over.

    No. They will move to the West; the West will be destroyed – and then they’ll starve.

  179. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Cicerone
    Yes, but not only there. Africans in big cities all over the continent have lower than average fertility (but probably also above average IQs). While in Kenya TFR is raound 3.8, it is just 2.4 in Nairobi. Similar thing with Lagos in Nigeria (4 against 5.5 children per woman) or, in an extreme form, Addis Abeba in Ethiopia (with just 1.5 children per woman against 4.8).

    So the first step of slowing down population growth should be to foster urbanization in Africa. Regarding Africa, I am not one of those believers in inborn r and k strategies. Under certain circumstances even Africans can have very few children (Addis Abeba or in many countries in the Americas), while other circumstances encourage Whites to breed like rabbits (Amish, ultraorthodox Jews).

    You’re reading massively disproportionate male migration to the cities (and South Africa) as lower fertility.

    It’s like the different immigrant groups in Europe – on the surface the ones that are 2/3 male have a lower fertility rate than the ones which are 50/50 but it’s just the disproportion messing with the stats.

  180. @gruff
    I wonder what the Chinese are thinking. I'm sure they already have a plan. They need Africa's resources. They could also do with some land - what's Mandarin for Lebensraum?

    More likely the Chinese will try to do something sensible and the poisoned West will prevent it.

  181. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @gda
    Actually, there is no evidence that Keynes' wife ever miscarried, only speculation from Keynes' biographer, which is pooh-poohed by the wife's biographer, who presumably would be more in the know.

    Keynes was not only gay, but an enthusiastic pedophile. To compound his contemptible character, he was also a communist sympathizer.

    Undoubtedly his continued hero worship in the social science arena owes much to his left wing leanings, and the fawning admiration of similarly deluded so-called "economists" and ideologues over the years. It's hard to come up with any other explanation why his economic theories, which have been proven to be crucially flawed, continue to walk the earth like zombies, despite having stakes driven through their hearts again and again.

    It’s hard to come up with any other explanation why his economic theories, which have been proven to be crucially flawed, continue to walk the earth like zombies, despite having stakes driven through their hearts again and again.

    Nonsense.

    The level of demand in the economy being critical is simply obvious. The banking mafia don’t like that aspect because it points so directly at the flaw in their desire for subsistence level wages.

    The things wrong with Keynsianism are that he accepts the consequences of the banking mafia’s control of money i.e.
    a) he’s speaking to how to manage boom and bust when boom and bust is a function of fractional reserve banking
    b) govts borrowing imaginary money from banks and paying it back with interest is ludicrous when they could simply create the money themselves (like the constitution says).

    As usual the banking mafia want it both ways. They want Keynesianism as an excuse for govt borrowing and at the same time attack it for silently pointing a big fat finger at why the cheap labor lobby is wrecking the economy.

  182. @Anonym
    The reason is that Africans simply can *not* beat white people (or Asian people) in a conflict. The unique African package of mental traits–relative to other people in the world–is lower IQ, extroversion, high time preference, low conscientiousness and low cooperation. This just isn’t a winning package for any sort of conflict, beyond a quick smash+grab or mob beating.

    Where white people “lose” or cede power to African people, it is because they are stopped by … other white people. For example, left on their own, i have zero doubt that a bunch of Sicilian men could and would organize and successfully prevent any Africans from landing on their turf and surviving. But they are stopped from doing basic territorial self-defense by the Italian state and EU. Same story across all the white nations including the US. White guys are more than capable of seeing off all these problems. But the establishment left is in control of all these governments (save maybe Hungary) and have organized state power–other white guys–to stop white guys from organizing to protect their nations ad hoc.

    I agree with this 100%. I think we are seeing the beginning of changing attitudes towards this. The Bill Maher video that someone linked to recently... he is a smart guy, a liberal, and realizes that liberals have overreached, and still wants the liberals to maintain control. That's pretty rare, for someone steeped in PC to have that much self awareness and intellectual honesty, but unfortunately it has taken Trump to reveal that it would get to this stage. Maher knows it needs to be walked back. If it were walked back earlier, maybe in the 2000s or even early 2010s, we wouldn't be in this situation. However, it's no longer at the finger in the dyke stage of containment. Everywhere you look online, there are voices, in many cases a majority, where people are incensed at what is happening and not afraid of saying it. It's getting to be like the attitudes of Americans after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

    Remember the Cronulla riots? Remember the donut eating cop that brought it to the white Australians rioting? Where were he and his compatriots during the years of Lebanese and other Muslim violence and sexual predation that provoked the riots, or in the reprisals by the Lebanese immediately after?

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/hero-cop-craig-campbell-left-behind-by-the-cronulla-riots-20160117-gm7j5r.html

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/muslims-back-excronulla-riot-cop-craig-campbell/news-story/8209896a1fec85e72187c81811308bc7

    This traitor has been kicked from the force, lost his bravery medal, had his marriage fail and can't hold down a job. As natural justice goes, it's a fairly damp squib but it's more than we usually see in these days of seeing Tony Blair receiving speaking fees and million dollar contracts, along with other traitors. Anyway, it's an indication that those higher up on the force know the score and have done the right thing. (Police see more race reality than probably any other profession.)

    I've said for years now that the non-whites who have been immigrating to the Eurosphere have been like the idiots who go out and pick up fish when the sea levels suddenly drop. They think it's normal and don't see the potential for the tsunami coming their way. PC is an aberration. Look back over the last thousand years in Europe and try and find anything like it. History ain't over.

    I can’t agree that a mob of youths bashing and possibly killing two lone Middle Eastern youth is an expression of white superiority.

    I think the cop did a good job. I think he should have been brought up on real charges if he had stood back and let two non-offensive boys be killed for no reason.

    There are better ways to express your superior fighting skills: the South African army repelling the invasion from Namibia against numerically-superior forces backed by Cuba and other Communist countries is an example. But killing two lone, outnumbered boys?…No.

    • Replies: @anon
    You're forgetting all the Muslim gang attacks and rapes that sparked the reaction.
  183. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri

    "Households are often composed of three generations of women living together and visited by their current sexual partners. Women compete for men as sexual partners and dump them as soon as they get bored. Actually it’s a lot like Negro underclass life in the developed world but sans gangs, firearms, and drugs."
     
    It's not just the developed world's Negro underclass life that is like that now. Seen the white underclass lately?

    It's been a while since I was in Africa, but when I was I do recall seeing one woman who lived as you describe, but she was something of an outcast living at the fringe of the village. But as with so many things nowadays, the fringe has become the core, so maybe whole villages are like that now. Well, anyway if this is the new female-empowered/liberated Africa, then for purposes of our discussion, the real question is how does the TFR compare to the old male-empowered/patriarchal Africa?

    Well, anyway if this is the new female-empowered/liberated Africa

    It’s not new it’s been that far since forever because of the nature of farming there.

    It’s not just the developed world’s Negro underclass life that is like that now. Seen the white underclass lately?

    Yes because the welfare underclass environment mimics that African environment where the women don’t need male help to feed their kids.

    The white underclass is evolving African behavior through selection.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Admitted, my experience was

    1) anecdotal,

    2) in East Africa rather than the west African home of so much emigration, voluntary and otherwise, and

    3) three decades ago, so the British colonial influence may have still been pervading the countryside. Since everyone agrees that colonialism was the Worst Thing Ever, all "colonial" influences may have been eliminated by now, and the villagers returned to their default lifestyle.
  184. @tris

    The South African black has to navigate in at the very least a quasi European enviroment other Africans do not.
     
    The ANC gov is doing everything in its power to remove that European influence through its various forms of indigenization, known as BEE, BBBEE, and other economically destructive and utterly racist affirmative action programs. Even the code of law is now officially being changed from Roman-Dutch to African, whatever that means. Basically the blacks want the economic goodies, but loathe the cultural framework/message which accompanies them.

    “The code of law is officially being changed from Roman-Dutch to African” Citation?

    Affirmative action in South Africa is largely bemoaned by low-IQ white types who can’t compete against the hopeless and incompetent tokens it favors. Smart whites manage to thrive cleaning up the messes it creates.

    • Replies: @anon
    I look forward to the day you're car-jacked.
  185. @celt darnell
    "Europe" is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won't. We can already see this in the very different responses the different nations have made towards the "migrant crisis" (i.e. the invasion of settlers from Africa and the Middle East).

    Same is true of western nations as a whole. I don't see the US making it (in terms of non-white percentage of population, it's far past the point of any nation in Europe) but I do see Australia and New Zealand surviving as predominantly white countries.

    New Zealand is not significantly whiter than the US.

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    Maoris -- the indigenous peoples of New Zealand.

    Their numbers ain't mushrooming like the numbers of America's immigrants.
  186. @Anonymous
    New Zealand is not significantly whiter than the US.

    Maoris — the indigenous peoples of New Zealand.

    Their numbers ain’t mushrooming like the numbers of America’s immigrants.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    At the next census, there will be more Asians in NZ than Maoris. And that's in spite of the Maori population growing steadily. And you're also forgetting the Pacific Islanders. Then there are the much smaller but growing populations like Arabs and Africans. 69% of New Zealanders identify as having some European descent. Most of that 69% are white, but hundreds of thousands are Polynesian/European mixes. And the percentage is falling fast.
  187. @ben tillman

    “Europe” is nothing more than a geographic concept.

    Some nations in Europe will undoubtedly go down. Others, however, won’t.
     
    How is that possible? If one nation goes down, but another doesn't, wouldn't the other just kick out the invaders and take over themselves? It's all or nothing, surely.

    Why should it be all or nothing?

    “Europe” has never been united in its history.

    I can see parts of Europe being under Muslim rule and other parts not being under Muslim rule.

    Hell, I find Vox Day’s unlikely prediction of another reconquista taking place in Europe far more credible than the idea of Eurabia.

  188. @Flip
    The US is a continent sized country though. The demographics of Idaho are quite different than New Jersey or California.

    I concede the point that, like Europe, parts of the U.S. may hang on while other parts go under.

    That would still, however, mean the dismembering of a nation state (the U.S.) with it’s national identity and culture.

    By contrast, Europe has never been united, let alone been politically unified with a common culture in its entire existence. A Europe divided into Muslim parts and non-Muslim parts would be pretty much par for the course.

    Hell, it’s happened in Europe’s past.

  189. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @celt darnell
    Maoris -- the indigenous peoples of New Zealand.

    Their numbers ain't mushrooming like the numbers of America's immigrants.

    At the next census, there will be more Asians in NZ than Maoris. And that’s in spite of the Maori population growing steadily. And you’re also forgetting the Pacific Islanders. Then there are the much smaller but growing populations like Arabs and Africans. 69% of New Zealanders identify as having some European descent. Most of that 69% are white, but hundreds of thousands are Polynesian/European mixes. And the percentage is falling fast.

  190. @Jefferson
    "Ethiopians are not really subsaharan Africans, but rather mixed people. In a way they are dark skinned caucasians."

    Since Ethiopians they are racially mixed, how can they be dark skin Caucasians? Are African Americans dark skin Caucasians as well? After all they are not pure Sub Saharans.

    And if Ethiopians are dark skin Caucasians, why don't most of them have straightish hair like Indians? Ethiopian hair texture falls within the range of Negroid hair texture.

    If people with Caucasian bone structure and light skin moved too far south for long enough they might get darker over time if both the bone structure and darker skin were selected for.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "If people with Caucasian bone structure and light skin moved too far south for long enough they might get darker over time if both the bone structure and darker skin were selected for."

    Who are you talking about?

    Also why hasn't living in states like Texas and Florida not darken the skin of Caucasian bone structered Northern Europeans over time?
  191. @RonaldB
    I can't agree that a mob of youths bashing and possibly killing two lone Middle Eastern youth is an expression of white superiority.

    I think the cop did a good job. I think he should have been brought up on real charges if he had stood back and let two non-offensive boys be killed for no reason.

    There are better ways to express your superior fighting skills: the South African army repelling the invasion from Namibia against numerically-superior forces backed by Cuba and other Communist countries is an example. But killing two lone, outnumbered boys?...No.

    You’re forgetting all the Muslim gang attacks and rapes that sparked the reaction.

  192. @Dave Sliny
    "The code of law is officially being changed from Roman-Dutch to African" Citation?

    Affirmative action in South Africa is largely bemoaned by low-IQ white types who can't compete against the hopeless and incompetent tokens it favors. Smart whites manage to thrive cleaning up the messes it creates.

    I look forward to the day you’re car-jacked.

    • Replies: @Dave Sliny
    I never said it wasn't a dangerous, awful place. I was addressing affirmative action in South Africa, in particular.
  193. @anon

    Well, anyway if this is the new female-empowered/liberated Africa
     
    It's not new it's been that far since forever because of the nature of farming there.

    It’s not just the developed world’s Negro underclass life that is like that now. Seen the white underclass lately?
     
    Yes because the welfare underclass environment mimics that African environment where the women don't need male help to feed their kids.

    The white underclass is evolving African behavior through selection.

    Admitted, my experience was

    1) anecdotal,

    2) in East Africa rather than the west African home of so much emigration, voluntary and otherwise, and

    3) three decades ago, so the British colonial influence may have still been pervading the countryside. Since everyone agrees that colonialism was the Worst Thing Ever, all “colonial” influences may have been eliminated by now, and the villagers returned to their default lifestyle.

  194. @Steve Sailer
    I have shirts sewn in Africa.

    “I have shirts sewn in Africa.”

    I have zero clothes that were made in Africa. All of my Non Donald Trump and Non Wounded Warriors Project clothes were made in either Asia or Central America.

    Africans are punching below their weight even by 3rd World standards.

  195. @anon
    If people with Caucasian bone structure and light skin moved too far south for long enough they might get darker over time if both the bone structure and darker skin were selected for.

    “If people with Caucasian bone structure and light skin moved too far south for long enough they might get darker over time if both the bone structure and darker skin were selected for.”

    Who are you talking about?

    Also why hasn’t living in states like Texas and Florida not darken the skin of Caucasian bone structered Northern Europeans over time?

  196. @Counterpoint
    The idea that the "Economist" is left-wing is almost funny. Apparently there is such a thing as political color-blindness.

    The Economist is the ghost of early 19th century British Free Trade Liberalism that lived long enough to become late 20th century neoliberalism and then early 21st century globalism.

    It’s earliest incarnation was the progressive/liberal/radical ideology of the time- remember that early British Liberalism had some fairly radical social content on issues like marriage, the law, social reform, policing, prisons, and so forth, included then especially radical subsets like Benthamite utilitarianism, etc. Free Trade was its flagship policy, not all of it. And all that made some sense as a descendant of fairly libertine Whiggism, as well. It had its upside when applied in the context of an all-white society undergoing rapid demographic and economic expansion and taking on the world.

    Neoliberalism and globalism today are considered right-wing if one is coming at things from a Marxist or post-Marxist perspective, sure. It could be considered the centre-right wing of globalist technocracy, where others want more state planning.

    But if your definition of ‘right’ includes any element at all of nationalism, national sovereignty, traditionalism, cultural or ethnic identity, or social conservatism, all of which I would consider valid markers of a right-wing, then the Economist is left. One world, all the time, under a multicultural, multilingual class of social progressives.

    Plus there’s that emblematic masthead slogan of theirs, which unites the arrogant progressivism of their first days with that of today, under which the Economist was founded in 1843 to “take part in a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress.”

  197. @anon
    I look forward to the day you're car-jacked.

    I never said it wasn’t a dangerous, awful place. I was addressing affirmative action in South Africa, in particular.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS