The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Strong Correlation Between White Fertility and White Republicanism at the State Level
🔊 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

The following graphs show two-way partisan affiliation among whites and total fertility rates among whites by state. The state-level results correlate at an impressive .73. States where whites still have a few babies here and there are red ones:

The future belongs to those who show up, so if you’re looking for comfort where some can be found, this is not nothing.

If the invasion put to a halt and the invaders expelled, the long-term electoral viability of the Republican party would once again become an open question. On the current trajectory, the GOP is a dead party walking.

Scrounging around the bottom of the bottle for another white pill, final birth data for 2017 shows that once again the sensational pronouncement by the Census all the way back in 2011 alleging that non-Hispanic white births no longer constituted a majority of all births in the US was incorrect then just as it continues to be incorrect now, albeit only just:

Parenthetically, the assertion can be quibbled with by pointing out that the data is exclusively for mothers, so if the progeny of both mixed-race male non-white/female white parents and male white/female non-white parents are counted as non-white, the POC percentage could be above 50%. In a flight-from-white zeitgeist, this is fair enough from a cultural perspective. Biologically-speaking, it’s less defensible.

It can also be contested on the relatively expansive definition of non-Hispanic white, which includes “off whites” among some portion of Chileans, Jews, Armenians, etc.

Still, the mendacious media’s effort at demoralization must not go unnoticed. When Fake News was celebrating the premature death of white America several years ago, it was not subsequent to taking these things into consideration. It was a headline they hungered for and uncritically gobbled up.

A few other interesting insights gleaned from the CDC’s report:

– Hispanics of Cuban extraction now comprise just 22.4% of all Hispanic births in the state of Florida. In a few short years, Puerto Rican births will overtake Cuban ones, with Mexican births not far behind.

Speaking of Puerto Rico, fertility on the island itself is almost non-existent with a TFR of 1.1, lower than any other country in the world except for Macau and Singapore. They invade the mainland to spawn. They’re looking for better schools, of course.

– The percentages of new mothers in 2017 who had a bachelor’s degree or higher, by race:

This is additional evidence that while NAM fertility in the US is starkly ‘dysgenic’, white fertility is only modestly so–and even then only among women.

– Hey whitey, congratulations on footing the bill for the majority of non-white births. Funding your own future–your own future replacements, that is! Percentages of births, by race, that were paid for by Medicaid:

– Similarly, the percentages of mothers receiving WIC benefits at the time of birth, by race:

The White Man’s Burden is alive and well, and will be until white men either finally arise to seize the future for themselves and their posterity–or until we die.

 
Hide 151 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as “pro-life”.

    • Agree: Endgame Napoleon
    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
    Conservatism, Inc. is too busy demanding that Congress censure Steve King.
    , @Rosie

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.
     
    It is considered shameful, but only among Whites, and that is the problem.

    As the erstwhile custodial majority population, Whites obviously frown upon welfare dependence. I'm not sure that ethos is appropriate to our current situation, where we either have children we cannot afford, or none at all.
    , @SunBakedSuburb
    Conservatism Inc. is a dwindling enterprise. Now that liberals have fully embraced neoconservatism and neoliberalism, country club Republicans are obsolete. I don't think the newly-elected socialist firebrands will alter the Democratic Party's establishment trajectory. The Dems are now the party of the deep state, the shadow government, and the financial sector. Trump Republicans and independent conservatives have a real opportunity now to reshape the GOP.
    , @Mr. Rational

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.
     
    It was deliberately de-stigmatized among Blacks way back in the 1960's, as Democratic machines in places like NYC used welfare to build a plantation of captive voters.

    Efforts to roll this back have been unsuccessful, as groups like "pro-life" have hysterically opposed the limitation of welfare for additional illegitimate children as "promoting abortion".  Evangelicals are leftists at heart.

    , @dvorak

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points?
     
    RadFem goes far beyond Conservatism Inc. Dalrock has shown that it has infected much of the Evangelical church.

    The Southern Baptist Convention recently handed power to some homo hipsters. It's basically the Soros Baptist Convention now.
    , @eah, @Stan d Mute

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.
     
    Indeed, and an even bigger failure that we fund it rather than making women get a Norplant while receiving any monies from the Treasury.

    Who’s to blame here? We are. Or rather the Silent Generation and the Boomers who left us this legacy of dysgenic stupidity.

    If I were King Stan, I’d require permanent sterilization in exchange for public welfare benefits. So Norplant is me being conciliatory [for you Mr Rational - busting my chops for offering a pragmatic compromise].
  2. Please, states aren’t “levels”.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt

    Please, states aren’t “levels”.

     

    Administrative units of Swamp City DC?

    Federal Reserve Bank printing press renders 10th Amendment null and void.
  3. This may be opening a can of slightly-off-topic worms here, A.E., but that’s not so bad, right? This is for the same folks I’d been going back and forth with under the “Washington Watcher”‘s post about Socialism:

    Maybe the term “cuck” is out of favor now, so forgive me as I’m using it. Looking at the bottom 2 graphs, stuff I already know from my observations, are not supposedly-alt-right Socialists the ultimate in cucks? Is it not the definition of getting cuckolded what’s going on in those graphs, for white people? You are getting money forcibly extracted from you in the form of taxes on your property, on your income, on your purchases, and other ways. This amounts to the theft of your labor, meaning the theft of a portion of your life!

    You people that argue “I don’t care about lowering taxes, we’ve got other problems!” (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don’t even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you “can’t afford them right now”. Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future “Americans”.

    Socialism and its more-violent cousin Communism are the ultimate in Cuckdom. Enjoy, anti-Libertards!

    • Replies: @Saint Louis

    You people that argue “I don’t care about lowering taxes, we’ve got other problems!” (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don’t even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you “can’t afford them right now”. Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future “Americans”.
     
    Whites need to have more kids. And although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can't afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded. Get out there and breed, guys. No duty is more fulfilling than parenthood.

    And before I get some moron telling me to walk the walk, my wife and I have had 5 kids and aren't ready to stop yet. With the child tax credit and other credits and deductions, we pay an effective tax rate of about 3%, so we're simultaneously starving the beast. And I live in VT, so judging by the graphs my kids will be the only ones here in 25 years.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    Yes. The take-home lesson is that in democracies when the market dominant group becomes a minority, one of two things happen: 1) socialism, then communism, then collapse (Venezuela), or 2) democracy gets shelved for something workable (Singapore).
    , @Anon
    Great post Whites pay so much to support parasite non White kids we can’t afford to have any of our own.
    We’re it not for abortion there’d be millions more of them supported by Whites in the prison and life long welfare system.
    , @jacques sheete
    I

    s it not the definition of getting cuckolded what’s going on in those graphs, for white people? You are getting money forcibly extracted from you in the form of taxes on your property, on your income, on your purchases, and other ways. This amounts to the theft of your labor, meaning the theft of a portion of your life!
     
    That certainly seems to be a valid definition of the word, and as you point out, it's even worse when such easily surrendered resources are used against the victims own interests. Such has been the case, really big time, since the Federal Reserve Act, yet most don't see what you've so masterfully illuminated.
  4. the number of mixed race children in the case of asian and native american women , could be as high as 50 % of the births, the opposite is true for black women who almost never have children with non-black men

    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?
    , @Stan d Mute

    black women who almost never have children with non-black men
     
    There’s a very simple evolutionary reason why negro males are so virile they’ll bang anything moving or not. They have to be in order to even consider banging a negro female.
  5. BTW, a little about the Asian category in those bar graphs, though I can only speak from my experience with Chinese people (is this why that bar is yellow?) Quite a few of them, especially in the Chinese-concentrated areas as in NYC that are on the dole in some way (the 25% and 22%), are actually doing fairly well, but that’s off the books. Many will take advantage of everything they can even when they are doing well. It’s not their money, as they aren’t the ones putting in that tax money, after all, right?

    Lots of white people don’t do things that way as that’s not who we are.

  6. @Reg Cæsar
    Please, states aren't "levels".

    Please, states aren’t “levels”.

    Administrative units of Swamp City DC?

    Federal Reserve Bank printing press renders 10th Amendment null and void.

  7. Speaking of Puerto Rico, Fred Sanford was right.

    He told Lamont that the Puerto Rican national anthem was “we’ll take Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island, too.”

    Fred may have stretched things, a bit, when he accused the Puerto Ricans of trashing Harlem by bringing in rats and cockroaches.

    • Replies: @Lucas McCrudy
    Puerto Ricans are the worst of the 3 largest Hispanic groups- they even trail blacks in academic achievement and beat them in teen births. Living in the Northeast my whole life in close proximity to them, I can say they're no picnic to be around. I felt more at ease when I visited southern California and was around Mexican mestizos versus the quadroon PRs I was accustomed to.
    Old Joke- Q. "Why did God create Puerto Ricans? A- "To give blacks someone to look down on."

    Can we finally cut them loose and all declare in true multi-culti fashion:

    iViva Puerto Rico libre!

  8. @216
    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as "pro-life".

    Conservatism, Inc. is too busy demanding that Congress censure Steve King.

    • Replies: @Judith Barsella
    Dear Liberty Mike, The only reason they are removing him from various committees, is because he was too blatant with his disdain for immigrants and minorities. As soon as the dust settles, the party will be right back, practicing it's subtle brand of racism. The US just cannot be seen as racist and be a "shining city on a hill." We do not have over 1000 military bases (not to mention black/rendition sites) because we are pacifists. We have plans to dominate Space. We fighting to maintain hegemony over the planet. We would rather build tanks and planes and bombs before we provide our fellow Americans with employment, healthcare and jobs. The section of the country identified with the "depths of despair" phenomenon. We must offer hope to fly-over country, the heartland, if you will.
  9. @eli
    the number of mixed race children in the case of asian and native american women , could be as high as 50 % of the births, the opposite is true for black women who almost never have children with non-black men

    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?

    • Replies: @Peter Johnson
    Sorry to contradict you, but it is actually mostly due to the "self-respecting" black women who prevent these unions. Black women are not much attracted to non-black men; whereas black men are quite strongly attracted to white women. Just on average, as a statistically valid stereotype.
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    If you have seen walmart commercials, all that is left for white men are negro women.
    , @Truth
    ... About a hundred thousand of them a year.
    , @Stan d Mute

    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?
     
    I’ve noticed a sick fetish for this in some German and Swedish men, but otherwise it’s gotta be blind men with anosmia.
  10. The uncomfortable truth for people is that fertility is inversely related to female employment and has no correlation to male employment. Since Republicans still practice a low-key patriarchal model, their women stay at home and have kids. This effect has become more pronounced in research years due to the ease of access to contraceptives which mostly keeps white liberals from having kids that they would have been forced to have several decades ago.

    • Replies: @216
    IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping. Usually credited as salutary effect of the Obamacare BC mandate. Also due to the de-glamorization of teen pregnancy by the Teen Mom show, and growing "screen time" replacing social interaction in low-trust Millennials and Zeds.

    Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    From the perspective of a younger white middle class woman (rarer than Nigerians on Unz), they have few complaints about the present system other than "I hate the icky beta males that are harazzing me" and the amorphous "pay gap" that is the reason they need their debts bailed out. If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common, and worsened by the odious elite employers that pay for "egg freezing". At least for now, there isn't a social acceptability of a high-status male other than a sportsballer/entertainer having children by multiple women. Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    What will be interesting is when the Millennial cohort ages into its 30s and 40s during the next decade. A lot of "never married" women here. Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women? If they don't, and white tribalism increases/receives legitimacy, we could be headed towards the "conservative wave of feminism" as these women suddenly decide that "men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals".
    , @Endgame Napoleon
    Keep accommodating single moms with monthly welfare that serves as a spousal income, thereby replacing the American husband. Keep on handing out refundable child tax credits that top out at $6,431, making it easy for the single moms, too, to undercut females with no spousal income—i.e. females who have no access to wage boosters from Uncle Sam. In addition to widowed females and a much lower number of divorced females, these are the females who worked out of necessity in past eras, finding plenty of jobs to keep a roof over their heads since the jobs were not mom-dominated and “voted best for moms” when most moms were married, raising their own children in single-breadwinner households.

    As a single and childless woman who switched parties to vote for Trump, I have decades of voting left and actually show up to vote in the midterms and general elections, but I should not vote for either fertility-obsessed party. Neither party represents my economic interests. Republicans have done nothing to stop the multi-layered, rigged welfare system that undercuts citizens by aiding the immigrant-replacement strategy and, in turn, drives down wages (and hours) for single, childless, welfare-ineligible citizens and single, welfare-ineligible parents with kids over 18.

    And white fertility rates are not bolstered by accommodating dual-earner, married households with non-refundable child tax credits and womb-privileged absenteeism standards. By supporting these measures, Republicans have helped to halve the size of the college-educated middle class, thereby reducing the white fertility rate.

    When dual-earner parents keep two middle-class (or upper-middle class) jobs under one roof, far fewer white Americans can pursue household formation of any kind, not even the dignity of one-person independent household formation in a safe neighborhood, much less household formation with kids in a safe neighborhood. People end up putting it off, thnking I got the required college degree and / or other certifications. Surely, as advertised, the fabled “real job” will surface. At that point they will have kids.

    Come to find out, in the fake-feminist era of womb privilege, almost no amount of absenteeism results in an above-firing mom—with a bigly spousal income and low-wage daycare workers or elderly grandparents raising her kids for her—getting fired. This crony-parent job-protection racket reduces the chances of decent-job access for millions of white college grads (and other qualified job seekers). Most of us white people, and some in minority groups, were raised with strong pressure to refrain from reproducing until we were 1) married and 2) financially independent enough to support children in middle-class style.

    Republicans would be very surprised to hear what Black, middle-class government workers say about the clients behind the scenes. Many of them—more than some Republicans may think—were raised not to have kids when young and unmarried. Other than the “plantation” stuff, which is aimed at welfare recipients who are mostly not registered to vote, I do not hear Republicans pitching anything about conservative social values to middle-class Black citizens, a group that includes quite a few religious types.

    Other minority groups have plenty of social conservatives.

    It is just that many non-voting illegal aliens, and many legal Hispanic immigrants, too, are using the welfare system to pursue stay-at-home, married motherhood, with the father of their children being the single breadwinner.

    They bring in their US-born kids’ SS cards and 8 paycheck stubs from their spouse when applying for benefits. One rock-bottom-low male income keeps them under the earned-income limits for welfare programs, particularly if the illegal alien mom limits evidence of traceable income from the dad.

    The US-born kids qualify them for hundreds in monthly income to add to the household till. They often live in crowded households, with several families under one roof and several womb-productive, noncitizen females, getting paid by the US government for sex and reproduction.

    Do all Hispanics—all of the Catholics and all of the Protestant Hispanics—approve of this? I don’t think so. If they are monolithic on social issues, why does Cruz still win in Texas?

    Do all Asians, including Indian Americans, approve of this social libertinism?

    Ugh, no, it is a safe bet to assume that most Asians do not approve, not enough to encourage their own kids to adopt this way of life even if they vote for Democrats on strictly ideological grounds.

    Seems like there might be some tradionalist Asians. Why don’t Republicans ask Asians what they think of the newfangled, single-parenthood-facilitating social programs? How do Asians think this will effect American society long term? There is a good chance that Asians will respond to rational arguments anout welfare-assisted traditional-family breakdown, as opposed to the purely emotional arguments of Democrats, screaming about mommas and babies at the border.

    Republicans aren’t even trying.

    How about the Muslims? We do not want more mass-scale Muslim immigration for sure, but there are Muslim citizens. They are already US citizens. They vote. They do not appear to embrace libertine social values. What do they think about pay-per-birth single motherhood? When I worked in the EBT and cash-assistance programs, other than the Somalians brought in by reps from Catholic Charities, I saw very few Muslim applicants and zero Asian applicants.

    The majority of welfare applicants were Black single moms with their own paycheck stubs. There were plenty of white people, too, and again, the overwhelming majority were single moms with their own paycheck stubs from temp or part-time jobs, which keep them under the earned-income limits for the programs during working months, whereas the Hispanic moms (at least 1/4th [if not 1/3rd] of the applicants) brought the paycheck stubs of their children’s father. Hispanic legal & illegal immigrants often got the max, with EBT alone for a womb-prolific momma of 4 approaching $800 per month. Welfare is allocated in increasing amounts per birth, including the additional cash-assistance welfare issued in lump sum via the progressive tax code.
  11. On a totally different slightly-off-topic subject, possibly, though these graphs/maps are not about immigration directly, they still bring up the subject. Wasn’t it only 30 years back or so when the treehuggers were still pretty solid on “we don’t need any more people in this country”? John Denver (OK, more like 40 years for this) was getting Rocky Mountain High, for one decade’s census (1980?), more people were living in rural areas, as a percentage, than the previous one, etc. This carried over pretty much until the time the Sierra Club got Mission Creep.

    My point is that I thought people should be happy with a stable population, though it would have been stable at 50 million lower, if the gates hadn’t have been positioned wide open in 1965. The small note below the 2nd map proves this out. Yet, the argument put forth into useful idiots’ heads over the last 30 years has been, “no, no, but we’ve got to shore up SS and Medicare. We need new young people to pay for all of us old people. It’s about the money.” Nevermind that the low-IQ massive influx from Latin America works off the books a lot, gets tax CREDITS for kids that are in Guatemala or pretend kids that are nowhere, uses expensive emergency room service for free, and costs around 10 grand per kid YEARLY to educate (if possible).

    Then, even the people writing the code that Americans just can’t do anymore (due to resumes getting thrown in the trash by Hindu-run companies) and the bright people out of China just bring their in-laws and grandmas over to mooch off the system and cheat on their taxes anyway.

    I don’t think the numbers pan out for an economic case for massive immigration, as the good VDare folks could tell you in 1000 X more detail. Sorry, old people, the money won’t be there, and you’ll have people that don’t give a crap about your kind employed to take care of you. Why didn’t you people just save up your own money, so you didn’t have to rely on that Ponzi SS scam* to begin with?!

    .

    * Part 2 of “The Social Security Scam, errr, Scheme(?)”

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @follyofwar
    Tucker Carlson has brought up the point several times about how conservationists USED to be for a stable population with severely limited immigration. Now, they seem to care less about saving endangered species and protecting the forests than they are about amorphous, and impossible to stop, Climate Change. Sierra Club, as you referred to, is a prime example.
  12. @Brett
    The uncomfortable truth for people is that fertility is inversely related to female employment and has no correlation to male employment. Since Republicans still practice a low-key patriarchal model, their women stay at home and have kids. This effect has become more pronounced in research years due to the ease of access to contraceptives which mostly keeps white liberals from having kids that they would have been forced to have several decades ago.

    IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping. Usually credited as salutary effect of the Obamacare BC mandate. Also due to the de-glamorization of teen pregnancy by the Teen Mom show, and growing “screen time” replacing social interaction in low-trust Millennials and Zeds.

    Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    From the perspective of a younger white middle class woman (rarer than Nigerians on Unz), they have few complaints about the present system other than “I hate the icky beta males that are harazzing me” and the amorphous “pay gap” that is the reason they need their debts bailed out. If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common, and worsened by the odious elite employers that pay for “egg freezing”. At least for now, there isn’t a social acceptability of a high-status male other than a sportsballer/entertainer having children by multiple women. Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    What will be interesting is when the Millennial cohort ages into its 30s and 40s during the next decade. A lot of “never married” women here. Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women? If they don’t, and white tribalism increases/receives legitimacy, we could be headed towards the “conservative wave of feminism” as these women suddenly decide that “men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals”.

    • Replies: @Brett
    Thanks for the thorough reply. Lets hash this out a little more.

    >IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping.

    This is mostly a continuation of the effect of cheap access to contraception as I mentioned earlier. Obamacare is just piling on to what came before. But this access affects white liberals more than any other demographic. There's a lot that affects fertility. The most significant factors are urbanization and industrialization. This is why the most interesting demographics are not those that have lost TFR but those that have maintained it despite these many pressures against them.

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.

    >Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    2/3 of student debt is held by women. Why? Because of their poor choice in majors [1]. They rack up as much debt as men but don't study anything that will pay their debts. Incidentally, any student debt write-off will just be men paying for women's poor choices. These choices have a rippling effect of delaying marriage, homebuying and children. So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place. Again, this affects white liberal women the most.

    >If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Preferences are related to opportunities. Imagine if there wasn't an intense institutional drive to hire and promote women in all fields. The wage gap would be much larger and a substantial number of women in well-off careers would be bottom feeders. In those conditions, they'd know the path to a comfortable life would be to marry and have children. They're not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.

    >Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common

    Nevermind fertility. Men aren't interested in marrying older women. Many women get careers to fulfill their feminist merit badge [2] only to discover that men stop paying attention to them after a certain age.

    >Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    Men aren't willing to do this. Lower status males are more likely than high status to play step-father. But just look at the animal kingdom and you see chimpanzees, black bears, etc... that deliberately kill offspring that isn't theirs. So this isn't a social issue, it's a biological one.

    >Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women?

    I doubt it [3]. There's a question whether this is just delayed marriage or opting out. Dalrock thinks it's delayed. But check the data in my source. The effects of delay are based on the slope of the curve and the effects of opting out are based on the asymptote.

    >as these women suddenly decide that “men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals”

    This has always been a part of feminism. Another post of Dalrock's shows how perverse it is, because getting divorced and then remarried are also part of that script [4].

    [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/18/the-most-lucrative-college-majors-for-men-and-women-charted/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e52b9ae6dc4d
    [2] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/playing-career-woman/
    [3] http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2016/10/millennials-are-still-not-getting.html
    [4] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/losing-control-of-the-narrative/
  13. Hey Audie,

    Have you ever followed the demographic work of Chris Hamilton at the Econimica blog? He tends to be a bit of a one note symphony, but that one note he pounds is a pretty important one. He exactingly charts the utter collapse of the working and child-bearing age populations across the developed world, with its implication of an inevitable global depopulation.

    I always find it frustrating that more people do not take this stuff seriously, especially when economics are being discussed. The modern man worries about over-population, which is already a mathematical impossibility. He sees the waves of immigrants come, the city-scape sprawl on and on, the traffic get worse and worse, and inflation go up year after year, and he thinks that these trends are about to swallow up the entire world. But there are not enough children being born to even maintain the population at the current level, let alone grow it. It is only the adult population of the cities that continue to swell. The urban centers, like seed crystals, continue to draw in all the masses of mankind into their own infertile, artificial worlds, using their blood merely to prop them up a little while longer, meanwhile the whole vast countryside is progressively denuded of people.

    It is unthinkable to me that nobody takes this into consideration when making their economic prognostications. Anybody forecasting future growth, abundant resources, cheap energy, techno-Utopia, or automation (my ass) simply does not realize the extent to which the world is shortly about to be wracked by declining populations, exploding dependency ratios, and our legacy of unsustainable debt. Globalism and socialist welfare states will not be able to survive this, standards of living will plunge, and the entire geopolitical order as we know it will be replaced by something else.

    (And as a parenthetical sidebar, notwithstanding Steve’s Most Important Graph in the World, the population of Africa is completely unsustainable without modern advancements which the Africans can neither afford nor replicate by themselves. When the developed world collapses, Africa will likewise collapse.)

    This is inevitable. It has already happened. It’s already present in the numbers and in the daily reality. It just hasn’t “worked itself out” yet; but there is no digging our way out of this demographic hole. Every Western woman would need to start having 4 or 5 children apiece simply to reverse the fertility decline of the last several decades, and frankly we cannot afford it. We have already consumed tens of trillions of dollars in excess of what we produce, and all that debt will be liquidated one way or another, either by austerity, default, or a currency collapse. The resources simply do not exist to be diverted towards raising that many offspring, unless we were willing to accept Indian levels of mass poverty. However, this end will eventually be visited upon us whether we chose it or not.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
    Yep. We're due for a shakeout.

    Depopulation in absolute terms, plus the smart and educated people are being consumed like a chain smoker consumes cigarettes (or, perhaps, like a person with a cold goes through facial tissues). I have two friends with doctorates, one in OR and one in CS. Both are employed in low level jobs and both work 80 hour weeks. One has medical problems, the other is younger and still optimistic. Only a fool would work for a decade to get this kind of life if he knows of it in advance.

    There are several new types of weapons that nobody has tried out, so nobody knows their effects. Just like WW I.

    Furthermore, the cities dominate politics, but have all the economic importance of the old British rotten boroughs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_and_pocket_boroughs).

    Sort of like the Renaissance. Great troubles, and the weakening of central power frees intellect, leading to new things. Space industrialization, for example, was impossible until NASA grew too weak to prevent it. Countering things like bio-weapons and net viruses will lead to rapid development of science and engineering in those areas.

    The descendants of those who survive will, as usual, refer to the period as "Those fortunate events that led to our present dominance.", as the US referred to WW II until c.a. AD 2010.

    Philosophically, we'll get an alternative to the Enlightenment's "reason as a common ground", or at the very least, developments in epistemology and mathematics should put to rest the "how do we know reality?" and "Why does mathematics describe any part of nature? " questions.

    Quite a ride.

    Counterinsurgency
    , @Audacious Epigone
    The debt, especially the foreign-held debt, doesn't have to matter so long as the currency crisis happens while the US is militarily unbeatable (from attack, not from 'pacifying' goatherds in the Hindu Kush).

    Default is the way to go. America is the drug addict, China the dealer. America has been consuming drugs on credit for decades. China kept dispensing even though it's obvious America can't pay. But America can still kick China's ass. So China doesn't get its money. Instead, America tells it to go fuck off, gets clean--that'll be painful but manageable--and becomes healthy again.

    , @Anon
    So please inform us how you’re going to make it possible for Whites to have families of 4 or 5 children, especially in the age of ferocious racial discrimination against Whites.

    The only possible way I can see is to not get married and move to some rural area with low cost housing and go on life long welfare with the girls having babies in their teens to keep the whole thing going. Maybe cutting off s limb to segue from child benefit to adult disability.

    Looking around the schools and playgrounds of San Francisco San Mateo and Santa Clara I see mostly Asian kids. In S and Central California nothing but Hispanic kids. The combination of racial discrimination in favor of non Whites and generous welfare for non Whites including all those grandmas and grandpas on SSI
    means they can have kids but Whites can’t
    , @follyofwar
    You bring up the huge problem of Africa's unsustainable population. Before the white man intervened it was more stable due to famines and wars. The white man's compassion has only made Africa's (and the West's) problems worse, with endless boatloads of them making their way into Europe and America. It's "The Camp of the Saints" writ large.

    The hard truth is that, if the world could somehow stop Africans from leaving Africa, it would probably go back to where it was - with a stable population due to famines and wars. But modern mass communication, showing starving children with bloated bellies which tugs at the heartstrings, has made that impossible. Regards massive food and medical assistance from the compassionate West, the old maxim is true - No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.
    , @follyofwar
    You bring up the huge problem of Africa's unsustainable population. Before the white man intervened it was more stable due to famines and wars. The white man's compassion has only made Africa's (and the West's) problems worse, with endless boatloads of them making their way into Europe and America. It's "The Camp of the Saints" writ large.

    The hard truth is that, if the world could somehow stop Africans from leaving Africa, it would probably go back to where it was - with a stable population due to famines and wars. But modern mass communication, showing starving children with bloated bellies which tugs at the heartstrings, has made that impossible. Regards massive food and medical assistance from the compassionate West, the old maxim is true - No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.
  14. part of it is simply the available land and the type of people it attracts. In Olathe, KS – you have more room and it is therefore more amenable to children. It’s also not as expensive. In Westchester County, NY – there’s not as much room and the housing stock is more expensive.

    I do find it interesting how the dems are doing better not just in the blue state built-out suburban areas but in the more “Affordable Family Formation” type areas. O’Rourke only lost Collin County, TX by like five.

    • Replies: @3g4me
    @14 KrustyKurmudgeon: "I do find it interesting how the dems are doing better not just in the blue state built-out suburban areas but in the more “Affordable Family Formation” type areas. O’Rourke only lost Collin County, TX by like five."

    Collin County is rapidly approaching 'majority-minority' status. Whites with young children settle only in the farthest suburbs, approaching and encroaching on rural territory. The rest of the place is bursting at the seams with various Chinese, Indians, Pakistanis, Mestizos, Arabs, and increasing talented tenth/section 8 denizens. More than half the time I see an out of state license plate (a very common occurrence), the driver is some shade of non-White.

    Add in the self-abnegating White women and 'nice' churchian ladies and you have a winning hand. White men winning elective office - and any flavor of Repuke in general - are living on borrowed time here.

    We HATE it and cannot wait to leave.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    The dirt gap!
  15. They’re looking for better schools, of course

    LOL yes that must be it, the never-ending hunt for higher academic attainment.

  16. @216
    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as "pro-life".

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    It is considered shameful, but only among Whites, and that is the problem.

    As the erstwhile custodial majority population, Whites obviously frown upon welfare dependence. I’m not sure that ethos is appropriate to our current situation, where we either have children we cannot afford, or none at all.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @216
    No, out-of-wedlock is slightly lower among Asians, and presumably lower among Muslims.

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2017/05/05/percent-of-out-of-wedlock-births-by-age-and-race-of-of-mother/

    I don't see any advantage for working-class men to engage in "premature family formation", unless they are part of a traditionalist sect with its own "private welfare state". If you can't afford the bourgeois norms before 30, 35 or 40, there is no shame in remaining unmarried. I don't recall any specific information about "vice" consumption by SES, but I can say without any doubt that the working class can ill-afford any level of vice.

    Yes, societal responsibility is important, but it starts with personal responsibility.
    , @Judith Barsella
    Dear Rosie, Do we risk raising the illegitimacy rate in the majority community to increase majority births? How do we encourage births, especially for the high school educated when they can hardly maintain themselves (opioid crisis)? If they are too proud to seek assistance, how will we expand our numbers? Something will have to be offered to encourage these births (see European/Japanese schemes to encourage childbirth).
  17. @Liberty Mike
    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?

    Sorry to contradict you, but it is actually mostly due to the “self-respecting” black women who prevent these unions. Black women are not much attracted to non-black men; whereas black men are quite strongly attracted to white women. Just on average, as a statistically valid stereotype.

    • Replies: @216

    black men are quite strongly attracted to white women
     
    That's a myth created by 2% ad agencies with a subversive agenda.

    https://theblog.okcupid.com/race-and-attraction-2009-2014-107dcbb4f060

    White men display the least tribalism after Black men, actually white women are more tribal. Asian women display a preference for ytboyz, it would be interesting to see if this is different with East/South.

    Has anyone done a study on "body art, piercings" by race? Conceivably that affects attractiveness ratios.
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    "Black women are not much attracted to non-black men; "

    You have this exactly opposite. Non black men are not attracted to black women. Black women occupy the lowest point of SMV.
  18. @Rosie

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.
     
    It is considered shameful, but only among Whites, and that is the problem.

    As the erstwhile custodial majority population, Whites obviously frown upon welfare dependence. I'm not sure that ethos is appropriate to our current situation, where we either have children we cannot afford, or none at all.

    No, out-of-wedlock is slightly lower among Asians, and presumably lower among Muslims.

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2017/05/05/percent-of-out-of-wedlock-births-by-age-and-race-of-of-mother/

    I don’t see any advantage for working-class men to engage in “premature family formation”, unless they are part of a traditionalist sect with its own “private welfare state”. If you can’t afford the bourgeois norms before 30, 35 or 40, there is no shame in remaining unmarried. I don’t recall any specific information about “vice” consumption by SES, but I can say without any doubt that the working class can ill-afford any level of vice.

    Yes, societal responsibility is important, but it starts with personal responsibility.

    • Disagree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Rosie

    I don’t see any advantage for working-class men to engage in “premature family formation”, unless they are part of a traditionalist sect with its own “private welfare state”
     
    Why are private welfare states ok but not public ones? The nation-state is the natural focus of loyalty for individualistic (nonclannish) Whites. Of course, that's why we are so particularly hated by globalists.
  19. @Peter Johnson
    Sorry to contradict you, but it is actually mostly due to the "self-respecting" black women who prevent these unions. Black women are not much attracted to non-black men; whereas black men are quite strongly attracted to white women. Just on average, as a statistically valid stereotype.

    black men are quite strongly attracted to white women

    That’s a myth created by 2% ad agencies with a subversive agenda.

    https://theblog.okcupid.com/race-and-attraction-2009-2014-107dcbb4f060

    White men display the least tribalism after Black men, actually white women are more tribal. Asian women display a preference for ytboyz, it would be interesting to see if this is different with East/South.

    Has anyone done a study on “body art, piercings” by race? Conceivably that affects attractiveness ratios.

  20. @216
    No, out-of-wedlock is slightly lower among Asians, and presumably lower among Muslims.

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2017/05/05/percent-of-out-of-wedlock-births-by-age-and-race-of-of-mother/

    I don't see any advantage for working-class men to engage in "premature family formation", unless they are part of a traditionalist sect with its own "private welfare state". If you can't afford the bourgeois norms before 30, 35 or 40, there is no shame in remaining unmarried. I don't recall any specific information about "vice" consumption by SES, but I can say without any doubt that the working class can ill-afford any level of vice.

    Yes, societal responsibility is important, but it starts with personal responsibility.

    I don’t see any advantage for working-class men to engage in “premature family formation”, unless they are part of a traditionalist sect with its own “private welfare state”

    Why are private welfare states ok but not public ones? The nation-state is the natural focus of loyalty for individualistic (nonclannish) Whites. Of course, that’s why we are so particularly hated by globalists.

    • Replies: @Brett
    Local welfare is better than non-local because it comes with a level of accountability.
  21. @Liberty Mike
    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?

    If you have seen walmart commercials, all that is left for white men are negro women.

  22. @Peter Johnson
    Sorry to contradict you, but it is actually mostly due to the "self-respecting" black women who prevent these unions. Black women are not much attracted to non-black men; whereas black men are quite strongly attracted to white women. Just on average, as a statistically valid stereotype.

    “Black women are not much attracted to non-black men; ”

    You have this exactly opposite. Non black men are not attracted to black women. Black women occupy the lowest point of SMV.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it 'the best', white men and Asian women are in between.
  23. @216
    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as "pro-life".

    Conservatism Inc. is a dwindling enterprise. Now that liberals have fully embraced neoconservatism and neoliberalism, country club Republicans are obsolete. I don’t think the newly-elected socialist firebrands will alter the Democratic Party’s establishment trajectory. The Dems are now the party of the deep state, the shadow government, and the financial sector. Trump Republicans and independent conservatives have a real opportunity now to reshape the GOP.

    • Replies: @216
    There's a saying in the Scouts (don't have your sons join, its converged now), that a fire must be left attended until it is "cold, dead, out"


    Conservatism Inc is not "cold, dead, out".

    They have the donors

    They have the mainstream media access

    The Silicon Dons have indicated a willingness to ban "hate sites". Outright deranking of the sites from search engines is the next likely path.

    Silicon Valley is now funding several cuckservative establishments. One imagines that they will be given preferred indexing and algorithms.
  24. @SunBakedSuburb
    Conservatism Inc. is a dwindling enterprise. Now that liberals have fully embraced neoconservatism and neoliberalism, country club Republicans are obsolete. I don't think the newly-elected socialist firebrands will alter the Democratic Party's establishment trajectory. The Dems are now the party of the deep state, the shadow government, and the financial sector. Trump Republicans and independent conservatives have a real opportunity now to reshape the GOP.

    There’s a saying in the Scouts (don’t have your sons join, its converged now), that a fire must be left attended until it is “cold, dead, out”

    Conservatism Inc is not “cold, dead, out”.

    They have the donors

    They have the mainstream media access

    The Silicon Dons have indicated a willingness to ban “hate sites”. Outright deranking of the sites from search engines is the next likely path.

    Silicon Valley is now funding several cuckservative establishments. One imagines that they will be given preferred indexing and algorithms.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    Good point. I neglected to mention Silicon Valley's overwhelming support of the Democratic Party, to the point of subverting whatever democratic elements remain in our political system.
  25. @216
    IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping. Usually credited as salutary effect of the Obamacare BC mandate. Also due to the de-glamorization of teen pregnancy by the Teen Mom show, and growing "screen time" replacing social interaction in low-trust Millennials and Zeds.

    Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    From the perspective of a younger white middle class woman (rarer than Nigerians on Unz), they have few complaints about the present system other than "I hate the icky beta males that are harazzing me" and the amorphous "pay gap" that is the reason they need their debts bailed out. If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common, and worsened by the odious elite employers that pay for "egg freezing". At least for now, there isn't a social acceptability of a high-status male other than a sportsballer/entertainer having children by multiple women. Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    What will be interesting is when the Millennial cohort ages into its 30s and 40s during the next decade. A lot of "never married" women here. Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women? If they don't, and white tribalism increases/receives legitimacy, we could be headed towards the "conservative wave of feminism" as these women suddenly decide that "men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals".

    Thanks for the thorough reply. Lets hash this out a little more.

    >IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping.

    This is mostly a continuation of the effect of cheap access to contraception as I mentioned earlier. Obamacare is just piling on to what came before. But this access affects white liberals more than any other demographic. There’s a lot that affects fertility. The most significant factors are urbanization and industrialization. This is why the most interesting demographics are not those that have lost TFR but those that have maintained it despite these many pressures against them.

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.

    >Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    2/3 of student debt is held by women. Why? Because of their poor choice in majors [1]. They rack up as much debt as men but don’t study anything that will pay their debts. Incidentally, any student debt write-off will just be men paying for women’s poor choices. These choices have a rippling effect of delaying marriage, homebuying and children. So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place. Again, this affects white liberal women the most.

    >If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Preferences are related to opportunities. Imagine if there wasn’t an intense institutional drive to hire and promote women in all fields. The wage gap would be much larger and a substantial number of women in well-off careers would be bottom feeders. In those conditions, they’d know the path to a comfortable life would be to marry and have children. They’re not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.

    >Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common

    Nevermind fertility. Men aren’t interested in marrying older women. Many women get careers to fulfill their feminist merit badge [2] only to discover that men stop paying attention to them after a certain age.

    >Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    Men aren’t willing to do this. Lower status males are more likely than high status to play step-father. But just look at the animal kingdom and you see chimpanzees, black bears, etc… that deliberately kill offspring that isn’t theirs. So this isn’t a social issue, it’s a biological one.

    >Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women?

    I doubt it [3]. There’s a question whether this is just delayed marriage or opting out. Dalrock thinks it’s delayed. But check the data in my source. The effects of delay are based on the slope of the curve and the effects of opting out are based on the asymptote.

    >as these women suddenly decide that “men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals”

    This has always been a part of feminism. Another post of Dalrock’s shows how perverse it is, because getting divorced and then remarried are also part of that script [4].

    [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/18/the-most-lucrative-college-majors-for-men-and-women-charted/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e52b9ae6dc4d
    [2] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/playing-career-woman/
    [3] http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2016/10/millennials-are-still-not-getting.html
    [4] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/losing-control-of-the-narrative/

    • Agree: follyofwar
    • Replies: @216
    On point [3], it is possible that women may decide to have children without marriage, but there is a tremendous bourgeois status signalling from having a wedding and being married.

    This "feminist merit badge" career sounds like a Boomerism to me. I don't know a single SAHM Millennial peer, the dual-earner household is seen as the norm in the UMC. Working class couples may be more sceptical, but are forced by economic necessity into it.

    The feminist myth (wave III and IV) is "having it all", which conservatives stupidly play into with the various thots promoted by our media (Palin, Megyn Kelly, etc.) You rarely hear of any feminist community promoting "self-improvement" in the facet that manosphere communities do. There "thinking" promotes the idea that if a woman isn't married (or achieving other bourgeois goals), then it is normally a man's fault. Somewhat ironic for a movement that loathes the idea of "male sexual entitlement".

    One aspect of politics and society is that "no one likes being the sucker". This will come into play as those student loan bills are (eventually) paid off by the next decade. Such will create a constituency of "white college" voters that presumably will resent the debts of others being paid off when they (husbands) paid their own down. DSA types may think otherwise, but if you pay off 100K of debt, and 2024 Ocasio plans on taxing you (not just the rich, don't kid yourself) to reward others, that is now a newly minted GOP voter.

    The surprising lesson of the recession was that people continued to make mortgage payments on considerable numbers of underwater houses. I expect the same with student loans.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Great comment, Brett. There are a lot of good points to think about there.
    , @Rosie

    So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place.
     
    Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that the career-seeking is caused by men choosing to delay marriage.

    https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2372-man-shortage-men-drives-women-careers.html

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.
     
    I'm not sure what you mean by "patriarchal families," but in any event it seems we agree that healthy families are perfectly compatible with legal equality of rights for women.

    They’re not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.
     
    I call this MGTOW creationism. The idea is that somehow evolution created a human female that is useful for sex and procreation but nothing more. Being useless, women can't actually survive in a modern economy without husbands, real or surrogate. Therefore, women who are not married are parasites, by definition.

    From there it follows, of course, that the proper course of action is to take opportunities away from women, rather than to encourage them to marry and have children by making marriage more secure than career with an enforceable marital covenant (and lifetime alimony if a wife is abused or unjustly abandoned).

    That MGTOW creationism is false is clear from the data on law, veterinary and medical school admissions and subsequent licensing test data, completely setting aside traditional pink-collar jobs like nursing, teaching, secretarial work, beauty services, etc.

    Certainly, women are highly sought after in tech and perhaps other male-dominated fields, but the reason those fields are male-dominated is precisely because women don't want those jobs, or at least White women don't want them.
  26. 52% of births are to white females…but over 10% of the these children do not have white fathers. Thus white children are no longer the majority of births.

    in the 2010 census 53% of the under 20 population was white….many hispanics self-identify as white, but more and more hispanics are choosing another racial category so we should expect the 2020 census will indicate whites are less than 50% of the under 20 population. In fact we should expect less than 50% of the under-30 population will be white on the next census.

    should my children be counted as white ? My wife is from Chile and self-identifies as white, thus my children were counted as white on the 2010 census. She may decide to self-identify as Hispanic , part amerindian, as her recent DNA test revealed she is 24% Native American. My children are thus 12% amerindian. Back in 2010 my wife would not identify as hispanic, so I suspect she will still self-identify as white and still reject the “hispanic” classification.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    This makes sense culturally, as the flight from white is basically creating a one-drop rule for non-whiteness. Otoh, genetically the US is far more than 50% white/European, with Hispanics and blacks having far more European ancestry than whites have Amerindian or African ancestry.
  27. @Rosie

    I don’t see any advantage for working-class men to engage in “premature family formation”, unless they are part of a traditionalist sect with its own “private welfare state”
     
    Why are private welfare states ok but not public ones? The nation-state is the natural focus of loyalty for individualistic (nonclannish) Whites. Of course, that's why we are so particularly hated by globalists.

    Local welfare is better than non-local because it comes with a level of accountability.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Local welfare is better than non-local because it comes with a level of accountability.
     
    I certainly understand what you're saying in theory, but I'm not sure it's true. White nations are some of the least corrupt in the world, e.g. Denmark. Whites are generally not cheats and grifters by nature. I suspect, but don't know for sure, that the worst welfare abusers and cheats come from the most corrupt societies.

    I would very much like to see data on subsequent fertility among welfare recipients by race and ethnicity. My hypothesis would obviously be that White women do not, as a rule, get pregnant while on public assistance. However, I wouldn't be surprised if that is changing, given that the ruling class has breached the social contract. I don't know that self-sufficiency is a fair and reasonable standard anymore for the WWC.
  28. @Brett
    Thanks for the thorough reply. Lets hash this out a little more.

    >IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping.

    This is mostly a continuation of the effect of cheap access to contraception as I mentioned earlier. Obamacare is just piling on to what came before. But this access affects white liberals more than any other demographic. There's a lot that affects fertility. The most significant factors are urbanization and industrialization. This is why the most interesting demographics are not those that have lost TFR but those that have maintained it despite these many pressures against them.

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.

    >Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    2/3 of student debt is held by women. Why? Because of their poor choice in majors [1]. They rack up as much debt as men but don't study anything that will pay their debts. Incidentally, any student debt write-off will just be men paying for women's poor choices. These choices have a rippling effect of delaying marriage, homebuying and children. So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place. Again, this affects white liberal women the most.

    >If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Preferences are related to opportunities. Imagine if there wasn't an intense institutional drive to hire and promote women in all fields. The wage gap would be much larger and a substantial number of women in well-off careers would be bottom feeders. In those conditions, they'd know the path to a comfortable life would be to marry and have children. They're not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.

    >Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common

    Nevermind fertility. Men aren't interested in marrying older women. Many women get careers to fulfill their feminist merit badge [2] only to discover that men stop paying attention to them after a certain age.

    >Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    Men aren't willing to do this. Lower status males are more likely than high status to play step-father. But just look at the animal kingdom and you see chimpanzees, black bears, etc... that deliberately kill offspring that isn't theirs. So this isn't a social issue, it's a biological one.

    >Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women?

    I doubt it [3]. There's a question whether this is just delayed marriage or opting out. Dalrock thinks it's delayed. But check the data in my source. The effects of delay are based on the slope of the curve and the effects of opting out are based on the asymptote.

    >as these women suddenly decide that “men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals”

    This has always been a part of feminism. Another post of Dalrock's shows how perverse it is, because getting divorced and then remarried are also part of that script [4].

    [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/18/the-most-lucrative-college-majors-for-men-and-women-charted/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e52b9ae6dc4d
    [2] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/playing-career-woman/
    [3] http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2016/10/millennials-are-still-not-getting.html
    [4] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/losing-control-of-the-narrative/

    On point [3], it is possible that women may decide to have children without marriage, but there is a tremendous bourgeois status signalling from having a wedding and being married.

    This “feminist merit badge” career sounds like a Boomerism to me. I don’t know a single SAHM Millennial peer, the dual-earner household is seen as the norm in the UMC. Working class couples may be more sceptical, but are forced by economic necessity into it.

    The feminist myth (wave III and IV) is “having it all”, which conservatives stupidly play into with the various thots promoted by our media (Palin, Megyn Kelly, etc.) You rarely hear of any feminist community promoting “self-improvement” in the facet that manosphere communities do. There “thinking” promotes the idea that if a woman isn’t married (or achieving other bourgeois goals), then it is normally a man’s fault. Somewhat ironic for a movement that loathes the idea of “male sexual entitlement”.

    One aspect of politics and society is that “no one likes being the sucker”. This will come into play as those student loan bills are (eventually) paid off by the next decade. Such will create a constituency of “white college” voters that presumably will resent the debts of others being paid off when they (husbands) paid their own down. DSA types may think otherwise, but if you pay off 100K of debt, and 2024 Ocasio plans on taxing you (not just the rich, don’t kid yourself) to reward others, that is now a newly minted GOP voter.

    The surprising lesson of the recession was that people continued to make mortgage payments on considerable numbers of underwater houses. I expect the same with student loans.

  29. @216
    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as "pro-life".

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    It was deliberately de-stigmatized among Blacks way back in the 1960’s, as Democratic machines in places like NYC used welfare to build a plantation of captive voters.

    Efforts to roll this back have been unsuccessful, as groups like “pro-life” have hysterically opposed the limitation of welfare for additional illegitimate children as “promoting abortion”.  Evangelicals are leftists at heart.

  30. @krustykurmudgeon
    part of it is simply the available land and the type of people it attracts. In Olathe, KS - you have more room and it is therefore more amenable to children. It's also not as expensive. In Westchester County, NY - there's not as much room and the housing stock is more expensive.

    I do find it interesting how the dems are doing better not just in the blue state built-out suburban areas but in the more "Affordable Family Formation" type areas. O'Rourke only lost Collin County, TX by like five.

    @14 KrustyKurmudgeon: “I do find it interesting how the dems are doing better not just in the blue state built-out suburban areas but in the more “Affordable Family Formation” type areas. O’Rourke only lost Collin County, TX by like five.”

    Collin County is rapidly approaching ‘majority-minority’ status. Whites with young children settle only in the farthest suburbs, approaching and encroaching on rural territory. The rest of the place is bursting at the seams with various Chinese, Indians, Pakistanis, Mestizos, Arabs, and increasing talented tenth/section 8 denizens. More than half the time I see an out of state license plate (a very common occurrence), the driver is some shade of non-White.

    Add in the self-abnegating White women and ‘nice’ churchian ladies and you have a winning hand. White men winning elective office – and any flavor of Repuke in general – are living on borrowed time here.

    We HATE it and cannot wait to leave.

    • Replies: @krustykurmudgeon
    from what I know there are really three different areas of Collin County. Plano is basically a second generation suburb that was built in the 70s-90s and is now built out. A lot of corporations have there offices there (Frito Lay, JCPenney, Dr Pepper, TI) and a high asian population.

    Then you have the boomtowns of Frisco, McKinney (the county seat) and Allen that are where all the homes and "town centers" (the new euphemism for a mall) are being built. The rest of the county (north of 380, east of 75) is still small town Texas.
  31. @Brett
    Thanks for the thorough reply. Lets hash this out a little more.

    >IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping.

    This is mostly a continuation of the effect of cheap access to contraception as I mentioned earlier. Obamacare is just piling on to what came before. But this access affects white liberals more than any other demographic. There's a lot that affects fertility. The most significant factors are urbanization and industrialization. This is why the most interesting demographics are not those that have lost TFR but those that have maintained it despite these many pressures against them.

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.

    >Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    2/3 of student debt is held by women. Why? Because of their poor choice in majors [1]. They rack up as much debt as men but don't study anything that will pay their debts. Incidentally, any student debt write-off will just be men paying for women's poor choices. These choices have a rippling effect of delaying marriage, homebuying and children. So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place. Again, this affects white liberal women the most.

    >If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Preferences are related to opportunities. Imagine if there wasn't an intense institutional drive to hire and promote women in all fields. The wage gap would be much larger and a substantial number of women in well-off careers would be bottom feeders. In those conditions, they'd know the path to a comfortable life would be to marry and have children. They're not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.

    >Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common

    Nevermind fertility. Men aren't interested in marrying older women. Many women get careers to fulfill their feminist merit badge [2] only to discover that men stop paying attention to them after a certain age.

    >Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    Men aren't willing to do this. Lower status males are more likely than high status to play step-father. But just look at the animal kingdom and you see chimpanzees, black bears, etc... that deliberately kill offspring that isn't theirs. So this isn't a social issue, it's a biological one.

    >Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women?

    I doubt it [3]. There's a question whether this is just delayed marriage or opting out. Dalrock thinks it's delayed. But check the data in my source. The effects of delay are based on the slope of the curve and the effects of opting out are based on the asymptote.

    >as these women suddenly decide that “men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals”

    This has always been a part of feminism. Another post of Dalrock's shows how perverse it is, because getting divorced and then remarried are also part of that script [4].

    [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/18/the-most-lucrative-college-majors-for-men-and-women-charted/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e52b9ae6dc4d
    [2] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/playing-career-woman/
    [3] http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2016/10/millennials-are-still-not-getting.html
    [4] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/losing-control-of-the-narrative/

    Great comment, Brett. There are a lot of good points to think about there.

  32. Here’s a question for you, Audacious Epigone: Was NAM fertility even more dysgenic before welfare reform was implemented? Or did welfare reform have no effect on this?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    In the mid-nineties? The GSS will allow for a look. Will do!
  33. @Brett
    Local welfare is better than non-local because it comes with a level of accountability.

    Local welfare is better than non-local because it comes with a level of accountability.

    I certainly understand what you’re saying in theory, but I’m not sure it’s true. White nations are some of the least corrupt in the world, e.g. Denmark. Whites are generally not cheats and grifters by nature. I suspect, but don’t know for sure, that the worst welfare abusers and cheats come from the most corrupt societies.

    I would very much like to see data on subsequent fertility among welfare recipients by race and ethnicity. My hypothesis would obviously be that White women do not, as a rule, get pregnant while on public assistance. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if that is changing, given that the ruling class has breached the social contract. I don’t know that self-sufficiency is a fair and reasonable standard anymore for the WWC.

    • Replies: @Brett

    White nations are some of the least corrupt in the world
     
    Both can be true. Whites could be less likely to cheat than non-white and local can be more reliable than non-local.
    , @EliteCommInc.
    State corruption scale ------ I have little doubt that this is politically influenced however, it serves as a reference point


    https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017
  34. @Brett
    Thanks for the thorough reply. Lets hash this out a little more.

    >IIRC, part of the decline in TFR is due to teen births dropping.

    This is mostly a continuation of the effect of cheap access to contraception as I mentioned earlier. Obamacare is just piling on to what came before. But this access affects white liberals more than any other demographic. There's a lot that affects fertility. The most significant factors are urbanization and industrialization. This is why the most interesting demographics are not those that have lost TFR but those that have maintained it despite these many pressures against them.

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.

    >Unsure if this is apparent with older Millennials, who have delayed marriage, homebuying and children thanks to student debt and wage stagnation.

    2/3 of student debt is held by women. Why? Because of their poor choice in majors [1]. They rack up as much debt as men but don't study anything that will pay their debts. Incidentally, any student debt write-off will just be men paying for women's poor choices. These choices have a rippling effect of delaying marriage, homebuying and children. So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place. Again, this affects white liberal women the most.

    >If these women had a revealed preference for children, their actions would be different.

    Preferences are related to opportunities. Imagine if there wasn't an intense institutional drive to hire and promote women in all fields. The wage gap would be much larger and a substantial number of women in well-off careers would be bottom feeders. In those conditions, they'd know the path to a comfortable life would be to marry and have children. They're not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.

    >Apparent misinformation about being fertile in your 40s is common

    Nevermind fertility. Men aren't interested in marrying older women. Many women get careers to fulfill their feminist merit badge [2] only to discover that men stop paying attention to them after a certain age.

    >Nor are lower status males willing to be a father to children that are not theirs.

    Men aren't willing to do this. Lower status males are more likely than high status to play step-father. But just look at the animal kingdom and you see chimpanzees, black bears, etc... that deliberately kill offspring that isn't theirs. So this isn't a social issue, it's a biological one.

    >Past generational practice is that the vast majority of women will eventually marry. But will these women?

    I doubt it [3]. There's a question whether this is just delayed marriage or opting out. Dalrock thinks it's delayed. But check the data in my source. The effects of delay are based on the slope of the curve and the effects of opting out are based on the asymptote.

    >as these women suddenly decide that “men need to marry me to fulfill my feminist goals”

    This has always been a part of feminism. Another post of Dalrock's shows how perverse it is, because getting divorced and then remarried are also part of that script [4].

    [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/18/the-most-lucrative-college-majors-for-men-and-women-charted/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e52b9ae6dc4d
    [2] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/playing-career-woman/
    [3] http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2016/10/millennials-are-still-not-getting.html
    [4] https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/losing-control-of-the-narrative/

    So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place.

    Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that the career-seeking is caused by men choosing to delay marriage.

    https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2372-man-shortage-men-drives-women-careers.html

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “patriarchal families,” but in any event it seems we agree that healthy families are perfectly compatible with legal equality of rights for women.

    They’re not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.

    I call this MGTOW creationism. The idea is that somehow evolution created a human female that is useful for sex and procreation but nothing more. Being useless, women can’t actually survive in a modern economy without husbands, real or surrogate. Therefore, women who are not married are parasites, by definition.

    From there it follows, of course, that the proper course of action is to take opportunities away from women, rather than to encourage them to marry and have children by making marriage more secure than career with an enforceable marital covenant (and lifetime alimony if a wife is abused or unjustly abandoned).

    That MGTOW creationism is false is clear from the data on law, veterinary and medical school admissions and subsequent licensing test data, completely setting aside traditional pink-collar jobs like nursing, teaching, secretarial work, beauty services, etc.

    Certainly, women are highly sought after in tech and perhaps other male-dominated fields, but the reason those fields are male-dominated is precisely because women don’t want those jobs, or at least White women don’t want them.

    • Replies: @Brett

    Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that the career-seeking is caused by men choosing to delay marriage.
     
    There aren't any clear links to the study they reference so I can't check the data. I will say, though, that the evidence I repeatedly see for a "man-drought" is almost always a complaint about lack of high-value men. For example, Manhattan is the place most commonly referenced as where there are no available men. But if you check the population statistics, there's more men in New York than women, just not specifically in Manhattan. What they're actually complaining about is that there's no available men at their level of education since they're looking for someone equal to or above their status. This is again a consequence of schools prioritizing educating women over men, leading to a scarcity of higher value men.

    but in any event it seems we agree that healthy families are perfectly compatible with legal equality of rights for women.
     
    We don't agree here. The examples show that under strong religious pressure, women will give up their rights and as a consequence have a higher fertility. Outside of religion, the best way for women to have both a successful career and family life would be to have their family first and join the workforce in their mid-30's.

    I call this MGTOW creationism. The idea is that somehow evolution created a human female that is useful for sex and procreation but nothing more. Being useless, women can’t actually survive in a modern economy without husbands, real or surrogate. Therefore, women who are not married are parasites, by definition.
     
    I agree with you MGTOWs take this creation myth to an extreme by using anecdotal evidence about unqualified women. That wasn't my argument here. Rather that on the margins, significantly less women would have successful careers in a free market than what we presently see. Unfortunately, your rebuttal is also anecdotal. "Because some women are smart and successful, all women can be." The question I'm raising is not an all or nothing question but how many? In what proportions? For that you need data. I'll try to provide three data sets.

    First, men score higher in intelligence tests than women. The IQ tests which attempt to show equal IQs compare men and women at age 12-14, when women enter puberty before men. When you compare adult IQ scores, men will score about 5 points higher [1] and their increased performance is related to higher brain volume and surface area [2]. This intelligence difference is not extreme and there's lots of room for overlap, but that doesn't invalidate the averages.

    Second, on national aptitude tests, men consistently score better than women when controlling for race [3, 4]. This has been true for as long as tests have been administered no matter how pro-female the education system is.

    Finally, and somewhat ironically, once you realize the wage gap doesn't result from discrimination, then it becomes a short-hand method to compare relative productivity. In other words, the wage gap says women are 75% as productive as men.

    In all these cases, there's lots of room for many female all-stars, among which 216 and HBDchick are included. Proportionally, men are going to be more successful and would dominate a free market.

    [1] http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/sexdifferences.aspx
    [2] https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/28/8/2959/4996558
    [3] http://www.aei.org/publication/2016-sat-test-results-confirm-pattern-thats-persisted-for-45-years-high-school-boys-are-better-at-math-than-girls/
    [4] https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/conf_achgapwomen_allspach.pdf
  35. @3g4me
    @14 KrustyKurmudgeon: "I do find it interesting how the dems are doing better not just in the blue state built-out suburban areas but in the more “Affordable Family Formation” type areas. O’Rourke only lost Collin County, TX by like five."

    Collin County is rapidly approaching 'majority-minority' status. Whites with young children settle only in the farthest suburbs, approaching and encroaching on rural territory. The rest of the place is bursting at the seams with various Chinese, Indians, Pakistanis, Mestizos, Arabs, and increasing talented tenth/section 8 denizens. More than half the time I see an out of state license plate (a very common occurrence), the driver is some shade of non-White.

    Add in the self-abnegating White women and 'nice' churchian ladies and you have a winning hand. White men winning elective office - and any flavor of Repuke in general - are living on borrowed time here.

    We HATE it and cannot wait to leave.

    from what I know there are really three different areas of Collin County. Plano is basically a second generation suburb that was built in the 70s-90s and is now built out. A lot of corporations have there offices there (Frito Lay, JCPenney, Dr Pepper, TI) and a high asian population.

    Then you have the boomtowns of Frisco, McKinney (the county seat) and Allen that are where all the homes and “town centers” (the new euphemism for a mall) are being built. The rest of the county (north of 380, east of 75) is still small town Texas.

    • Replies: @3g4me
    @35 krustykurmudgeon: " Then you have the boomtowns of Frisco, McKinney (the county seat) and Allen that are where all the homes and “town centers” (the new euphemism for a mall) are being built. The rest of the county (north of 380, east of 75) is still small town Texas."

    Actually, Frisco and Allen were booming and new about 20 years ago. All that growth moved north to Prosper and beyond, and southwest to Keller and Southlake. Both places have also seen their own influx of Orientals and Subcontinentals. McKinney has its newer, Whiter areas but also a large number of dysfunctional Negroes. The rest of the county is no longer "small town Texas." Prosper has been the "in" locale for about 10 years now. They already had lawsuits about Negro football players raping clueless White girls - said football players were the sons of various members of the Negro sportsball league who had built their own mansions up there.

    The Mohammedans bought 35 acres out in Farmersville (still Collin County) and proposed building a cemetery and cultural center there. Lawsuits and liberal outrage abound. The Whites in Collin County are shrinking and being squeezed on all sides, and the ones moving in are all NPCs from California, Chicago, and the east coast.

    Texas (at least the greater DFW area, Houston, and San Antonio), are lost causes. Add the entire southern border area which is nothing but Mexico with a smattering of western amenities, and Texas really is toast. I do not glory in this but those who think of Texas as full of tough, strong, proud Western men are woefully out of date.
  36. “Conservatism, Inc. is too busy demanding that Congress censure Steve King.”

    Republicans at the state level couldn’t censure the GOP/deepstate back by kicking out ROTC from schools?

    • Replies: @216
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX95QSKBODo
  37. @216
    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as "pro-life".

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points?

    RadFem goes far beyond Conservatism Inc. Dalrock has shown that it has infected much of the Evangelical church.

    The Southern Baptist Convention recently handed power to some homo hipsters. It’s basically the Soros Baptist Convention now.

    • Agree: Cleburne
  38. @Intelligent Dasein
    Hey Audie,

    Have you ever followed the demographic work of Chris Hamilton at the Econimica blog? He tends to be a bit of a one note symphony, but that one note he pounds is a pretty important one. He exactingly charts the utter collapse of the working and child-bearing age populations across the developed world, with its implication of an inevitable global depopulation.

    I always find it frustrating that more people do not take this stuff seriously, especially when economics are being discussed. The modern man worries about over-population, which is already a mathematical impossibility. He sees the waves of immigrants come, the city-scape sprawl on and on, the traffic get worse and worse, and inflation go up year after year, and he thinks that these trends are about to swallow up the entire world. But there are not enough children being born to even maintain the population at the current level, let alone grow it. It is only the adult population of the cities that continue to swell. The urban centers, like seed crystals, continue to draw in all the masses of mankind into their own infertile, artificial worlds, using their blood merely to prop them up a little while longer, meanwhile the whole vast countryside is progressively denuded of people.

    It is unthinkable to me that nobody takes this into consideration when making their economic prognostications. Anybody forecasting future growth, abundant resources, cheap energy, techno-Utopia, or automation (my ass) simply does not realize the extent to which the world is shortly about to be wracked by declining populations, exploding dependency ratios, and our legacy of unsustainable debt. Globalism and socialist welfare states will not be able to survive this, standards of living will plunge, and the entire geopolitical order as we know it will be replaced by something else.

    (And as a parenthetical sidebar, notwithstanding Steve's Most Important Graph in the World, the population of Africa is completely unsustainable without modern advancements which the Africans can neither afford nor replicate by themselves. When the developed world collapses, Africa will likewise collapse.)

    This is inevitable. It has already happened. It's already present in the numbers and in the daily reality. It just hasn't "worked itself out" yet; but there is no digging our way out of this demographic hole. Every Western woman would need to start having 4 or 5 children apiece simply to reverse the fertility decline of the last several decades, and frankly we cannot afford it. We have already consumed tens of trillions of dollars in excess of what we produce, and all that debt will be liquidated one way or another, either by austerity, default, or a currency collapse. The resources simply do not exist to be diverted towards raising that many offspring, unless we were willing to accept Indian levels of mass poverty. However, this end will eventually be visited upon us whether we chose it or not.

    Yep. We’re due for a shakeout.

    Depopulation in absolute terms, plus the smart and educated people are being consumed like a chain smoker consumes cigarettes (or, perhaps, like a person with a cold goes through facial tissues). I have two friends with doctorates, one in OR and one in CS. Both are employed in low level jobs and both work 80 hour weeks. One has medical problems, the other is younger and still optimistic. Only a fool would work for a decade to get this kind of life if he knows of it in advance.

    There are several new types of weapons that nobody has tried out, so nobody knows their effects. Just like WW I.

    Furthermore, the cities dominate politics, but have all the economic importance of the old British rotten boroughs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_and_pocket_boroughs).

    Sort of like the Renaissance. Great troubles, and the weakening of central power frees intellect, leading to new things. Space industrialization, for example, was impossible until NASA grew too weak to prevent it. Countering things like bio-weapons and net viruses will lead to rapid development of science and engineering in those areas.

    The descendants of those who survive will, as usual, refer to the period as “Those fortunate events that led to our present dominance.”, as the US referred to WW II until c.a. AD 2010.

    Philosophically, we’ll get an alternative to the Enlightenment’s “reason as a common ground”, or at the very least, developments in epistemology and mathematics should put to rest the “how do we know reality?” and “Why does mathematics describe any part of nature? ” questions.

    Quite a ride.

    Counterinsurgency

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  39. @anon
    "Conservatism, Inc. is too busy demanding that Congress censure Steve King."

    Republicans at the state level couldn't censure the GOP/deepstate back by kicking out ROTC from schools?

  40. @Rosie

    Local welfare is better than non-local because it comes with a level of accountability.
     
    I certainly understand what you're saying in theory, but I'm not sure it's true. White nations are some of the least corrupt in the world, e.g. Denmark. Whites are generally not cheats and grifters by nature. I suspect, but don't know for sure, that the worst welfare abusers and cheats come from the most corrupt societies.

    I would very much like to see data on subsequent fertility among welfare recipients by race and ethnicity. My hypothesis would obviously be that White women do not, as a rule, get pregnant while on public assistance. However, I wouldn't be surprised if that is changing, given that the ruling class has breached the social contract. I don't know that self-sufficiency is a fair and reasonable standard anymore for the WWC.

    White nations are some of the least corrupt in the world

    Both can be true. Whites could be less likely to cheat than non-white and local can be more reliable than non-local.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Both can be true. Whites could be less likely to cheat than non-white and local can be more reliable than non-local.
     
    I suppose a more interesting question would be this: Is the Western model of a national state built on the nuclear family compatible with a sustainable welfare state. I would say yes. Any tendency to cheat a national welfare system would be sufficiently held in check by nuclear family ties. You don't need a locally administered welfare system to have locally applied social pressure to not take advantage of the system. Local family and friends will shame freeloaders either way.

    All that said, I don't really have any objection to local welfare systems, so long as national disaster relief is available when entire communities fall on hard times.
  41. @216
    There's a saying in the Scouts (don't have your sons join, its converged now), that a fire must be left attended until it is "cold, dead, out"


    Conservatism Inc is not "cold, dead, out".

    They have the donors

    They have the mainstream media access

    The Silicon Dons have indicated a willingness to ban "hate sites". Outright deranking of the sites from search engines is the next likely path.

    Silicon Valley is now funding several cuckservative establishments. One imagines that they will be given preferred indexing and algorithms.

    Good point. I neglected to mention Silicon Valley’s overwhelming support of the Democratic Party, to the point of subverting whatever democratic elements remain in our political system.

  42. @Rosie

    So the delays are caused by women seeking education and careers in the first place.
     
    Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that the career-seeking is caused by men choosing to delay marriage.

    https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2372-man-shortage-men-drives-women-careers.html

    Who are they? The Amish, Orthodox Jews, Fundamentalist Muslims and Christians. What do they have in common? Patriarchial families.
     
    I'm not sure what you mean by "patriarchal families," but in any event it seems we agree that healthy families are perfectly compatible with legal equality of rights for women.

    They’re not choosing marriage and children because the government is acting as their surrogate husband.
     
    I call this MGTOW creationism. The idea is that somehow evolution created a human female that is useful for sex and procreation but nothing more. Being useless, women can't actually survive in a modern economy without husbands, real or surrogate. Therefore, women who are not married are parasites, by definition.

    From there it follows, of course, that the proper course of action is to take opportunities away from women, rather than to encourage them to marry and have children by making marriage more secure than career with an enforceable marital covenant (and lifetime alimony if a wife is abused or unjustly abandoned).

    That MGTOW creationism is false is clear from the data on law, veterinary and medical school admissions and subsequent licensing test data, completely setting aside traditional pink-collar jobs like nursing, teaching, secretarial work, beauty services, etc.

    Certainly, women are highly sought after in tech and perhaps other male-dominated fields, but the reason those fields are male-dominated is precisely because women don't want those jobs, or at least White women don't want them.

    Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that the career-seeking is caused by men choosing to delay marriage.

    There aren’t any clear links to the study they reference so I can’t check the data. I will say, though, that the evidence I repeatedly see for a “man-drought” is almost always a complaint about lack of high-value men. For example, Manhattan is the place most commonly referenced as where there are no available men. But if you check the population statistics, there’s more men in New York than women, just not specifically in Manhattan. What they’re actually complaining about is that there’s no available men at their level of education since they’re looking for someone equal to or above their status. This is again a consequence of schools prioritizing educating women over men, leading to a scarcity of higher value men.

    but in any event it seems we agree that healthy families are perfectly compatible with legal equality of rights for women.

    We don’t agree here. The examples show that under strong religious pressure, women will give up their rights and as a consequence have a higher fertility. Outside of religion, the best way for women to have both a successful career and family life would be to have their family first and join the workforce in their mid-30’s.

    I call this MGTOW creationism. The idea is that somehow evolution created a human female that is useful for sex and procreation but nothing more. Being useless, women can’t actually survive in a modern economy without husbands, real or surrogate. Therefore, women who are not married are parasites, by definition.

    I agree with you MGTOWs take this creation myth to an extreme by using anecdotal evidence about unqualified women. That wasn’t my argument here. Rather that on the margins, significantly less women would have successful careers in a free market than what we presently see. Unfortunately, your rebuttal is also anecdotal. “Because some women are smart and successful, all women can be.” The question I’m raising is not an all or nothing question but how many? In what proportions? For that you need data. I’ll try to provide three data sets.

    First, men score higher in intelligence tests than women. The IQ tests which attempt to show equal IQs compare men and women at age 12-14, when women enter puberty before men. When you compare adult IQ scores, men will score about 5 points higher [1] and their increased performance is related to higher brain volume and surface area [2]. This intelligence difference is not extreme and there’s lots of room for overlap, but that doesn’t invalidate the averages.

    Second, on national aptitude tests, men consistently score better than women when controlling for race [3, 4]. This has been true for as long as tests have been administered no matter how pro-female the education system is.

    Finally, and somewhat ironically, once you realize the wage gap doesn’t result from discrimination, then it becomes a short-hand method to compare relative productivity. In other words, the wage gap says women are 75% as productive as men.

    In all these cases, there’s lots of room for many female all-stars, among which 216 and HBDchick are included. Proportionally, men are going to be more successful and would dominate a free market.

    [1] http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/sexdifferences.aspx
    [2] https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/28/8/2959/4996558
    [3] http://www.aei.org/publication/2016-sat-test-results-confirm-pattern-thats-persisted-for-45-years-high-school-boys-are-better-at-math-than-girls/
    [4] https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/conf_achgapwomen_allspach.pdf

    • Replies: @Rosie

    This is again a consequence of schools prioritizing educating women over men, leading to a scarcity of higher value men.
     
    Schools don't prioritize educating women over men. School just by its nature, at least as we have known it till now, is more friendly to girls. This is a legitimate issue for the men's rights movement to pursue IMO.

    As far as the man drought is concerned, I don't think you understand that general prefer to date men a little, but not too much, older than them. A girl in her early twenties could date a and marry a man in his thirties, but that's not what they want to do. Men in their age cohort are not, in fact, interested in marriage. I've no doubt that at least sometimes this is because they have no economic prospects, but the fact remains either way. If men near your age are not offering to support you, then you have to think about supporting yourself, indefinitely if need be.

    The examples show that under strong religious pressure, women will give up their rights and as a consequence have a higher fertility.
     
    But they haven't given up their rights. They still have them. They've just chosen a traditional way of life, probably at least partially because some young man in their traditional subculture proposed to them. Once again, you continue to assume that women are driving the trend toward later marriage.

    Outside of religion, the best way for women to have both a successful career and family life would be to have their family first and join the workforce in their mid-30’s.
     
    I don't necessarily disagree with you here, though you have to remember that if women are going to have children without independent means of support, they will require additional security in the form of alimony.

    Unfortunately, your rebuttal is also anecdotal. “Because some women are smart and successful, all women can be.” The question I’m raising is not an all or nothing question but how many? In what proportions? For that you need data. I’ll try to provide three data sets.
     
    No, that is not my position. My position is merely that most women can be economically self-sufficient. What they cannot do, or at least the majority of us cannot do, is earn enough to support children without a husband. A woman does not need a husband, but most women with children will struggle without one.

    First, men score higher in intelligence tests than women.
     
    I've never said otherwise.

    Anyway, you seem like a reasonable person. Perhaps we can make some headway towards a reasonable consensus.
  43. @Brett

    Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that the career-seeking is caused by men choosing to delay marriage.
     
    There aren't any clear links to the study they reference so I can't check the data. I will say, though, that the evidence I repeatedly see for a "man-drought" is almost always a complaint about lack of high-value men. For example, Manhattan is the place most commonly referenced as where there are no available men. But if you check the population statistics, there's more men in New York than women, just not specifically in Manhattan. What they're actually complaining about is that there's no available men at their level of education since they're looking for someone equal to or above their status. This is again a consequence of schools prioritizing educating women over men, leading to a scarcity of higher value men.

    but in any event it seems we agree that healthy families are perfectly compatible with legal equality of rights for women.
     
    We don't agree here. The examples show that under strong religious pressure, women will give up their rights and as a consequence have a higher fertility. Outside of religion, the best way for women to have both a successful career and family life would be to have their family first and join the workforce in their mid-30's.

    I call this MGTOW creationism. The idea is that somehow evolution created a human female that is useful for sex and procreation but nothing more. Being useless, women can’t actually survive in a modern economy without husbands, real or surrogate. Therefore, women who are not married are parasites, by definition.
     
    I agree with you MGTOWs take this creation myth to an extreme by using anecdotal evidence about unqualified women. That wasn't my argument here. Rather that on the margins, significantly less women would have successful careers in a free market than what we presently see. Unfortunately, your rebuttal is also anecdotal. "Because some women are smart and successful, all women can be." The question I'm raising is not an all or nothing question but how many? In what proportions? For that you need data. I'll try to provide three data sets.

    First, men score higher in intelligence tests than women. The IQ tests which attempt to show equal IQs compare men and women at age 12-14, when women enter puberty before men. When you compare adult IQ scores, men will score about 5 points higher [1] and their increased performance is related to higher brain volume and surface area [2]. This intelligence difference is not extreme and there's lots of room for overlap, but that doesn't invalidate the averages.

    Second, on national aptitude tests, men consistently score better than women when controlling for race [3, 4]. This has been true for as long as tests have been administered no matter how pro-female the education system is.

    Finally, and somewhat ironically, once you realize the wage gap doesn't result from discrimination, then it becomes a short-hand method to compare relative productivity. In other words, the wage gap says women are 75% as productive as men.

    In all these cases, there's lots of room for many female all-stars, among which 216 and HBDchick are included. Proportionally, men are going to be more successful and would dominate a free market.

    [1] http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/sexdifferences.aspx
    [2] https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/28/8/2959/4996558
    [3] http://www.aei.org/publication/2016-sat-test-results-confirm-pattern-thats-persisted-for-45-years-high-school-boys-are-better-at-math-than-girls/
    [4] https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/conf_achgapwomen_allspach.pdf

    This is again a consequence of schools prioritizing educating women over men, leading to a scarcity of higher value men.

    Schools don’t prioritize educating women over men. School just by its nature, at least as we have known it till now, is more friendly to girls. This is a legitimate issue for the men’s rights movement to pursue IMO.

    As far as the man drought is concerned, I don’t think you understand that general prefer to date men a little, but not too much, older than them. A girl in her early twenties could date a and marry a man in his thirties, but that’s not what they want to do. Men in their age cohort are not, in fact, interested in marriage. I’ve no doubt that at least sometimes this is because they have no economic prospects, but the fact remains either way. If men near your age are not offering to support you, then you have to think about supporting yourself, indefinitely if need be.

    The examples show that under strong religious pressure, women will give up their rights and as a consequence have a higher fertility.

    But they haven’t given up their rights. They still have them. They’ve just chosen a traditional way of life, probably at least partially because some young man in their traditional subculture proposed to them. Once again, you continue to assume that women are driving the trend toward later marriage.

    Outside of religion, the best way for women to have both a successful career and family life would be to have their family first and join the workforce in their mid-30’s.

    I don’t necessarily disagree with you here, though you have to remember that if women are going to have children without independent means of support, they will require additional security in the form of alimony.

    Unfortunately, your rebuttal is also anecdotal. “Because some women are smart and successful, all women can be.” The question I’m raising is not an all or nothing question but how many? In what proportions? For that you need data. I’ll try to provide three data sets.

    No, that is not my position. My position is merely that most women can be economically self-sufficient. What they cannot do, or at least the majority of us cannot do, is earn enough to support children without a husband. A woman does not need a husband, but most women with children will struggle without one.

    First, men score higher in intelligence tests than women.

    I’ve never said otherwise.

    Anyway, you seem like a reasonable person. Perhaps we can make some headway towards a reasonable consensus.

  44. @Brett

    White nations are some of the least corrupt in the world
     
    Both can be true. Whites could be less likely to cheat than non-white and local can be more reliable than non-local.

    Both can be true. Whites could be less likely to cheat than non-white and local can be more reliable than non-local.

    I suppose a more interesting question would be this: Is the Western model of a national state built on the nuclear family compatible with a sustainable welfare state. I would say yes. Any tendency to cheat a national welfare system would be sufficiently held in check by nuclear family ties. You don’t need a locally administered welfare system to have locally applied social pressure to not take advantage of the system. Local family and friends will shame freeloaders either way.

    All that said, I don’t really have any objection to local welfare systems, so long as national disaster relief is available when entire communities fall on hard times.

  45. @Achmed E. Newman
    This may be opening a can of slightly-off-topic worms here, A.E., but that's not so bad, right? This is for the same folks I'd been going back and forth with under the "Washington Watcher"'s post about Socialism:

    Maybe the term "cuck" is out of favor now, so forgive me as I'm using it. Looking at the bottom 2 graphs, stuff I already know from my observations, are not supposedly-alt-right Socialists the ultimate in cucks? Is it not the definition of getting cuckolded what's going on in those graphs, for white people? You are getting money forcibly extracted from you in the form of taxes on your property, on your income, on your purchases, and other ways. This amounts to the theft of your labor, meaning the theft of a portion of your life!

    You people that argue "I don't care about lowering taxes, we've got other problems!" (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don't even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you "can't afford them right now". Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future "Americans".

    Socialism and its more-violent cousin Communism are the ultimate in Cuckdom. Enjoy, anti-Libertards!

    You people that argue “I don’t care about lowering taxes, we’ve got other problems!” (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don’t even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you “can’t afford them right now”. Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future “Americans”.

    Whites need to have more kids. And although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can’t afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded. Get out there and breed, guys. No duty is more fulfilling than parenthood.

    And before I get some moron telling me to walk the walk, my wife and I have had 5 kids and aren’t ready to stop yet. With the child tax credit and other credits and deductions, we pay an effective tax rate of about 3%, so we’re simultaneously starving the beast. And I live in VT, so judging by the graphs my kids will be the only ones here in 25 years.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can’t afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded

    Indeed. Take heart, HBD is real. All the stupidity about sending children to expensive pre-schools and getting them piano lessons at four is bunk. None of that has any correlation with life outcomes. Bond with your kids, rediscover the world through them--and they may even save you money! Our entertainment/social budget is almost nothing now. On the weekends, we... stay up a little later with the kids at home, go hiking, etc. Very little going to restaurants, let alone bars.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    And I live in VT, so judging by the graphs my kids will be the only ones here in 25 years.
     
    Haven't half of all Vermont's children left the state once they grew up? That was fine when people had six or eight kids, but with two, that leaves the state's effective TFR at 1.o. 200 years ago, Vermont had six congressional districts, starting from only two in 1791.


    Two Vermont natives who went west, first to New York, then farther on to become quite philoprogenitive were Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

    Those who move into the state today, quite suspiciously considering their racial views and experience, eg James W Loewen and Bernie Sanders, don't seem to prioritize having children. And if they did, they wanted them to grow up in the whitest available environment.
  46. @krustykurmudgeon
    from what I know there are really three different areas of Collin County. Plano is basically a second generation suburb that was built in the 70s-90s and is now built out. A lot of corporations have there offices there (Frito Lay, JCPenney, Dr Pepper, TI) and a high asian population.

    Then you have the boomtowns of Frisco, McKinney (the county seat) and Allen that are where all the homes and "town centers" (the new euphemism for a mall) are being built. The rest of the county (north of 380, east of 75) is still small town Texas.

    @35 krustykurmudgeon: ” Then you have the boomtowns of Frisco, McKinney (the county seat) and Allen that are where all the homes and “town centers” (the new euphemism for a mall) are being built. The rest of the county (north of 380, east of 75) is still small town Texas.”

    Actually, Frisco and Allen were booming and new about 20 years ago. All that growth moved north to Prosper and beyond, and southwest to Keller and Southlake. Both places have also seen their own influx of Orientals and Subcontinentals. McKinney has its newer, Whiter areas but also a large number of dysfunctional Negroes. The rest of the county is no longer “small town Texas.” Prosper has been the “in” locale for about 10 years now. They already had lawsuits about Negro football players raping clueless White girls – said football players were the sons of various members of the Negro sportsball league who had built their own mansions up there.

    The Mohammedans bought 35 acres out in Farmersville (still Collin County) and proposed building a cemetery and cultural center there. Lawsuits and liberal outrage abound. The Whites in Collin County are shrinking and being squeezed on all sides, and the ones moving in are all NPCs from California, Chicago, and the east coast.

    Texas (at least the greater DFW area, Houston, and San Antonio), are lost causes. Add the entire southern border area which is nothing but Mexico with a smattering of western amenities, and Texas really is toast. I do not glory in this but those who think of Texas as full of tough, strong, proud Western men are woefully out of date.

    • Replies: @krustykurmudgeon
    Ted Cruz, in his surprisingly close 2018 reelection bid, won 75% or more in 151 or 254 of the counties. Think of the movie "hell or high water"
  47. @3g4me
    @35 krustykurmudgeon: " Then you have the boomtowns of Frisco, McKinney (the county seat) and Allen that are where all the homes and “town centers” (the new euphemism for a mall) are being built. The rest of the county (north of 380, east of 75) is still small town Texas."

    Actually, Frisco and Allen were booming and new about 20 years ago. All that growth moved north to Prosper and beyond, and southwest to Keller and Southlake. Both places have also seen their own influx of Orientals and Subcontinentals. McKinney has its newer, Whiter areas but also a large number of dysfunctional Negroes. The rest of the county is no longer "small town Texas." Prosper has been the "in" locale for about 10 years now. They already had lawsuits about Negro football players raping clueless White girls - said football players were the sons of various members of the Negro sportsball league who had built their own mansions up there.

    The Mohammedans bought 35 acres out in Farmersville (still Collin County) and proposed building a cemetery and cultural center there. Lawsuits and liberal outrage abound. The Whites in Collin County are shrinking and being squeezed on all sides, and the ones moving in are all NPCs from California, Chicago, and the east coast.

    Texas (at least the greater DFW area, Houston, and San Antonio), are lost causes. Add the entire southern border area which is nothing but Mexico with a smattering of western amenities, and Texas really is toast. I do not glory in this but those who think of Texas as full of tough, strong, proud Western men are woefully out of date.

    Ted Cruz, in his surprisingly close 2018 reelection bid, won 75% or more in 151 or 254 of the counties. Think of the movie “hell or high water”

  48. @Achmed E. Newman
    This may be opening a can of slightly-off-topic worms here, A.E., but that's not so bad, right? This is for the same folks I'd been going back and forth with under the "Washington Watcher"'s post about Socialism:

    Maybe the term "cuck" is out of favor now, so forgive me as I'm using it. Looking at the bottom 2 graphs, stuff I already know from my observations, are not supposedly-alt-right Socialists the ultimate in cucks? Is it not the definition of getting cuckolded what's going on in those graphs, for white people? You are getting money forcibly extracted from you in the form of taxes on your property, on your income, on your purchases, and other ways. This amounts to the theft of your labor, meaning the theft of a portion of your life!

    You people that argue "I don't care about lowering taxes, we've got other problems!" (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don't even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you "can't afford them right now". Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future "Americans".

    Socialism and its more-violent cousin Communism are the ultimate in Cuckdom. Enjoy, anti-Libertards!

    Yes. The take-home lesson is that in democracies when the market dominant group becomes a minority, one of two things happen: 1) socialism, then communism, then collapse (Venezuela), or 2) democracy gets shelved for something workable (Singapore).

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm not too enamored with Singapore though, that's the problem. I'd take it over your (1), though, but, it'd still be one hell of a shame, compared to 20th-Century America.
  49. @Intelligent Dasein
    Hey Audie,

    Have you ever followed the demographic work of Chris Hamilton at the Econimica blog? He tends to be a bit of a one note symphony, but that one note he pounds is a pretty important one. He exactingly charts the utter collapse of the working and child-bearing age populations across the developed world, with its implication of an inevitable global depopulation.

    I always find it frustrating that more people do not take this stuff seriously, especially when economics are being discussed. The modern man worries about over-population, which is already a mathematical impossibility. He sees the waves of immigrants come, the city-scape sprawl on and on, the traffic get worse and worse, and inflation go up year after year, and he thinks that these trends are about to swallow up the entire world. But there are not enough children being born to even maintain the population at the current level, let alone grow it. It is only the adult population of the cities that continue to swell. The urban centers, like seed crystals, continue to draw in all the masses of mankind into their own infertile, artificial worlds, using their blood merely to prop them up a little while longer, meanwhile the whole vast countryside is progressively denuded of people.

    It is unthinkable to me that nobody takes this into consideration when making their economic prognostications. Anybody forecasting future growth, abundant resources, cheap energy, techno-Utopia, or automation (my ass) simply does not realize the extent to which the world is shortly about to be wracked by declining populations, exploding dependency ratios, and our legacy of unsustainable debt. Globalism and socialist welfare states will not be able to survive this, standards of living will plunge, and the entire geopolitical order as we know it will be replaced by something else.

    (And as a parenthetical sidebar, notwithstanding Steve's Most Important Graph in the World, the population of Africa is completely unsustainable without modern advancements which the Africans can neither afford nor replicate by themselves. When the developed world collapses, Africa will likewise collapse.)

    This is inevitable. It has already happened. It's already present in the numbers and in the daily reality. It just hasn't "worked itself out" yet; but there is no digging our way out of this demographic hole. Every Western woman would need to start having 4 or 5 children apiece simply to reverse the fertility decline of the last several decades, and frankly we cannot afford it. We have already consumed tens of trillions of dollars in excess of what we produce, and all that debt will be liquidated one way or another, either by austerity, default, or a currency collapse. The resources simply do not exist to be diverted towards raising that many offspring, unless we were willing to accept Indian levels of mass poverty. However, this end will eventually be visited upon us whether we chose it or not.

    The debt, especially the foreign-held debt, doesn’t have to matter so long as the currency crisis happens while the US is militarily unbeatable (from attack, not from ‘pacifying’ goatherds in the Hindu Kush).

    Default is the way to go. America is the drug addict, China the dealer. America has been consuming drugs on credit for decades. China kept dispensing even though it’s obvious America can’t pay. But America can still kick China’s ass. So China doesn’t get its money. Instead, America tells it to go fuck off, gets clean–that’ll be painful but manageable–and becomes healthy again.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I gotta differ with you here, A.E. I WISH it was the case that we had one big ~ $1,500,000,000,000 note for our debt to China. We would be perfectly within our rights to say "Hey, you all would be speaking Japanese if Americans hadn't fought the Japs all over the Pacific, so let's call it even." whether the average Chinaman knows anything about WWII or not, along with a line from that famous sage Otter: "Listen, you fucked up. You trusted us."

    When you default on Treasury bonds, the way that people lend money to the US Feral Gov't, you default on ALL of them. They are fungible. It'd be like saying "all 20 dollar bills with serial numbers starting in 0 through 4 are now invalid. You don't know who's got all these bills. The US dollar would die. Come to think of it, maybe you do know this, but I am responding more to your 2nd paragraph.

    I am not actually arguing that default wouldn't be the best thing for America, in the long run. However, short and medium term, there would be much serious financial pain for unprepared Americans (95%) and lots of others around the world. How could we kick China's ass when we borrow money each year to fund the military?

    First thing: KILL! THE! FED! (Sorry, Charles Pewitt, I stole your thunder.)
  50. @krustykurmudgeon
    part of it is simply the available land and the type of people it attracts. In Olathe, KS - you have more room and it is therefore more amenable to children. It's also not as expensive. In Westchester County, NY - there's not as much room and the housing stock is more expensive.

    I do find it interesting how the dems are doing better not just in the blue state built-out suburban areas but in the more "Affordable Family Formation" type areas. O'Rourke only lost Collin County, TX by like five.

    The dirt gap!

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    Mr Audacious, if you're looking for relevant topics, this one might be of interest:

    Florida felons just got the right to vote. GOP leaders want to slow-walk it.
    https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/43zgnd/florida-felons-just-got-the-right-to-vote-gop-leaders-want-to-slow-walk-it
     
    Yes, I know it's old news (happening in state after state) and even the editorial slant in the second sentence is a big yawn.

    But. The news is that there are nearly 1.5 million felons in one state!

    Try and compete with that, America.

  51. @MikeatMikedotMike
    "Black women are not much attracted to non-black men; "

    You have this exactly opposite. Non black men are not attracted to black women. Black women occupy the lowest point of SMV.

    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it ‘the best’, white men and Asian women are in between.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    Black men have the highest SMV (assuming that's what you mean by "the best") among males? I'm not convinced of that.
    , @Rosie

    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it ‘the best’, white men and Asian women are in between.
     
    I thought Asian women and White men had the highest SMV.

    https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ethnic-preferences2.png?w=1260&strip=all&quality=75
  52. @Travis
    52% of births are to white females...but over 10% of the these children do not have white fathers. Thus white children are no longer the majority of births.

    in the 2010 census 53% of the under 20 population was white....many hispanics self-identify as white, but more and more hispanics are choosing another racial category so we should expect the 2020 census will indicate whites are less than 50% of the under 20 population. In fact we should expect less than 50% of the under-30 population will be white on the next census.

    should my children be counted as white ? My wife is from Chile and self-identifies as white, thus my children were counted as white on the 2010 census. She may decide to self-identify as Hispanic , part amerindian, as her recent DNA test revealed she is 24% Native American. My children are thus 12% amerindian. Back in 2010 my wife would not identify as hispanic, so I suspect she will still self-identify as white and still reject the "hispanic" classification.

    This makes sense culturally, as the flight from white is basically creating a one-drop rule for non-whiteness. Otoh, genetically the US is far more than 50% white/European, with Hispanics and blacks having far more European ancestry than whites have Amerindian or African ancestry.

  53. @Mr. XYZ
    Here's a question for you, Audacious Epigone: Was NAM fertility even more dysgenic before welfare reform was implemented? Or did welfare reform have no effect on this?

    In the mid-nineties? The GSS will allow for a look. Will do!

  54. @Saint Louis

    You people that argue “I don’t care about lowering taxes, we’ve got other problems!” (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don’t even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you “can’t afford them right now”. Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future “Americans”.
     
    Whites need to have more kids. And although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can't afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded. Get out there and breed, guys. No duty is more fulfilling than parenthood.

    And before I get some moron telling me to walk the walk, my wife and I have had 5 kids and aren't ready to stop yet. With the child tax credit and other credits and deductions, we pay an effective tax rate of about 3%, so we're simultaneously starving the beast. And I live in VT, so judging by the graphs my kids will be the only ones here in 25 years.

    although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can’t afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded

    Indeed. Take heart, HBD is real. All the stupidity about sending children to expensive pre-schools and getting them piano lessons at four is bunk. None of that has any correlation with life outcomes. Bond with your kids, rediscover the world through them–and they may even save you money! Our entertainment/social budget is almost nothing now. On the weekends, we… stay up a little later with the kids at home, go hiking, etc. Very little going to restaurants, let alone bars.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    AGREED!

    Both you guys rock!
    , @Corvinus
    "All the stupidity...getting them piano lessons at four is bunk."

    Not necessarily.

    https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+link+between+music+lessons+and+IQ+in+children.-a0464981041

    "Indeed. Take heart, HBD is real."

    Debatable.

    "Bond with your kids, rediscover the world through them–and they may even save you money!...On the weekends, we… stay up a little later with the kids at home, go hiking, etc."

    Finally, some common sense.
  55. @Audacious Epigone
    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it 'the best', white men and Asian women are in between.

    Black men have the highest SMV (assuming that’s what you mean by “the best”) among males? I’m not convinced of that.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Not without controlling for everything else. But they are 3:1 WF relative to how BF do WM. Crudely, black men are attractive to black and white women, while black women are only attractive to black men.
  56. @Audacious Epigone
    although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can’t afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded

    Indeed. Take heart, HBD is real. All the stupidity about sending children to expensive pre-schools and getting them piano lessons at four is bunk. None of that has any correlation with life outcomes. Bond with your kids, rediscover the world through them--and they may even save you money! Our entertainment/social budget is almost nothing now. On the weekends, we... stay up a little later with the kids at home, go hiking, etc. Very little going to restaurants, let alone bars.

    AGREED!

    Both you guys rock!

  57. @Audacious Epigone
    Yes. The take-home lesson is that in democracies when the market dominant group becomes a minority, one of two things happen: 1) socialism, then communism, then collapse (Venezuela), or 2) democracy gets shelved for something workable (Singapore).

    I’m not too enamored with Singapore though, that’s the problem. I’d take it over your (1), though, but, it’d still be one hell of a shame, compared to 20th-Century America.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  58. @Audacious Epigone
    The debt, especially the foreign-held debt, doesn't have to matter so long as the currency crisis happens while the US is militarily unbeatable (from attack, not from 'pacifying' goatherds in the Hindu Kush).

    Default is the way to go. America is the drug addict, China the dealer. America has been consuming drugs on credit for decades. China kept dispensing even though it's obvious America can't pay. But America can still kick China's ass. So China doesn't get its money. Instead, America tells it to go fuck off, gets clean--that'll be painful but manageable--and becomes healthy again.

    I gotta differ with you here, A.E. I WISH it was the case that we had one big ~ $1,500,000,000,000 note for our debt to China. We would be perfectly within our rights to say “Hey, you all would be speaking Japanese if Americans hadn’t fought the Japs all over the Pacific, so let’s call it even.” whether the average Chinaman knows anything about WWII or not, along with a line from that famous sage Otter: “Listen, you fucked up. You trusted us.”

    When you default on Treasury bonds, the way that people lend money to the US Feral Gov’t, you default on ALL of them. They are fungible. It’d be like saying “all 20 dollar bills with serial numbers starting in 0 through 4 are now invalid. You don’t know who’s got all these bills. The US dollar would die. Come to think of it, maybe you do know this, but I am responding more to your 2nd paragraph.

    I am not actually arguing that default wouldn’t be the best thing for America, in the long run. However, short and medium term, there would be much serious financial pain for unprepared Americans (95%) and lots of others around the world. How could we kick China’s ass when we borrow money each year to fund the military?

    First thing: KILL! THE! FED! (Sorry, Charles Pewitt, I stole your thunder.)

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    I do not think default would be the best option for ordinary Americans. I think that monetization of the debt plus a program of inflation-adjusted, matched savings would be the best way to erode the debt-berg while causing the minimum amount of pain to working people,plus having numerous other salutary social side effects. I've written a rudimentary yet still lengthy version of my plan in the comments here at Unz.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Heh, I'm not sure I'm sophisticated enough to understand how that would really differ from default, beyond being funny. A currency crisis would be the consequence either way, wouldn't it? I'm sure we're in agreement that said crisis will be painful in the short- and medium-terms but that it's necessary for our economic convalescence over the long-term.
  59. @Achmed E. Newman
    I gotta differ with you here, A.E. I WISH it was the case that we had one big ~ $1,500,000,000,000 note for our debt to China. We would be perfectly within our rights to say "Hey, you all would be speaking Japanese if Americans hadn't fought the Japs all over the Pacific, so let's call it even." whether the average Chinaman knows anything about WWII or not, along with a line from that famous sage Otter: "Listen, you fucked up. You trusted us."

    When you default on Treasury bonds, the way that people lend money to the US Feral Gov't, you default on ALL of them. They are fungible. It'd be like saying "all 20 dollar bills with serial numbers starting in 0 through 4 are now invalid. You don't know who's got all these bills. The US dollar would die. Come to think of it, maybe you do know this, but I am responding more to your 2nd paragraph.

    I am not actually arguing that default wouldn't be the best thing for America, in the long run. However, short and medium term, there would be much serious financial pain for unprepared Americans (95%) and lots of others around the world. How could we kick China's ass when we borrow money each year to fund the military?

    First thing: KILL! THE! FED! (Sorry, Charles Pewitt, I stole your thunder.)

    I do not think default would be the best option for ordinary Americans. I think that monetization of the debt plus a program of inflation-adjusted, matched savings would be the best way to erode the debt-berg while causing the minimum amount of pain to working people,plus having numerous other salutary social side effects. I’ve written a rudimentary yet still lengthy version of my plan in the comments here at Unz.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra

    erode the debt-berg while causing the minimum amount of pain to working people,
     
    If dying of hunger is painful, I really do not know.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Given how little in the way of net assets that ordinary Americans have, why would a default be particularly bad for them? It'd effectively be debt forgiveness for them, wouldn't it?
  60. @Audacious Epigone
    although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can’t afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded

    Indeed. Take heart, HBD is real. All the stupidity about sending children to expensive pre-schools and getting them piano lessons at four is bunk. None of that has any correlation with life outcomes. Bond with your kids, rediscover the world through them--and they may even save you money! Our entertainment/social budget is almost nothing now. On the weekends, we... stay up a little later with the kids at home, go hiking, etc. Very little going to restaurants, let alone bars.

    “All the stupidity…getting them piano lessons at four is bunk.”

    Not necessarily.

    https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+link+between+music+lessons+and+IQ+in+children.-a0464981041

    “Indeed. Take heart, HBD is real.”

    Debatable.

    “Bond with your kids, rediscover the world through them–and they may even save you money!…On the weekends, we… stay up a little later with the kids at home, go hiking, etc.”

    Finally, some common sense.

  61. @Audacious Epigone
    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it 'the best', white men and Asian women are in between.

    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it ‘the best’, white men and Asian women are in between.

    I thought Asian women and White men had the highest SMV.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    Tinder should have a racial filter, so tedious swiping left on all the black profiles.
    , @Truth
    These silly incel-created graphs are so funny! They always ask "who are the men that women are most attracted to?" As if that means two shits. If all women ended up with whom they were attracted, the all-state QB in high school would have 67 wives.

    The question is," what man is going to risk his ego approaching me, and if I say no, continue to try" because even now, women generally end up with a man who, at some point, risked his reputation, embarrassment, or his job to impress her.

    Once you understand this, to my mind, very simple fact of heterosexual relationships, you will understand the conflict between these graphs and what you see with your eyes.
  62. Cannot understand articles like this.
    In order to survive as members of the European cultures we must enter a child producing race with the cultures that threaten us ?
    Nationalism based on culture seems far more simple, and far better for this already overcrowded planet.
    We should begin with a discriminatory immigration policy.
    If this is insufficient, inverse diversity.

    • Replies: @Anon
    We must have more White children is s conservative American thing.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    It's more that reproduction is the most fundamental indicator of a people's/ethnicity's/race's love for itself. A people who no longer have children is a defeated people.
  63. @Intelligent Dasein
    I do not think default would be the best option for ordinary Americans. I think that monetization of the debt plus a program of inflation-adjusted, matched savings would be the best way to erode the debt-berg while causing the minimum amount of pain to working people,plus having numerous other salutary social side effects. I've written a rudimentary yet still lengthy version of my plan in the comments here at Unz.

    erode the debt-berg while causing the minimum amount of pain to working people,

    If dying of hunger is painful, I really do not know.

  64. @Rosie

    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it ‘the best’, white men and Asian women are in between.
     
    I thought Asian women and White men had the highest SMV.

    https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ethnic-preferences2.png?w=1260&strip=all&quality=75

    Tinder should have a racial filter, so tedious swiping left on all the black profiles.

    • Replies: @blackbrit
    londonbob ! that will be why london looks like a brown mixed race baby factory showroom then ! lol ! all those white females swiping left their knickers off more like ! lol ! who are you trying to kid who knows anything about london ? !
    , @blackbrit
    londonbob ! that will be why london looks like a brown mixed race baby factory showroom then ! lol ! all those white females swiping left their knickers off more like ! lol ! who are you trying to kid who knows anything about london ? !
  65. To quote myself: don’t fool yourself.

    By now, it is evident that TFR beyond replacement level is completely incompatible with modern high tech civilization. There should be no illusions about that.

    Women just don’t want to have more than 1-2 children. They do want children, vast majority of them, but not 3-4 or more. It’s women who matter since fatherhood has never been such a powerful force for males, and now it’s rapidly declining.

    This goes for advanced races, whites & Asians.

    Only religion can keep women in business of birthing; when they cease to believe or submit to men as the standard of behavior, say goodbye to sustainable levels of replacement fertility.

    Other races & groups (dot Indians, blacks, Muslims, various Mestizos,…) will have high fertility & will replace liberal whites causing dystopian nightmare & collapse of global society; or, they’ll be expelled & put under some sort of quasi-Nazi supervision.

    If we set aside extreme futurist alterations a la Asimov’s “Foundation”, we have a rather simple picture:

    * human beings live, normally, in communities: tribes, peoples, nations, …. differing in cultures, customs, languages, myths, loyalties, laws, …

    * the basic unit is monogamous family. Never mind India, China, Islam, …-polygamy was for a select few, rich & powerful. Man & woman & children, family- that is human life.

    * women, virtually all of them, want their man, want children & family. This is the center of their life. Perhaps 15% of them will never have children (health, environmental changes, “destiny”, ..). They want, basically, soft patriarchy; they want their men to be superior, but not brutes & savages. Also, they want some financial independence & a decent level of education, not to be confined to drudgery of purely domestic life. That’s what makes them happy (plus some chocolate).

    Some women with “male brain” may have different priorities, but they’re in the minority.
    That goes for modern women, white & some Asian. Others, like black females, Muslim women (most of them), Mestizo women, dot Indian females & feather Indian women, various colored mixtures in SE Asia … will, in a foreseeable future, retain their traditional roles of male exchange commodities & essentially men’s slaves. They will remain religious sex & satisfied with it. Not only feminism, but basic women’s rights don’t mean much to them. It is in their nature, particularly re Africans: https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/02/08/the-particularism-of-white-morality/

    .. Senegal was not a hellhole. Very poor people can lead happy, meaningful lives in their own cultures’ terms. But they are not our terms. The excrement is the least of it. Our basic ideas of human relations, right and wrong, are incompatible. […]

    Take something as basic as family. Family was a few hundred people, extending out to second and third cousins. All the men in one generation were called “father.” Senegalese are Muslim, with up to four wives. Girls had their clitorises cut off at puberty. (I witnessed this, at what I thought was going to be a nice coming-of-age ceremony, like a bat mitzvah or confirmation.) Sex, I was told, did not include kissing. Love and friendship in marriage were Western ideas. Fidelity was not a thing. Married women would have sex for a few cents to have cash for the market.

    What I did witness every day was that women were worked half to death. Wives raised the food and fed their own children, did the heavy labor of walking miles to gather wood for the fire, drew water from the well or public faucet, pounded grain with heavy hand-held pestles, lived in their own huts, and had conjugal visits from their husbands on a rotating basis with their co-wives. Their husbands lazed in the shade of the trees.

    There is no going back in history. Socialists in the 2nd half of the 19th C had progressed with their liberation of women, then this became universal way of behavior in civilized world across the globe & this issue is settled, permanently (for Europeans & their descendants). Those who think that women should give up voting rights; that they should – most of them- remain housewives, that they should give up education & financial independence are delusional. These male movements, men’s separatism, …. this all is reactionary stupidity not worth discussing. An aside- gay “marriage” is actually a non-issue. It is unimportant & does not have any real significance in modern world re stable family structure & fertility.

    So, in immortal Chernyshevsky’s words: What is to be done?

    What is to be done, with us whites & some Asians?

    Despite all the differences from Norwegians to Italians & from Irish to Russians, we’re in the same mess. We know that real clincher was the pill & sexual licentiousness from 60ies/70ies. From that period, there is no turning back.

    Yet, women want marriage,man, family, children, shopping & easier life with financial security and more interesting life with something more than central stuff, children. This is achievable.

    What is not achievable is 3-5 babies per average educated woman. This is absolutely impossible.

    1. too many kids, after some time they become annoying

    2. always around them, a mother does not have a life of her own, even a slice of it

    3. because contemporary culture’s pressure that “kids must have all”, it is financially impossible for a middle class couple to give all to their 3, 4.. babies.

    There is a need for cultural paradigm shift in whole Western world, and this cannot be simply planned. There are two extremes that should be addressed first, because of …later.

    Israeli Jews have TFR beyond replacement level, and they are the only developed nation with that characteristic, an anomaly. But: a) a significant part of it is demographic race with Arabs. Without enemy as that, why would Czechs or Norwegians rise their TFR? b) a big chunk goes to religious- not ultra-Orthodox- Jews/Jewesses, who somehow accept male dominance & traditional lifestyle at home (just- they do not stay confined to home: mothers of 4-5 children have PhD from Harvard in psychology or mom of 3 kids is a pediatrician).

    So, you have to have a national culture where religion, not too restrictive to status of females, does play a role & women are ennobled by their role in the whole fabric of society. Religion should be best thisworldly, with cooking, food, various taboos & family rituals- not theologically or metaphysically too heavy and exacting.

    As with the Japanese & their abysmal birth rate, what is to be done? Japanese religious movements are mostly hyper-macho wildings; they don’t anymore have a balanced approach to religiosity in family life & don’t care about family as such. Oppressive sides of their family life seem, due to perverted & distorted Confucian & Buddhist traditions, to lead to a collective pessimism, gnawing sensibilities & lack of enthusiasm & drive for happiness (unlike Israelis). Everything becomes unstuck & pervs are unleashed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enjo_k%C5%8Dsai

    Enjo-kōsai (援助交際 compensated dating, shortened form enkō 援交,) is a type of transactional relationship. It is the Japanese language term for the practice of older men giving money and/or luxury gifts to attractive young women for their companionship or possibly for sexual favors. The female participants range from school girls (aka JK business) to housewives.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra

    Women just don’t want to have more than 1-2 children. They do want children, vast majority of them, but not 3-4 or more.
     
    Wrong.
    What women want, a long discussion is possible.
    Sure is that in many African societies a woman must have at least three children, thus possibly more, among them there must be a boy.
    MUST, society expects, wants this, women who refuse, or cannot, are ridiculed, or the husband is, or both.
    It is not just African cultures, in SW Greece at the end of the forties it was exactly the same:
    Nicholas Gage, 'Eleni', 1983, 1996, New York
    , @Audacious Epigone
    The advanced races, whites and Asians, have also created utterly unsustainable welfare states that grow faster than their productivity does.

    2. always around them, a mother does not have a life of her own, even a slice of it

    Social cocooning is a trend among single women, too. She can scroll mindlessly through instagram whether she has kids or not.
  66. @Bardon Kaldian
    To quote myself: don't fool yourself.

    By now, it is evident that TFR beyond replacement level is completely incompatible with modern high tech civilization. There should be no illusions about that.

    Women just don’t want to have more than 1-2 children. They do want children, vast majority of them, but not 3-4 or more. It’s women who matter since fatherhood has never been such a powerful force for males, and now it’s rapidly declining.

    This goes for advanced races, whites & Asians.

    Only religion can keep women in business of birthing; when they cease to believe or submit to men as the standard of behavior, say goodbye to sustainable levels of replacement fertility.

    Other races & groups (dot Indians, blacks, Muslims, various Mestizos,…) will have high fertility & will replace liberal whites causing dystopian nightmare & collapse of global society; or, they’ll be expelled & put under some sort of quasi-Nazi supervision.

    If we set aside extreme futurist alterations a la Asimov’s “Foundation”, we have a rather simple picture:

    * human beings live, normally, in communities: tribes, peoples, nations, …. differing in cultures, customs, languages, myths, loyalties, laws, …

    * the basic unit is monogamous family. Never mind India, China, Islam, …-polygamy was for a select few, rich & powerful. Man & woman & children, family- that is human life.

    * women, virtually all of them, want their man, want children & family. This is the center of their life. Perhaps 15% of them will never have children (health, environmental changes, “destiny”, ..). They want, basically, soft patriarchy; they want their men to be superior, but not brutes & savages. Also, they want some financial independence & a decent level of education, not to be confined to drudgery of purely domestic life. That’s what makes them happy (plus some chocolate).

    Some women with “male brain” may have different priorities, but they’re in the minority.
    That goes for modern women, white & some Asian. Others, like black females, Muslim women (most of them), Mestizo women, dot Indian females & feather Indian women, various colored mixtures in SE Asia … will, in a foreseeable future, retain their traditional roles of male exchange commodities & essentially men’s slaves. They will remain religious sex & satisfied with it. Not only feminism, but basic women’s rights don’t mean much to them. It is in their nature, particularly re Africans: https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/02/08/the-particularism-of-white-morality/


    .. Senegal was not a hellhole. Very poor people can lead happy, meaningful lives in their own cultures’ terms. But they are not our terms. The excrement is the least of it. Our basic ideas of human relations, right and wrong, are incompatible. […]

    Take something as basic as family. Family was a few hundred people, extending out to second and third cousins. All the men in one generation were called “father.” Senegalese are Muslim, with up to four wives. Girls had their clitorises cut off at puberty. (I witnessed this, at what I thought was going to be a nice coming-of-age ceremony, like a bat mitzvah or confirmation.) Sex, I was told, did not include kissing. Love and friendship in marriage were Western ideas. Fidelity was not a thing. Married women would have sex for a few cents to have cash for the market.

    What I did witness every day was that women were worked half to death. Wives raised the food and fed their own children, did the heavy labor of walking miles to gather wood for the fire, drew water from the well or public faucet, pounded grain with heavy hand-held pestles, lived in their own huts, and had conjugal visits from their husbands on a rotating basis with their co-wives. Their husbands lazed in the shade of the trees.
     

    There is no going back in history. Socialists in the 2nd half of the 19th C had progressed with their liberation of women, then this became universal way of behavior in civilized world across the globe & this issue is settled, permanently (for Europeans & their descendants). Those who think that women should give up voting rights; that they should – most of them- remain housewives, that they should give up education & financial independence are delusional. These male movements, men’s separatism, …. this all is reactionary stupidity not worth discussing. An aside- gay “marriage” is actually a non-issue. It is unimportant & does not have any real significance in modern world re stable family structure & fertility.

    So, in immortal Chernyshevsky’s words: What is to be done?

    What is to be done, with us whites & some Asians?

    Despite all the differences from Norwegians to Italians & from Irish to Russians, we’re in the same mess. We know that real clincher was the pill & sexual licentiousness from 60ies/70ies. From that period, there is no turning back.

    Yet, women want marriage,man, family, children, shopping & easier life with financial security and more interesting life with something more than central stuff, children. This is achievable.

    What is not achievable is 3-5 babies per average educated woman. This is absolutely impossible.

    1. too many kids, after some time they become annoying

    2. always around them, a mother does not have a life of her own, even a slice of it

    3. because contemporary culture’s pressure that “kids must have all”, it is financially impossible for a middle class couple to give all to their 3, 4.. babies.

    There is a need for cultural paradigm shift in whole Western world, and this cannot be simply planned. There are two extremes that should be addressed first, because of …later.

    Israeli Jews have TFR beyond replacement level, and they are the only developed nation with that characteristic, an anomaly. But: a) a significant part of it is demographic race with Arabs. Without enemy as that, why would Czechs or Norwegians rise their TFR? b) a big chunk goes to religious- not ultra-Orthodox- Jews/Jewesses, who somehow accept male dominance & traditional lifestyle at home (just- they do not stay confined to home: mothers of 4-5 children have PhD from Harvard in psychology or mom of 3 kids is a pediatrician).

    So, you have to have a national culture where religion, not too restrictive to status of females, does play a role & women are ennobled by their role in the whole fabric of society. Religion should be best thisworldly, with cooking, food, various taboos & family rituals- not theologically or metaphysically too heavy and exacting.

    As with the Japanese & their abysmal birth rate, what is to be done? Japanese religious movements are mostly hyper-macho wildings; they don’t anymore have a balanced approach to religiosity in family life & don’t care about family as such. Oppressive sides of their family life seem, due to perverted & distorted Confucian & Buddhist traditions, to lead to a collective pessimism, gnawing sensibilities & lack of enthusiasm & drive for happiness (unlike Israelis). Everything becomes unstuck & pervs are unleashed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enjo_k%C5%8Dsai

    Enjo-kōsai (援助交際 compensated dating, shortened form enkō 援交,) is a type of transactional relationship. It is the Japanese language term for the practice of older men giving money and/or luxury gifts to attractive young women for their companionship or possibly for sexual favors. The female participants range from school girls (aka JK business) to housewives.

     

    Women just don’t want to have more than 1-2 children. They do want children, vast majority of them, but not 3-4 or more.

    Wrong.
    What women want, a long discussion is possible.
    Sure is that in many African societies a woman must have at least three children, thus possibly more, among them there must be a boy.
    MUST, society expects, wants this, women who refuse, or cannot, are ridiculed, or the husband is, or both.
    It is not just African cultures, in SW Greece at the end of the forties it was exactly the same:
    Nicholas Gage, ‘Eleni’, 1983, 1996, New York

  67. @Achmed E. Newman
    This may be opening a can of slightly-off-topic worms here, A.E., but that's not so bad, right? This is for the same folks I'd been going back and forth with under the "Washington Watcher"'s post about Socialism:

    Maybe the term "cuck" is out of favor now, so forgive me as I'm using it. Looking at the bottom 2 graphs, stuff I already know from my observations, are not supposedly-alt-right Socialists the ultimate in cucks? Is it not the definition of getting cuckolded what's going on in those graphs, for white people? You are getting money forcibly extracted from you in the form of taxes on your property, on your income, on your purchases, and other ways. This amounts to the theft of your labor, meaning the theft of a portion of your life!

    You people that argue "I don't care about lowering taxes, we've got other problems!" (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don't even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you "can't afford them right now". Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future "Americans".

    Socialism and its more-violent cousin Communism are the ultimate in Cuckdom. Enjoy, anti-Libertards!

    Great post Whites pay so much to support parasite non White kids we can’t afford to have any of our own.
    We’re it not for abortion there’d be millions more of them supported by Whites in the prison and life long welfare system.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    Do you suppose that they would support whites. If the US blacks ran the US, do you think whites would get anything. Or that Hispanics would give blacks anything. Or that Indians would give anything to anybody.

    Jews seem to thrive on having a welfare system because it becomes a form of domination and control (Possibly why so many are socialist though they have a flair for capitalism).
  68. @Anon
    Great post Whites pay so much to support parasite non White kids we can’t afford to have any of our own.
    We’re it not for abortion there’d be millions more of them supported by Whites in the prison and life long welfare system.

    Do you suppose that they would support whites. If the US blacks ran the US, do you think whites would get anything. Or that Hispanics would give blacks anything. Or that Indians would give anything to anybody.

    Jews seem to thrive on having a welfare system because it becomes a form of domination and control (Possibly why so many are socialist though they have a flair for capitalism).

  69. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    Hey Audie,

    Have you ever followed the demographic work of Chris Hamilton at the Econimica blog? He tends to be a bit of a one note symphony, but that one note he pounds is a pretty important one. He exactingly charts the utter collapse of the working and child-bearing age populations across the developed world, with its implication of an inevitable global depopulation.

    I always find it frustrating that more people do not take this stuff seriously, especially when economics are being discussed. The modern man worries about over-population, which is already a mathematical impossibility. He sees the waves of immigrants come, the city-scape sprawl on and on, the traffic get worse and worse, and inflation go up year after year, and he thinks that these trends are about to swallow up the entire world. But there are not enough children being born to even maintain the population at the current level, let alone grow it. It is only the adult population of the cities that continue to swell. The urban centers, like seed crystals, continue to draw in all the masses of mankind into their own infertile, artificial worlds, using their blood merely to prop them up a little while longer, meanwhile the whole vast countryside is progressively denuded of people.

    It is unthinkable to me that nobody takes this into consideration when making their economic prognostications. Anybody forecasting future growth, abundant resources, cheap energy, techno-Utopia, or automation (my ass) simply does not realize the extent to which the world is shortly about to be wracked by declining populations, exploding dependency ratios, and our legacy of unsustainable debt. Globalism and socialist welfare states will not be able to survive this, standards of living will plunge, and the entire geopolitical order as we know it will be replaced by something else.

    (And as a parenthetical sidebar, notwithstanding Steve's Most Important Graph in the World, the population of Africa is completely unsustainable without modern advancements which the Africans can neither afford nor replicate by themselves. When the developed world collapses, Africa will likewise collapse.)

    This is inevitable. It has already happened. It's already present in the numbers and in the daily reality. It just hasn't "worked itself out" yet; but there is no digging our way out of this demographic hole. Every Western woman would need to start having 4 or 5 children apiece simply to reverse the fertility decline of the last several decades, and frankly we cannot afford it. We have already consumed tens of trillions of dollars in excess of what we produce, and all that debt will be liquidated one way or another, either by austerity, default, or a currency collapse. The resources simply do not exist to be diverted towards raising that many offspring, unless we were willing to accept Indian levels of mass poverty. However, this end will eventually be visited upon us whether we chose it or not.

    So please inform us how you’re going to make it possible for Whites to have families of 4 or 5 children, especially in the age of ferocious racial discrimination against Whites.

    The only possible way I can see is to not get married and move to some rural area with low cost housing and go on life long welfare with the girls having babies in their teens to keep the whole thing going. Maybe cutting off s limb to segue from child benefit to adult disability.

    Looking around the schools and playgrounds of San Francisco San Mateo and Santa Clara I see mostly Asian kids. In S and Central California nothing but Hispanic kids. The combination of racial discrimination in favor of non Whites and generous welfare for non Whites including all those grandmas and grandpas on SSI
    means they can have kids but Whites can’t

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Urban life has been a sinkhole of death for as long as it has been in existence. Stay away from it.
  70. I would imagine that Asian births are less dysgenic than even Whites. Smart Asians tend to marry other smart Asians, and the Asian women that marry White men tend to choose those that have higher-than-average IQ.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    This is true. I don't think Chinese-Americans are having 10 kids.

    By the way, when the US is run by blacks and Hispanics, what makes you think they will give whites welfare.

    The Boers in South Africa live in appalling conditions.
  71. @216
    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as "pro-life".
    • Replies: @eah
    https://twitter.com/Black_Pilled/status/1086072137255858178
  72. @Hapalong Cassidy
    I would imagine that Asian births are less dysgenic than even Whites. Smart Asians tend to marry other smart Asians, and the Asian women that marry White men tend to choose those that have higher-than-average IQ.

    This is true. I don’t think Chinese-Americans are having 10 kids.

    By the way, when the US is run by blacks and Hispanics, what makes you think they will give whites welfare.

    The Boers in South Africa live in appalling conditions.

  73. There is the third and most likely option, given the White indifference to their own plight, for the last paragraph: a slow and painful subsumption.

    An opinion on the stateside Puerto Ricans…

    Given that they aren’t producing offspring as rapido as in America, it’s because there isn’t fierce competition among themselves in their little island but once they are here, it all changes for simple reason that can’t compete with the mainlanders who are living it up.

    And unable to secure good paying jobs due to many reasons but especially, for the lack of genetic ability to compete with myriad of the hungry lot, in the big cities where they usually end up, that is Jews, Asians and even physically larger blacks in patronage jobs (park service for example) and even the diminutive Mesoamericanos who are not particular about the type of employment (a tedious dishwashing gig), the Puerto Ricans end on the public dole and more children they have without proper income, most surely it will bring guaranteed free public housing and cycle repeats itself.

    The best thing for the Puerto Rican is to return to the island and take control of his own destiny there, free from the Wall Street predators, as an independent and free country, whose sons and daughters aren’t killed in foreign wars for no stake of their own or in the ghettos.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  74. @Achmed E. Newman
    This may be opening a can of slightly-off-topic worms here, A.E., but that's not so bad, right? This is for the same folks I'd been going back and forth with under the "Washington Watcher"'s post about Socialism:

    Maybe the term "cuck" is out of favor now, so forgive me as I'm using it. Looking at the bottom 2 graphs, stuff I already know from my observations, are not supposedly-alt-right Socialists the ultimate in cucks? Is it not the definition of getting cuckolded what's going on in those graphs, for white people? You are getting money forcibly extracted from you in the form of taxes on your property, on your income, on your purchases, and other ways. This amounts to the theft of your labor, meaning the theft of a portion of your life!

    You people that argue "I don't care about lowering taxes, we've got other problems!" (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don't even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you "can't afford them right now". Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future "Americans".

    Socialism and its more-violent cousin Communism are the ultimate in Cuckdom. Enjoy, anti-Libertards!

    I

    s it not the definition of getting cuckolded what’s going on in those graphs, for white people? You are getting money forcibly extracted from you in the form of taxes on your property, on your income, on your purchases, and other ways. This amounts to the theft of your labor, meaning the theft of a portion of your life!

    That certainly seems to be a valid definition of the word, and as you point out, it’s even worse when such easily surrendered resources are used against the victims own interests. Such has been the case, really big time, since the Federal Reserve Act, yet most don’t see what you’ve so masterfully illuminated.

  75. Interesting. I haven’t read most of the other comments, so this may be redundant, but the underlying connection between republicanism and fertility is religion I bet. Religion is still very strong in Mississippi and Alabama (I like to say the Reformation is an act in progress, lol), and I bet Utah and Idaho are dominated by Mormons who still have a strong fundamentalist mind set. In Louisiana there is a strong civic republicanism but actual religious belief is on the wane compared with other southeastern states. Hence the discrepancy between fertility and politics there.

    Religion gives a sense of hope and purpose. Be fruitful and multiple saith the lord!

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  76. @Achmed E. Newman
    On a totally different slightly-off-topic subject, possibly, though these graphs/maps are not about immigration directly, they still bring up the subject. Wasn't it only 30 years back or so when the treehuggers were still pretty solid on "we don't need any more people in this country"? John Denver (OK, more like 40 years for this) was getting Rocky Mountain High, for one decade's census (1980?), more people were living in rural areas, as a percentage, than the previous one, etc. This carried over pretty much until the time the Sierra Club got Mission Creep.

    My point is that I thought people should be happy with a stable population, though it would have been stable at 50 million lower, if the gates hadn't have been positioned wide open in 1965. The small note below the 2nd map proves this out. Yet, the argument put forth into useful idiots' heads over the last 30 years has been, "no, no, but we've got to shore up SS and Medicare. We need new young people to pay for all of us old people. It's about the money." Nevermind that the low-IQ massive influx from Latin America works off the books a lot, gets tax CREDITS for kids that are in Guatemala or pretend kids that are nowhere, uses expensive emergency room service for free, and costs around 10 grand per kid YEARLY to educate (if possible).

    Then, even the people writing the code that Americans just can't do anymore (due to resumes getting thrown in the trash by Hindu-run companies) and the bright people out of China just bring their in-laws and grandmas over to mooch off the system and cheat on their taxes anyway.

    I don't think the numbers pan out for an economic case for massive immigration, as the good VDare folks could tell you in 1000 X more detail. Sorry, old people, the money won't be there, and you'll have people that don't give a crap about your kind employed to take care of you. Why didn't you people just save up your own money, so you didn't have to rely on that Ponzi SS scam* to begin with?!

    .

    * Part 2 of "The Social Security Scam, errr, Scheme(?)"

    Tucker Carlson has brought up the point several times about how conservationists USED to be for a stable population with severely limited immigration. Now, they seem to care less about saving endangered species and protecting the forests than they are about amorphous, and impossible to stop, Climate Change. Sierra Club, as you referred to, is a prime example.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  77. OT (but related to “societal failure”)

    What kind of society sends a woman like this off to a war zone, especially a shithole/quagmire like Syria? — and with the Establishment praising the fact ‘gender barriers’ are falling in the military — it is just fucking sick.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @bomag
    There's a lot of ruin in a nation; this is one example.
  78. @Liberty Mike
    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?

    … About a hundred thousand of them a year.

    • Replies: @The Practical Conservative
    Yeah, well, these folks can't do basic math. You don't need many white guys marrying black women to start dominating black fertility. And yes, a decent chunk of legitimate black births are black mom and not-black dad, usually white. This is especially the case among married black birth, which is mostly immigrant, educated black mothers with like fathers, but the next largest group is kids born in wedlock to only one black parent (almost 50/50 on which one these days).

    Is it a small number out of almost 4 million births? Sure. But it's a nontrivial and very relevant number of *black* births. Unfortunately for data nerds, a lot of the black mom-white dad births are listed as white, non-Hispanic, so they "disappear" in the data. And conversely a lot of white-mom/black-dad births are dumped into the "black" birth pool rather than the "multiple races" pool.
  79. @Rosie

    Along with Asian men. White women and black men have it ‘the best’, white men and Asian women are in between.
     
    I thought Asian women and White men had the highest SMV.

    https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ethnic-preferences2.png?w=1260&strip=all&quality=75

    These silly incel-created graphs are so funny! They always ask “who are the men that women are most attracted to?” As if that means two shits. If all women ended up with whom they were attracted, the all-state QB in high school would have 67 wives.

    The question is,” what man is going to risk his ego approaching me, and if I say no, continue to try” because even now, women generally end up with a man who, at some point, risked his reputation, embarrassment, or his job to impress her.

    Once you understand this, to my mind, very simple fact of heterosexual relationships, you will understand the conflict between these graphs and what you see with your eyes.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  80. @Intelligent Dasein
    Hey Audie,

    Have you ever followed the demographic work of Chris Hamilton at the Econimica blog? He tends to be a bit of a one note symphony, but that one note he pounds is a pretty important one. He exactingly charts the utter collapse of the working and child-bearing age populations across the developed world, with its implication of an inevitable global depopulation.

    I always find it frustrating that more people do not take this stuff seriously, especially when economics are being discussed. The modern man worries about over-population, which is already a mathematical impossibility. He sees the waves of immigrants come, the city-scape sprawl on and on, the traffic get worse and worse, and inflation go up year after year, and he thinks that these trends are about to swallow up the entire world. But there are not enough children being born to even maintain the population at the current level, let alone grow it. It is only the adult population of the cities that continue to swell. The urban centers, like seed crystals, continue to draw in all the masses of mankind into their own infertile, artificial worlds, using their blood merely to prop them up a little while longer, meanwhile the whole vast countryside is progressively denuded of people.

    It is unthinkable to me that nobody takes this into consideration when making their economic prognostications. Anybody forecasting future growth, abundant resources, cheap energy, techno-Utopia, or automation (my ass) simply does not realize the extent to which the world is shortly about to be wracked by declining populations, exploding dependency ratios, and our legacy of unsustainable debt. Globalism and socialist welfare states will not be able to survive this, standards of living will plunge, and the entire geopolitical order as we know it will be replaced by something else.

    (And as a parenthetical sidebar, notwithstanding Steve's Most Important Graph in the World, the population of Africa is completely unsustainable without modern advancements which the Africans can neither afford nor replicate by themselves. When the developed world collapses, Africa will likewise collapse.)

    This is inevitable. It has already happened. It's already present in the numbers and in the daily reality. It just hasn't "worked itself out" yet; but there is no digging our way out of this demographic hole. Every Western woman would need to start having 4 or 5 children apiece simply to reverse the fertility decline of the last several decades, and frankly we cannot afford it. We have already consumed tens of trillions of dollars in excess of what we produce, and all that debt will be liquidated one way or another, either by austerity, default, or a currency collapse. The resources simply do not exist to be diverted towards raising that many offspring, unless we were willing to accept Indian levels of mass poverty. However, this end will eventually be visited upon us whether we chose it or not.

    You bring up the huge problem of Africa’s unsustainable population. Before the white man intervened it was more stable due to famines and wars. The white man’s compassion has only made Africa’s (and the West’s) problems worse, with endless boatloads of them making their way into Europe and America. It’s “The Camp of the Saints” writ large.

    The hard truth is that, if the world could somehow stop Africans from leaving Africa, it would probably go back to where it was – with a stable population due to famines and wars. But modern mass communication, showing starving children with bloated bellies which tugs at the heartstrings, has made that impossible. Regards massive food and medical assistance from the compassionate West, the old maxim is true – No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I've got one quibble with this comment, FoW. The Camp of the Saints WAS writ large. Or, did you mean "writ true" or something like that? I wish a lot more people would read that book.
  81. @Intelligent Dasein
    Hey Audie,

    Have you ever followed the demographic work of Chris Hamilton at the Econimica blog? He tends to be a bit of a one note symphony, but that one note he pounds is a pretty important one. He exactingly charts the utter collapse of the working and child-bearing age populations across the developed world, with its implication of an inevitable global depopulation.

    I always find it frustrating that more people do not take this stuff seriously, especially when economics are being discussed. The modern man worries about over-population, which is already a mathematical impossibility. He sees the waves of immigrants come, the city-scape sprawl on and on, the traffic get worse and worse, and inflation go up year after year, and he thinks that these trends are about to swallow up the entire world. But there are not enough children being born to even maintain the population at the current level, let alone grow it. It is only the adult population of the cities that continue to swell. The urban centers, like seed crystals, continue to draw in all the masses of mankind into their own infertile, artificial worlds, using their blood merely to prop them up a little while longer, meanwhile the whole vast countryside is progressively denuded of people.

    It is unthinkable to me that nobody takes this into consideration when making their economic prognostications. Anybody forecasting future growth, abundant resources, cheap energy, techno-Utopia, or automation (my ass) simply does not realize the extent to which the world is shortly about to be wracked by declining populations, exploding dependency ratios, and our legacy of unsustainable debt. Globalism and socialist welfare states will not be able to survive this, standards of living will plunge, and the entire geopolitical order as we know it will be replaced by something else.

    (And as a parenthetical sidebar, notwithstanding Steve's Most Important Graph in the World, the population of Africa is completely unsustainable without modern advancements which the Africans can neither afford nor replicate by themselves. When the developed world collapses, Africa will likewise collapse.)

    This is inevitable. It has already happened. It's already present in the numbers and in the daily reality. It just hasn't "worked itself out" yet; but there is no digging our way out of this demographic hole. Every Western woman would need to start having 4 or 5 children apiece simply to reverse the fertility decline of the last several decades, and frankly we cannot afford it. We have already consumed tens of trillions of dollars in excess of what we produce, and all that debt will be liquidated one way or another, either by austerity, default, or a currency collapse. The resources simply do not exist to be diverted towards raising that many offspring, unless we were willing to accept Indian levels of mass poverty. However, this end will eventually be visited upon us whether we chose it or not.

    You bring up the huge problem of Africa’s unsustainable population. Before the white man intervened it was more stable due to famines and wars. The white man’s compassion has only made Africa’s (and the West’s) problems worse, with endless boatloads of them making their way into Europe and America. It’s “The Camp of the Saints” writ large.

    The hard truth is that, if the world could somehow stop Africans from leaving Africa, it would probably go back to where it was – with a stable population due to famines and wars. But modern mass communication, showing starving children with bloated bellies which tugs at the heartstrings, has made that impossible. Regards massive food and medical assistance from the compassionate West, the old maxim is true – No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.

  82. The ancient fallacies of deductive logic, in Latin, continue unabated.

    Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (Correlation is not causation.)
    Post hoc ergo propter hoc (After this, therefore because of this.)

    Fertility declines are correctly attributed to maternal use of Over The Counter (OTC) Analgesics, in pregnancy. Tylenol is probably the worst offender. There is no social etiology WTF-soever.

    • Replies: @Anon
    What do you mean by fertility decline is caused by use of analgesics during pregnancy? The woman is already pregnant.

    The only way your comment makes sense is if use of analgesics caused a 100 percent miscarriage rate. Not every hysterical article on the internet is valid. A little sceptism and common sense please.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    That cannot possibly be correct. There are of course some number of people who have fertility issues, maybe higher than in the past, but that's not the bulk of the explanation. YOLO women who have a TFR of 0.8 are not trying to achieve a TFR of 6.0 but coming up short because they're unable to conceive!
  83. @Rosie

    Local welfare is better than non-local because it comes with a level of accountability.
     
    I certainly understand what you're saying in theory, but I'm not sure it's true. White nations are some of the least corrupt in the world, e.g. Denmark. Whites are generally not cheats and grifters by nature. I suspect, but don't know for sure, that the worst welfare abusers and cheats come from the most corrupt societies.

    I would very much like to see data on subsequent fertility among welfare recipients by race and ethnicity. My hypothesis would obviously be that White women do not, as a rule, get pregnant while on public assistance. However, I wouldn't be surprised if that is changing, given that the ruling class has breached the social contract. I don't know that self-sufficiency is a fair and reasonable standard anymore for the WWC.

    State corruption scale —— I have little doubt that this is politically influenced however, it serves as a reference point

    https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017

  84. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @APilgrim
    The ancient fallacies of deductive logic, in Latin, continue unabated.

    Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (Correlation is not causation.)
    Post hoc ergo propter hoc (After this, therefore because of this.)

    Fertility declines are correctly attributed to maternal use of Over The Counter (OTC) Analgesics, in pregnancy. Tylenol is probably the worst offender. There is no social etiology WTF-soever.

    What do you mean by fertility decline is caused by use of analgesics during pregnancy? The woman is already pregnant.

    The only way your comment makes sense is if use of analgesics caused a 100 percent miscarriage rate. Not every hysterical article on the internet is valid. A little sceptism and common sense please.

    • Replies: @APilgrim
    https://www.fertilitycenter.com/fertility_cares_blog/how-do-over-the-counter-pain-relievers-affect-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/paracetamol-risks-fertility-female-embryos-study-a8144491.html

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103439.htm

    https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/painkiller-use-pregnancy-may-affect-babies-future-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future


    Anon, do try to keep up. Fire is hot. Water is wet. Smoking is unhealthy. ...
  85. @Anon
    What do you mean by fertility decline is caused by use of analgesics during pregnancy? The woman is already pregnant.

    The only way your comment makes sense is if use of analgesics caused a 100 percent miscarriage rate. Not every hysterical article on the internet is valid. A little sceptism and common sense please.
    • Replies: @Anon
    Some idiots believe any sensational nonsense they find in the internet.

    So taking Tylenol in pregnancy causes the baby to become sterile?

    Those studies were done by drug companies that want to push their own analgesic by convincing naive fools tyenol causes sterility in unborn babies.
    , @Anon
    Thinking of smoking, 1930 to 1950, cigarette companies ran ads claiming their bogus studies proved that smoking during pregnancy prevented weight gain which made for a healthier baby and faster recovery after childbirth.

    In the 1960s obstetricians gave pregnant women diet sheets for 800 calorie a day diets. Their goal was as little weight gain as possible.
    20 years later the experts decided a weight gain of 30 to 45 pounds was desirable.

    Medicine is driven by these bogus studies done to sell products.

    You probably still believe beef causes heart attacks and “ healthy carbs” like noodles brown rice and whole grain bread are diet food.
    , @Anon
    May affect may be a risk may might may may are standard words used when the bogus studies prove nothing.

    Allegedly tylenol may affect may risk loss of fertility in unborn babies. How in the world did the bogus studies prove babies are sterile?
  86. @eah
    OT (but related to "societal failure")

    What kind of society sends a woman like this off to a war zone, especially a shithole/quagmire like Syria? -- and with the Establishment praising the fact 'gender barriers' are falling in the military -- it is just fucking sick.

    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1086273343421104128

    There’s a lot of ruin in a nation; this is one example.

  87. @216
    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    The norms of bourgeious family formation is not merely just a lifestyle choice, it is empiracally superior. Our culture needs an enema of Neo-Victorianism.

    But when exactly is the last time a Conservatism Inc outlet made these points? And actually meant it, rather than the single mother apologism that parades as "pro-life".

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.

    Indeed, and an even bigger failure that we fund it rather than making women get a Norplant while receiving any monies from the Treasury.

    Who’s to blame here? We are. Or rather the Silent Generation and the Boomers who left us this legacy of dysgenic stupidity.

    If I were King Stan, I’d require permanent sterilization in exchange for public welfare benefits. So Norplant is me being conciliatory [for you Mr Rational – busting my chops for offering a pragmatic compromise].

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Anon
    You’d have to do something about the sperm donors of the welfare babies. The usual way would gradually lessen testosterone and bring down the crime rate.
  88. @eli
    the number of mixed race children in the case of asian and native american women , could be as high as 50 % of the births, the opposite is true for black women who almost never have children with non-black men

    black women who almost never have children with non-black men

    There’s a very simple evolutionary reason why negro males are so virile they’ll bang anything moving or not. They have to be in order to even consider banging a negro female.

  89. @Liberty Mike
    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?

    What self-respecting white man would volunteer to make babies with Chamique, Semeka, or Tamika?

    I’ve noticed a sick fetish for this in some German and Swedish men, but otherwise it’s gotta be blind men with anosmia.

  90. More identity politics from the snowflake right wingers. Boooring

    Hey, you want those “invaders” to stop invading your country? Demand that your capitalist overlords stop invading, murdering, and pillaging those “invaders” countries. If you want to live as slave cattle under your capitalist masters, thats fine, but don’t do the same to countries that clearly don’t want to be.

    Perhaps if you want the “invaders” to stop you should also tell your overlords to stop inviting them in and hiring them? No?

    I honestly don’t see what the problem is with the Republican and Democrat parties being destroyed. Both serve the same psychopathic thieving capitalists, not the slaves. Most should have figured this out by now. I live in rural Ga., and I can assure you things are going down fast here, we now have homeless camps just like in LA or San Francisco, caused by the the 2008/09 Wall St robbery, CIA-Jew Mafia heroin/meth and Jew Pharma opioid peddling. Never would have imagined this kind of rot happening here 20 years ago, and its still getting worse.

    Hey heres an idea, why not nationalize our oil/gas supplies here? Use the money for things like tax cuts for goyim, universal healthcare, assisting goyim with buying a home, goyim subsidies, you know things that would get up the goyim birthrates. Like Gaddafi had done in Libya for his people before our capitalist overlords assassinated him.

    Don’t Tax Oil Companies – Nationalize Them!
    https://www.businessinsider.com/thursday-thought-dont-tax-oil-companies-nationalize-them-2011-5

    But what do I know? I’m just a dumb low IQ goyim. Not good!

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    Perhaps if you want the “invaders” to stop you should also tell your overlords to stop inviting them in and hiring them? No?
     
    We've been doing that for ages.  Do you think any Republican ever ran on a platform of importing low-wage tech workers and rapefugees?  The public has been objecting ever more strongly for decades, and been ignored.

    Two years ago we delivered the message even more bluntly in the form of DJT.  You'll notice that the usual suspects still haven't agreed to change policy to suit us.  They're trying to un-do the election instead.


    I honestly don’t see what the problem is with the Republican and Democrat parties being destroyed. Both serve the same psychopathic thieving capitalists, not the slaves.
     
    Until we got DJT, those were our only options.
  91. White women should have three children first, and only then think about their carrier.

  92. Like almost all American articles, the writer fails to envisage a future with a 3rd political party. Both the Democrats and the Republicans will be gone before too long IMHO.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Like almost all American articles, the writer fails to envisage a future with a 3rd political party. Both the Democrats and the Republicans will be gone before too long IMHO.
     
    The Democrats have survived for over 200 years, and buried several competing parties. There is no reason to believe they can't keep doing this in the future.

    Our best strategy is to vacuum as many white voters out of that party as possible, whether to the other major party, third parties, independent status, or just plain staying home. The only way I can see to do that is to force their own worst policies on them.

    Remember the "walk around" strategy allegedly used by the GOP with black ministers? Try this with whites!
    , @Audacious Epigone
    2016 was a great opportunity for a serious third-party alternative to emerge and the lolbertarians offered up the joke that is Gary Johnson.
  93. If the Republican Party is actually in danger of going under, then the elites will do whatever it takes to makes sure the Republican Party (or some sort of pro-business replacement party) survives. There is no way the elites are going to allow the US to become a one-party, centre-left dictatorship. After all, the whole point of mass immigration to make the elites (like Jeff Bezos) richer, not create a socialist utopia. If the Republicans do go under, the Democrats will split in two, with the pro-business wing replacing the Republicans. Many Republican “cucks” would happily swift from the Republicans to a pro-business Democrat Party. In fact, they would probably prefer it, as they wouldn’t have to do all those tiresome fake appeals to the American bible belt.

    You can’t rely on the Republicans alone to change immigration policy, since the Republicans donors aren’t that bothered about race replacement, they’re only concerned with protecting neoliberal capitalism. If you want to reverse immigration policy, you’re going to have to somehow mobilise non-voting, politically apathetic working class whites. These are the people who are turning the political tide in Europe.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    You can’t rely on the Republicans alone to change immigration policy, since the Republicans donors aren’t that bothered about race replacement, they’re only concerned with protecting neoliberal capitalism.
     
    This was also true a century ago, just before the Republicans enacted the best immigration laws we ever had. Not quite the White Australia policy, but quite good by our standards.

    If you want to reverse immigration policy, you’re going to have to somehow mobilise non-voting, politically apathetic working class whites. These are the people who are turning the political tide in Europe.
     
    The problem with this is that they still want benefits. And your enemies will always offer better benefits, because those enemies don't care a whit about rational limits on benefits any more than on immigration.

    Eventually the immigration-restrictionist party has to be the benefits-restrictionist party as well, lest the whole population go broke. Then the other side will hammer this home, and a large portion of the "working class" will swallow it, alien hordes be damned.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    At the national level, agreed. At the gubernatorial level, it could be different. We'd hoped so with Kris Kobach. Alas.
  94. @redmudhooch
    More identity politics from the snowflake right wingers. Boooring

    Hey, you want those "invaders" to stop invading your country? Demand that your capitalist overlords stop invading, murdering, and pillaging those "invaders" countries. If you want to live as slave cattle under your capitalist masters, thats fine, but don't do the same to countries that clearly don't want to be.

    Perhaps if you want the "invaders" to stop you should also tell your overlords to stop inviting them in and hiring them? No?

    I honestly don't see what the problem is with the Republican and Democrat parties being destroyed. Both serve the same psychopathic thieving capitalists, not the slaves. Most should have figured this out by now. I live in rural Ga., and I can assure you things are going down fast here, we now have homeless camps just like in LA or San Francisco, caused by the the 2008/09 Wall St robbery, CIA-Jew Mafia heroin/meth and Jew Pharma opioid peddling. Never would have imagined this kind of rot happening here 20 years ago, and its still getting worse.

    Hey heres an idea, why not nationalize our oil/gas supplies here? Use the money for things like tax cuts for goyim, universal healthcare, assisting goyim with buying a home, goyim subsidies, you know things that would get up the goyim birthrates. Like Gaddafi had done in Libya for his people before our capitalist overlords assassinated him.

    Don't Tax Oil Companies - Nationalize Them!
    https://www.businessinsider.com/thursday-thought-dont-tax-oil-companies-nationalize-them-2011-5

    But what do I know? I'm just a dumb low IQ goyim. Not good!

    https://youtu.be/uazU3yyfCto

    Perhaps if you want the “invaders” to stop you should also tell your overlords to stop inviting them in and hiring them? No?

    We’ve been doing that for ages.  Do you think any Republican ever ran on a platform of importing low-wage tech workers and rapefugees?  The public has been objecting ever more strongly for decades, and been ignored.

    Two years ago we delivered the message even more bluntly in the form of DJT.  You’ll notice that the usual suspects still haven’t agreed to change policy to suit us.  They’re trying to un-do the election instead.

    I honestly don’t see what the problem is with the Republican and Democrat parties being destroyed. Both serve the same psychopathic thieving capitalists, not the slaves.

    Until we got DJT, those were our only options.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  95. @Saint Louis

    You people that argue “I don’t care about lowering taxes, we’ve got other problems!” (yes, we do) are paying these other races/ethnicities with parts of YOUR LIFE to have lots of kids delivered, taken care of at the hospital, fed, and schooled (including extra money when they don’t even speak English). In the meantime, being the most responsible, you white people are holding off on having children because you “can’t afford them right now”. Yeah, it is harder when 1/2 your earned money, all told, is taken from you to dole out to the others that are raising their future “Americans”.
     
    Whites need to have more kids. And although I agree there should be a stigma about having kids you can't afford, most of the worry about the costs of kids is unfounded. Get out there and breed, guys. No duty is more fulfilling than parenthood.

    And before I get some moron telling me to walk the walk, my wife and I have had 5 kids and aren't ready to stop yet. With the child tax credit and other credits and deductions, we pay an effective tax rate of about 3%, so we're simultaneously starving the beast. And I live in VT, so judging by the graphs my kids will be the only ones here in 25 years.

    And I live in VT, so judging by the graphs my kids will be the only ones here in 25 years.

    Haven’t half of all Vermont’s children left the state once they grew up? That was fine when people had six or eight kids, but with two, that leaves the state’s effective TFR at 1.o. 200 years ago, Vermont had six congressional districts, starting from only two in 1791.

    Two Vermont natives who went west, first to New York, then farther on to become quite philoprogenitive were Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

    Those who move into the state today, quite suspiciously considering their racial views and experience, eg James W Loewen and Bernie Sanders, don’t seem to prioritize having children. And if they did, they wanted them to grow up in the whitest available environment.

  96. @unpc downunder
    If the Republican Party is actually in danger of going under, then the elites will do whatever it takes to makes sure the Republican Party (or some sort of pro-business replacement party) survives. There is no way the elites are going to allow the US to become a one-party, centre-left dictatorship. After all, the whole point of mass immigration to make the elites (like Jeff Bezos) richer, not create a socialist utopia. If the Republicans do go under, the Democrats will split in two, with the pro-business wing replacing the Republicans. Many Republican "cucks" would happily swift from the Republicans to a pro-business Democrat Party. In fact, they would probably prefer it, as they wouldn't have to do all those tiresome fake appeals to the American bible belt.

    You can't rely on the Republicans alone to change immigration policy, since the Republicans donors aren't that bothered about race replacement, they're only concerned with protecting neoliberal capitalism. If you want to reverse immigration policy, you're going to have to somehow mobilise non-voting, politically apathetic working class whites. These are the people who are turning the political tide in Europe.

    You can’t rely on the Republicans alone to change immigration policy, since the Republicans donors aren’t that bothered about race replacement, they’re only concerned with protecting neoliberal capitalism.

    This was also true a century ago, just before the Republicans enacted the best immigration laws we ever had. Not quite the White Australia policy, but quite good by our standards.

    If you want to reverse immigration policy, you’re going to have to somehow mobilise non-voting, politically apathetic working class whites. These are the people who are turning the political tide in Europe.

    The problem with this is that they still want benefits. And your enemies will always offer better benefits, because those enemies don’t care a whit about rational limits on benefits any more than on immigration.

    Eventually the immigration-restrictionist party has to be the benefits-restrictionist party as well, lest the whole population go broke. Then the other side will hammer this home, and a large portion of the “working class” will swallow it, alien hordes be damned.

  97. @Alfred
    Like almost all American articles, the writer fails to envisage a future with a 3rd political party. Both the Democrats and the Republicans will be gone before too long IMHO.

    Like almost all American articles, the writer fails to envisage a future with a 3rd political party. Both the Democrats and the Republicans will be gone before too long IMHO.

    The Democrats have survived for over 200 years, and buried several competing parties. There is no reason to believe they can’t keep doing this in the future.

    Our best strategy is to vacuum as many white voters out of that party as possible, whether to the other major party, third parties, independent status, or just plain staying home. The only way I can see to do that is to force their own worst policies on them.

    Remember the “walk around” strategy allegedly used by the GOP with black ministers? Try this with whites!

  98. Why can’t the American Indian get his act together?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    They are defeated people. The miserable--as in seemingly unending misery--has been and continues to be a warning to us, a warning we fail to heed.
  99. @Liberty Mike
    Speaking of Puerto Rico, Fred Sanford was right.

    He told Lamont that the Puerto Rican national anthem was "we'll take Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island, too."

    Fred may have stretched things, a bit, when he accused the Puerto Ricans of trashing Harlem by bringing in rats and cockroaches.

    Puerto Ricans are the worst of the 3 largest Hispanic groups- they even trail blacks in academic achievement and beat them in teen births. Living in the Northeast my whole life in close proximity to them, I can say they’re no picnic to be around. I felt more at ease when I visited southern California and was around Mexican mestizos versus the quadroon PRs I was accustomed to.
    Old Joke- Q. “Why did God create Puerto Ricans? A- “To give blacks someone to look down on.”

    Can we finally cut them loose and all declare in true multi-culti fashion:

    iViva Puerto Rico libre!

    • Replies: @Tony
    In my opinion Ricans are worse than Dominicans even though Ricans are racially whiter.
  100. @APilgrim
    https://www.fertilitycenter.com/fertility_cares_blog/how-do-over-the-counter-pain-relievers-affect-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/paracetamol-risks-fertility-female-embryos-study-a8144491.html

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103439.htm

    https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/painkiller-use-pregnancy-may-affect-babies-future-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future


    Anon, do try to keep up. Fire is hot. Water is wet. Smoking is unhealthy. ...

    Some idiots believe any sensational nonsense they find in the internet.

    So taking Tylenol in pregnancy causes the baby to become sterile?

    Those studies were done by drug companies that want to push their own analgesic by convincing naive fools tyenol causes sterility in unborn babies.

  101. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @APilgrim
    https://www.fertilitycenter.com/fertility_cares_blog/how-do-over-the-counter-pain-relievers-affect-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/paracetamol-risks-fertility-female-embryos-study-a8144491.html

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103439.htm

    https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/painkiller-use-pregnancy-may-affect-babies-future-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future


    Anon, do try to keep up. Fire is hot. Water is wet. Smoking is unhealthy. ...

    Thinking of smoking, 1930 to 1950, cigarette companies ran ads claiming their bogus studies proved that smoking during pregnancy prevented weight gain which made for a healthier baby and faster recovery after childbirth.

    In the 1960s obstetricians gave pregnant women diet sheets for 800 calorie a day diets. Their goal was as little weight gain as possible.
    20 years later the experts decided a weight gain of 30 to 45 pounds was desirable.

    Medicine is driven by these bogus studies done to sell products.

    You probably still believe beef causes heart attacks and “ healthy carbs” like noodles brown rice and whole grain bread are diet food.

  102. @Audacious Epigone
    The dirt gap!

    Mr Audacious, if you’re looking for relevant topics, this one might be of interest:

    Florida felons just got the right to vote. GOP leaders want to slow-walk it.
    https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/43zgnd/florida-felons-just-got-the-right-to-vote-gop-leaders-want-to-slow-walk-it

    Yes, I know it’s old news (happening in state after state) and even the editorial slant in the second sentence is a big yawn.

    But. The news is that there are nearly 1.5 million felons in one state!

    Try and compete with that, America.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  103. @APilgrim
    https://www.fertilitycenter.com/fertility_cares_blog/how-do-over-the-counter-pain-relievers-affect-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/paracetamol-risks-fertility-female-embryos-study-a8144491.html

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103439.htm

    https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/painkiller-use-pregnancy-may-affect-babies-future-fertility/

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-reproductive-health/news/latest-news-2018/painkillers-in-pregnancy-may-affect-baby-s-future


    Anon, do try to keep up. Fire is hot. Water is wet. Smoking is unhealthy. ...

    May affect may be a risk may might may may are standard words used when the bogus studies prove nothing.

    Allegedly tylenol may affect may risk loss of fertility in unborn babies. How in the world did the bogus studies prove babies are sterile?

  104. So, how many Tylenol did their mothers take in her pregnancies?

    Perhaps conservative women are more stoic. Perhaps LEFTIES are whiners.

    Perhaps water is wet.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Perhaps you’re a naive credulous idiot who believes “ if it’s on the internet it’s true”

    Your grandmother probably smoked all during pregnancy because her Dr told her it was the best way to keep her weight down.
    , @Stan d Mute

    Perhaps water is wet.
     
    Blasphemer! Thoughtcriminal!
  105. @APilgrim
    So, how many Tylenol did their mothers take in her pregnancies?

    Perhaps conservative women are more stoic. Perhaps LEFTIES are whiners.

    Perhaps water is wet.

    Perhaps you’re a naive credulous idiot who believes “ if it’s on the internet it’s true”

    Your grandmother probably smoked all during pregnancy because her Dr told her it was the best way to keep her weight down.

    • Replies: @APilgrim
    My Great Grandfather was a surgeon in the Spanish American War and subsequently had a private practice in the Comanche Peach Orchards, (Now Balmorhea) Texas. So no.

    However, during the worldwide Spanish flu pandemic of 1918, many physicians did prescribe menthol cigarettes. Nicotine is a bronchodilator. https://asthma.net/living/asthmatics-must-never-smoke-and-heres-why/

    There is that science thingy.
  106. @Anon
    Perhaps you’re a naive credulous idiot who believes “ if it’s on the internet it’s true”

    Your grandmother probably smoked all during pregnancy because her Dr told her it was the best way to keep her weight down.

    My Great Grandfather was a surgeon in the Spanish American War and subsequently had a private practice in the Comanche Peach Orchards, (Now Balmorhea) Texas. So no.

    However, during the worldwide Spanish flu pandemic of 1918, many physicians did prescribe menthol cigarettes. Nicotine is a bronchodilator. https://asthma.net/living/asthmatics-must-never-smoke-and-heres-why/

    There is that science thingy.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Too bad you’re so naive and credulous you believe every bogus study that comes along
  107. @Stan d Mute

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.
     
    Indeed, and an even bigger failure that we fund it rather than making women get a Norplant while receiving any monies from the Treasury.

    Who’s to blame here? We are. Or rather the Silent Generation and the Boomers who left us this legacy of dysgenic stupidity.

    If I were King Stan, I’d require permanent sterilization in exchange for public welfare benefits. So Norplant is me being conciliatory [for you Mr Rational - busting my chops for offering a pragmatic compromise].

    You’d have to do something about the sperm donors of the welfare babies. The usual way would gradually lessen testosterone and bring down the crime rate.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    Bro, you really need a real pseudonym. I ignore all anons because Ron’s coding doesn’t differentiate between any anon or anonymous. You seem like the same guy who appears on my screen as anon[257] regularly, but I can’t be sure. You can just pick the 257 like (former) anon[216] did. Or get creative and devise a handle with a message. Your actual anonymity is the same regardless.

    I can’t be the only guy here who misses 75% or more of your often very cogent and insightful comments only because of this.
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    Be careful associating all negative negro behavior with (slightly) higher levels of testosterone. There are certainly other cognitive factors that contribute to blacks' attraction to non civilized behavior.

    Test has been made into an obvious co-villain with masculinity in general. Strong levels of T are important to men maintaining their existence as men, and not devolving into cucky man-boobed betas groveling for leftover 35 year old pussy.

    Anyway gradually lessening T levels among criminals seems like a long and complicated process that government would no doubt immediately attempt to profit on and ultimately fuck up. You should just mandate castration with garden shears upon criminal sentencing, or just repatriate all current negro criminals to Liberia, or both. They are simpler and less expensive to the tax payer and just as effective.
  108. @APilgrim
    My Great Grandfather was a surgeon in the Spanish American War and subsequently had a private practice in the Comanche Peach Orchards, (Now Balmorhea) Texas. So no.

    However, during the worldwide Spanish flu pandemic of 1918, many physicians did prescribe menthol cigarettes. Nicotine is a bronchodilator. https://asthma.net/living/asthmatics-must-never-smoke-and-heres-why/

    There is that science thingy.

    Too bad you’re so naive and credulous you believe every bogus study that comes along

    • Replies: @APilgrim
    Anon[257] combines nescience, lying, & impertinence into 100% troll.

    For example, low birth-weight greatly increases the combined maternal/fetal survival rate in the absence of routine availability of: caesarean section, symphysiotomy, pubiotomy, &/or antibiotics.

    Shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, preeclampsia, eclampsia, gestational diabetes, and other adverse maternal/fetal conditions are reduced by lower birth rates. So weight management objectives are properly adjusted when outside the parameters of modern medicine.
  109. @jilles dykstra
    Cannot understand articles like this.
    In order to survive as members of the European cultures we must enter a child producing race with the cultures that threaten us ?
    Nationalism based on culture seems far more simple, and far better for this already overcrowded planet.
    We should begin with a discriminatory immigration policy.
    If this is insufficient, inverse diversity.

    We must have more White children is s conservative American thing.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    We must have more White children is s conservative American thing.
     
    What can I say? We adore our children. As babies/toddlers that adoration keeps us from smothering them to death at 3am when we have a critical presentation or project to deliver the next day. As adolescents/teens, that adoration keeps us from choking them to death daily no matter how much we may want to nor how rational the idea may seem.

    It’s part of our K selection strategy.

    What is telling however is how many of our tribe is fanatically anti-white children. Abortion brings the topic to the fore. Morally, I’m repulsed, but I still support the legality of it because if not for abortion I’d have been subsumed by about double the number of savage negroes for much of my life. As an unwanted and abandoned bastard myself, it’s a bit of cognitive dissonance for me, but net net had more abortion happened pre Roe, the nation would have been much better off even (especially?) without me born into it
  110. @Lucas McCrudy
    Puerto Ricans are the worst of the 3 largest Hispanic groups- they even trail blacks in academic achievement and beat them in teen births. Living in the Northeast my whole life in close proximity to them, I can say they're no picnic to be around. I felt more at ease when I visited southern California and was around Mexican mestizos versus the quadroon PRs I was accustomed to.
    Old Joke- Q. "Why did God create Puerto Ricans? A- "To give blacks someone to look down on."

    Can we finally cut them loose and all declare in true multi-culti fashion:

    iViva Puerto Rico libre!

    In my opinion Ricans are worse than Dominicans even though Ricans are racially whiter.

  111. @Truth
    ... About a hundred thousand of them a year.

    Yeah, well, these folks can’t do basic math. You don’t need many white guys marrying black women to start dominating black fertility. And yes, a decent chunk of legitimate black births are black mom and not-black dad, usually white. This is especially the case among married black birth, which is mostly immigrant, educated black mothers with like fathers, but the next largest group is kids born in wedlock to only one black parent (almost 50/50 on which one these days).

    Is it a small number out of almost 4 million births? Sure. But it’s a nontrivial and very relevant number of *black* births. Unfortunately for data nerds, a lot of the black mom-white dad births are listed as white, non-Hispanic, so they “disappear” in the data. And conversely a lot of white-mom/black-dad births are dumped into the “black” birth pool rather than the “multiple races” pool.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    Your pseudonym is misleading and it’s not even ironic or parodic.

    I humbly suggest that you change it to “The Cucked Conservative”

    Unless you just left off some characters and meant “The Practically Stupid Conservative”
  112. @APilgrim
    So, how many Tylenol did their mothers take in her pregnancies?

    Perhaps conservative women are more stoic. Perhaps LEFTIES are whiners.

    Perhaps water is wet.

    Perhaps water is wet.

    Blasphemer! Thoughtcriminal!

  113. @Anon
    You’d have to do something about the sperm donors of the welfare babies. The usual way would gradually lessen testosterone and bring down the crime rate.

    Bro, you really need a real pseudonym. I ignore all anons because Ron’s coding doesn’t differentiate between any anon or anonymous. You seem like the same guy who appears on my screen as anon[257] regularly, but I can’t be sure. You can just pick the 257 like (former) anon[216] did. Or get creative and devise a handle with a message. Your actual anonymity is the same regardless.

    I can’t be the only guy here who misses 75% or more of your often very cogent and insightful comments only because of this.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    I believe 257 is a female but I could be confusing him/her with a different anon.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    216 actually picked that sobriquet because it's the area code he lives in. Yeah, we're culturally appropriating that shit from gangbangers!
  114. @Anon
    We must have more White children is s conservative American thing.

    We must have more White children is s conservative American thing.

    What can I say? We adore our children. As babies/toddlers that adoration keeps us from smothering them to death at 3am when we have a critical presentation or project to deliver the next day. As adolescents/teens, that adoration keeps us from choking them to death daily no matter how much we may want to nor how rational the idea may seem.

    It’s part of our K selection strategy.

    What is telling however is how many of our tribe is fanatically anti-white children. Abortion brings the topic to the fore. Morally, I’m repulsed, but I still support the legality of it because if not for abortion I’d have been subsumed by about double the number of savage negroes for much of my life. As an unwanted and abandoned bastard myself, it’s a bit of cognitive dissonance for me, but net net had more abortion happened pre Roe, the nation would have been much better off even (especially?) without me born into it

  115. @The Practical Conservative
    Yeah, well, these folks can't do basic math. You don't need many white guys marrying black women to start dominating black fertility. And yes, a decent chunk of legitimate black births are black mom and not-black dad, usually white. This is especially the case among married black birth, which is mostly immigrant, educated black mothers with like fathers, but the next largest group is kids born in wedlock to only one black parent (almost 50/50 on which one these days).

    Is it a small number out of almost 4 million births? Sure. But it's a nontrivial and very relevant number of *black* births. Unfortunately for data nerds, a lot of the black mom-white dad births are listed as white, non-Hispanic, so they "disappear" in the data. And conversely a lot of white-mom/black-dad births are dumped into the "black" birth pool rather than the "multiple races" pool.

    Your pseudonym is misleading and it’s not even ironic or parodic.

    I humbly suggest that you change it to “The Cucked Conservative”

    Unless you just left off some characters and meant “The Practically Stupid Conservative”

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @The Practical Conservative
    I'm a married black woman with above-replacement fertility whose household income is 1% level. I'll stick with my moniker, tyvm.
  116. @follyofwar
    You bring up the huge problem of Africa's unsustainable population. Before the white man intervened it was more stable due to famines and wars. The white man's compassion has only made Africa's (and the West's) problems worse, with endless boatloads of them making their way into Europe and America. It's "The Camp of the Saints" writ large.

    The hard truth is that, if the world could somehow stop Africans from leaving Africa, it would probably go back to where it was - with a stable population due to famines and wars. But modern mass communication, showing starving children with bloated bellies which tugs at the heartstrings, has made that impossible. Regards massive food and medical assistance from the compassionate West, the old maxim is true - No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.

    I’ve got one quibble with this comment, FoW. The Camp of the Saints WAS writ large. Or, did you mean “writ true” or something like that? I wish a lot more people would read that book.

  117. @Stan d Mute
    Bro, you really need a real pseudonym. I ignore all anons because Ron’s coding doesn’t differentiate between any anon or anonymous. You seem like the same guy who appears on my screen as anon[257] regularly, but I can’t be sure. You can just pick the 257 like (former) anon[216] did. Or get creative and devise a handle with a message. Your actual anonymity is the same regardless.

    I can’t be the only guy here who misses 75% or more of your often very cogent and insightful comments only because of this.

    I believe 257 is a female but I could be confusing him/her with a different anon.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Yes, she has said she is.
  118. @Anon
    You’d have to do something about the sperm donors of the welfare babies. The usual way would gradually lessen testosterone and bring down the crime rate.

    Be careful associating all negative negro behavior with (slightly) higher levels of testosterone. There are certainly other cognitive factors that contribute to blacks’ attraction to non civilized behavior.

    Test has been made into an obvious co-villain with masculinity in general. Strong levels of T are important to men maintaining their existence as men, and not devolving into cucky man-boobed betas groveling for leftover 35 year old pussy.

    Anyway gradually lessening T levels among criminals seems like a long and complicated process that government would no doubt immediately attempt to profit on and ultimately fuck up. You should just mandate castration with garden shears upon criminal sentencing, or just repatriate all current negro criminals to Liberia, or both. They are simpler and less expensive to the tax payer and just as effective.

  119. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Black men have the highest SMV (assuming that's what you mean by "the best") among males? I'm not convinced of that.

    Not without controlling for everything else. But they are 3:1 WF relative to how BF do WM. Crudely, black men are attractive to black and white women, while black women are only attractive to black men.

  120. @Achmed E. Newman
    I gotta differ with you here, A.E. I WISH it was the case that we had one big ~ $1,500,000,000,000 note for our debt to China. We would be perfectly within our rights to say "Hey, you all would be speaking Japanese if Americans hadn't fought the Japs all over the Pacific, so let's call it even." whether the average Chinaman knows anything about WWII or not, along with a line from that famous sage Otter: "Listen, you fucked up. You trusted us."

    When you default on Treasury bonds, the way that people lend money to the US Feral Gov't, you default on ALL of them. They are fungible. It'd be like saying "all 20 dollar bills with serial numbers starting in 0 through 4 are now invalid. You don't know who's got all these bills. The US dollar would die. Come to think of it, maybe you do know this, but I am responding more to your 2nd paragraph.

    I am not actually arguing that default wouldn't be the best thing for America, in the long run. However, short and medium term, there would be much serious financial pain for unprepared Americans (95%) and lots of others around the world. How could we kick China's ass when we borrow money each year to fund the military?

    First thing: KILL! THE! FED! (Sorry, Charles Pewitt, I stole your thunder.)

    Heh, I’m not sure I’m sophisticated enough to understand how that would really differ from default, beyond being funny. A currency crisis would be the consequence either way, wouldn’t it? I’m sure we’re in agreement that said crisis will be painful in the short- and medium-terms but that it’s necessary for our economic convalescence over the long-term.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I just mean, A.E. that we can't direct a default specifically at the Chinese, if that's what you meant. I think some people are under the impression that we borrow money from them in the form of something like a mortgage note. Would that it were true. Sure,we couldn't borrow any more after that, but I don't know if that would be a default in the same way, as saying "uhhh, those Treasury Bonds? Yeah, ummm, you can't cash them until 2025, when we get our shit together, mmmkkkay? Alrighty!" We have no recourse, as we did in 1971 to blow off the French wanting to be made whole on their dollars - then, we just said "OK, well they're not redeemable anymore in Gold, sorry." You can only do that one once.

    Yes, I agree that a reset will have to happen, and the longer it is put off, the worse that short and medium term financial pain will be. By "we're", BTW, it doesn't seem to include a lot of commenters under iSteve, just for example. I really don't agree with many of them that economically things are a whole lot better than a few years ago, but only that confidence is up due to Trump's election. That is good for a few years, but the numbers and trends are the same bad news.
  121. @Intelligent Dasein
    I do not think default would be the best option for ordinary Americans. I think that monetization of the debt plus a program of inflation-adjusted, matched savings would be the best way to erode the debt-berg while causing the minimum amount of pain to working people,plus having numerous other salutary social side effects. I've written a rudimentary yet still lengthy version of my plan in the comments here at Unz.

    Given how little in the way of net assets that ordinary Americans have, why would a default be particularly bad for them? It’d effectively be debt forgiveness for them, wouldn’t it?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Yeah, true they have nothing to lose. It'd hurt those who have been responsible with savings in dollars, but not those who are of the prepper mindset (responsible, but with no trust in the US Dollar). However, ordinary Americans are not prepared for life with no more borrowing allowed, as they are struggling to live as middle-class Americans did in the 1980's, by borrowing. It'll be a shock that they may not be mentally ready for.
  122. @jilles dykstra
    Cannot understand articles like this.
    In order to survive as members of the European cultures we must enter a child producing race with the cultures that threaten us ?
    Nationalism based on culture seems far more simple, and far better for this already overcrowded planet.
    We should begin with a discriminatory immigration policy.
    If this is insufficient, inverse diversity.

    It’s more that reproduction is the most fundamental indicator of a people’s/ethnicity’s/race’s love for itself. A people who no longer have children is a defeated people.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    So the Puerto Ricans still on the island are acting like a defeated people?

    Time to cut PR loose to find its own way.
  123. @Bardon Kaldian
    To quote myself: don't fool yourself.

    By now, it is evident that TFR beyond replacement level is completely incompatible with modern high tech civilization. There should be no illusions about that.

    Women just don’t want to have more than 1-2 children. They do want children, vast majority of them, but not 3-4 or more. It’s women who matter since fatherhood has never been such a powerful force for males, and now it’s rapidly declining.

    This goes for advanced races, whites & Asians.

    Only religion can keep women in business of birthing; when they cease to believe or submit to men as the standard of behavior, say goodbye to sustainable levels of replacement fertility.

    Other races & groups (dot Indians, blacks, Muslims, various Mestizos,…) will have high fertility & will replace liberal whites causing dystopian nightmare & collapse of global society; or, they’ll be expelled & put under some sort of quasi-Nazi supervision.

    If we set aside extreme futurist alterations a la Asimov’s “Foundation”, we have a rather simple picture:

    * human beings live, normally, in communities: tribes, peoples, nations, …. differing in cultures, customs, languages, myths, loyalties, laws, …

    * the basic unit is monogamous family. Never mind India, China, Islam, …-polygamy was for a select few, rich & powerful. Man & woman & children, family- that is human life.

    * women, virtually all of them, want their man, want children & family. This is the center of their life. Perhaps 15% of them will never have children (health, environmental changes, “destiny”, ..). They want, basically, soft patriarchy; they want their men to be superior, but not brutes & savages. Also, they want some financial independence & a decent level of education, not to be confined to drudgery of purely domestic life. That’s what makes them happy (plus some chocolate).

    Some women with “male brain” may have different priorities, but they’re in the minority.
    That goes for modern women, white & some Asian. Others, like black females, Muslim women (most of them), Mestizo women, dot Indian females & feather Indian women, various colored mixtures in SE Asia … will, in a foreseeable future, retain their traditional roles of male exchange commodities & essentially men’s slaves. They will remain religious sex & satisfied with it. Not only feminism, but basic women’s rights don’t mean much to them. It is in their nature, particularly re Africans: https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/02/08/the-particularism-of-white-morality/


    .. Senegal was not a hellhole. Very poor people can lead happy, meaningful lives in their own cultures’ terms. But they are not our terms. The excrement is the least of it. Our basic ideas of human relations, right and wrong, are incompatible. […]

    Take something as basic as family. Family was a few hundred people, extending out to second and third cousins. All the men in one generation were called “father.” Senegalese are Muslim, with up to four wives. Girls had their clitorises cut off at puberty. (I witnessed this, at what I thought was going to be a nice coming-of-age ceremony, like a bat mitzvah or confirmation.) Sex, I was told, did not include kissing. Love and friendship in marriage were Western ideas. Fidelity was not a thing. Married women would have sex for a few cents to have cash for the market.

    What I did witness every day was that women were worked half to death. Wives raised the food and fed their own children, did the heavy labor of walking miles to gather wood for the fire, drew water from the well or public faucet, pounded grain with heavy hand-held pestles, lived in their own huts, and had conjugal visits from their husbands on a rotating basis with their co-wives. Their husbands lazed in the shade of the trees.
     

    There is no going back in history. Socialists in the 2nd half of the 19th C had progressed with their liberation of women, then this became universal way of behavior in civilized world across the globe & this issue is settled, permanently (for Europeans & their descendants). Those who think that women should give up voting rights; that they should – most of them- remain housewives, that they should give up education & financial independence are delusional. These male movements, men’s separatism, …. this all is reactionary stupidity not worth discussing. An aside- gay “marriage” is actually a non-issue. It is unimportant & does not have any real significance in modern world re stable family structure & fertility.

    So, in immortal Chernyshevsky’s words: What is to be done?

    What is to be done, with us whites & some Asians?

    Despite all the differences from Norwegians to Italians & from Irish to Russians, we’re in the same mess. We know that real clincher was the pill & sexual licentiousness from 60ies/70ies. From that period, there is no turning back.

    Yet, women want marriage,man, family, children, shopping & easier life with financial security and more interesting life with something more than central stuff, children. This is achievable.

    What is not achievable is 3-5 babies per average educated woman. This is absolutely impossible.

    1. too many kids, after some time they become annoying

    2. always around them, a mother does not have a life of her own, even a slice of it

    3. because contemporary culture’s pressure that “kids must have all”, it is financially impossible for a middle class couple to give all to their 3, 4.. babies.

    There is a need for cultural paradigm shift in whole Western world, and this cannot be simply planned. There are two extremes that should be addressed first, because of …later.

    Israeli Jews have TFR beyond replacement level, and they are the only developed nation with that characteristic, an anomaly. But: a) a significant part of it is demographic race with Arabs. Without enemy as that, why would Czechs or Norwegians rise their TFR? b) a big chunk goes to religious- not ultra-Orthodox- Jews/Jewesses, who somehow accept male dominance & traditional lifestyle at home (just- they do not stay confined to home: mothers of 4-5 children have PhD from Harvard in psychology or mom of 3 kids is a pediatrician).

    So, you have to have a national culture where religion, not too restrictive to status of females, does play a role & women are ennobled by their role in the whole fabric of society. Religion should be best thisworldly, with cooking, food, various taboos & family rituals- not theologically or metaphysically too heavy and exacting.

    As with the Japanese & their abysmal birth rate, what is to be done? Japanese religious movements are mostly hyper-macho wildings; they don’t anymore have a balanced approach to religiosity in family life & don’t care about family as such. Oppressive sides of their family life seem, due to perverted & distorted Confucian & Buddhist traditions, to lead to a collective pessimism, gnawing sensibilities & lack of enthusiasm & drive for happiness (unlike Israelis). Everything becomes unstuck & pervs are unleashed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enjo_k%C5%8Dsai

    Enjo-kōsai (援助交際 compensated dating, shortened form enkō 援交,) is a type of transactional relationship. It is the Japanese language term for the practice of older men giving money and/or luxury gifts to attractive young women for their companionship or possibly for sexual favors. The female participants range from school girls (aka JK business) to housewives.

     

    The advanced races, whites and Asians, have also created utterly unsustainable welfare states that grow faster than their productivity does.

    2. always around them, a mother does not have a life of her own, even a slice of it

    Social cocooning is a trend among single women, too. She can scroll mindlessly through instagram whether she has kids or not.

  124. @Anon
    So please inform us how you’re going to make it possible for Whites to have families of 4 or 5 children, especially in the age of ferocious racial discrimination against Whites.

    The only possible way I can see is to not get married and move to some rural area with low cost housing and go on life long welfare with the girls having babies in their teens to keep the whole thing going. Maybe cutting off s limb to segue from child benefit to adult disability.

    Looking around the schools and playgrounds of San Francisco San Mateo and Santa Clara I see mostly Asian kids. In S and Central California nothing but Hispanic kids. The combination of racial discrimination in favor of non Whites and generous welfare for non Whites including all those grandmas and grandpas on SSI
    means they can have kids but Whites can’t

    Urban life has been a sinkhole of death for as long as it has been in existence. Stay away from it.

  125. @APilgrim
    The ancient fallacies of deductive logic, in Latin, continue unabated.

    Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (Correlation is not causation.)
    Post hoc ergo propter hoc (After this, therefore because of this.)

    Fertility declines are correctly attributed to maternal use of Over The Counter (OTC) Analgesics, in pregnancy. Tylenol is probably the worst offender. There is no social etiology WTF-soever.

    That cannot possibly be correct. There are of course some number of people who have fertility issues, maybe higher than in the past, but that’s not the bulk of the explanation. YOLO women who have a TFR of 0.8 are not trying to achieve a TFR of 6.0 but coming up short because they’re unable to conceive!

  126. @Alfred
    Like almost all American articles, the writer fails to envisage a future with a 3rd political party. Both the Democrats and the Republicans will be gone before too long IMHO.

    2016 was a great opportunity for a serious third-party alternative to emerge and the lolbertarians offered up the joke that is Gary Johnson.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    AGREED! Johnson was a big flake. I'd voted L a lot in the past, but (2012 maybe) I voted for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. He's a great guy, but I haven't kept up with him. He had moved his family, with maybe some of his congregation, from Cross City, Florida up to western Montana, as a prepper/free-state thing. I respect moves like that.
  127. @unpc downunder
    If the Republican Party is actually in danger of going under, then the elites will do whatever it takes to makes sure the Republican Party (or some sort of pro-business replacement party) survives. There is no way the elites are going to allow the US to become a one-party, centre-left dictatorship. After all, the whole point of mass immigration to make the elites (like Jeff Bezos) richer, not create a socialist utopia. If the Republicans do go under, the Democrats will split in two, with the pro-business wing replacing the Republicans. Many Republican "cucks" would happily swift from the Republicans to a pro-business Democrat Party. In fact, they would probably prefer it, as they wouldn't have to do all those tiresome fake appeals to the American bible belt.

    You can't rely on the Republicans alone to change immigration policy, since the Republicans donors aren't that bothered about race replacement, they're only concerned with protecting neoliberal capitalism. If you want to reverse immigration policy, you're going to have to somehow mobilise non-voting, politically apathetic working class whites. These are the people who are turning the political tide in Europe.

    At the national level, agreed. At the gubernatorial level, it could be different. We’d hoped so with Kris Kobach. Alas.

  128. @ricpic
    Why can't the American Indian get his act together?

    They are defeated people. The miserable–as in seemingly unending misery–has been and continues to be a warning to us, a warning we fail to heed.

  129. @Stan d Mute
    Bro, you really need a real pseudonym. I ignore all anons because Ron’s coding doesn’t differentiate between any anon or anonymous. You seem like the same guy who appears on my screen as anon[257] regularly, but I can’t be sure. You can just pick the 257 like (former) anon[216] did. Or get creative and devise a handle with a message. Your actual anonymity is the same regardless.

    I can’t be the only guy here who misses 75% or more of your often very cogent and insightful comments only because of this.

    216 actually picked that sobriquet because it’s the area code he lives in. Yeah, we’re culturally appropriating that shit from gangbangers!

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    Homie, I’ve been using the 313 since before the gangbangers could count (their crack rocks) that high. When I moved to Miami I used the 305. Now I’m back home and claiming what’s mines.

    Those punk ass bitches stole that shit from me!
  130. @Audacious Epigone
    Heh, I'm not sure I'm sophisticated enough to understand how that would really differ from default, beyond being funny. A currency crisis would be the consequence either way, wouldn't it? I'm sure we're in agreement that said crisis will be painful in the short- and medium-terms but that it's necessary for our economic convalescence over the long-term.

    I just mean, A.E. that we can’t direct a default specifically at the Chinese, if that’s what you meant. I think some people are under the impression that we borrow money from them in the form of something like a mortgage note. Would that it were true. Sure,we couldn’t borrow any more after that, but I don’t know if that would be a default in the same way, as saying “uhhh, those Treasury Bonds? Yeah, ummm, you can’t cash them until 2025, when we get our shit together, mmmkkkay? Alrighty!” We have no recourse, as we did in 1971 to blow off the French wanting to be made whole on their dollars – then, we just said “OK, well they’re not redeemable anymore in Gold, sorry.” You can only do that one once.

    Yes, I agree that a reset will have to happen, and the longer it is put off, the worse that short and medium term financial pain will be. By “we’re”, BTW, it doesn’t seem to include a lot of commenters under iSteve, just for example. I really don’t agree with many of them that economically things are a whole lot better than a few years ago, but only that confidence is up due to Trump’s election. That is good for a few years, but the numbers and trends are the same bad news.

  131. @MikeatMikedotMike
    I believe 257 is a female but I could be confusing him/her with a different anon.

    Yes, she has said she is.

  132. @Audacious Epigone
    2016 was a great opportunity for a serious third-party alternative to emerge and the lolbertarians offered up the joke that is Gary Johnson.

    AGREED! Johnson was a big flake. I’d voted L a lot in the past, but (2012 maybe) I voted for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. He’s a great guy, but I haven’t kept up with him. He had moved his family, with maybe some of his congregation, from Cross City, Florida up to western Montana, as a prepper/free-state thing. I respect moves like that.

    • Replies: @Truth
    Do you respect them enough to freeze your little toesies and make one?
  133. @Audacious Epigone
    Given how little in the way of net assets that ordinary Americans have, why would a default be particularly bad for them? It'd effectively be debt forgiveness for them, wouldn't it?

    Yeah, true they have nothing to lose. It’d hurt those who have been responsible with savings in dollars, but not those who are of the prepper mindset (responsible, but with no trust in the US Dollar). However, ordinary Americans are not prepared for life with no more borrowing allowed, as they are struggling to live as middle-class Americans did in the 1980’s, by borrowing. It’ll be a shock that they may not be mentally ready for.

    • Replies: @The Practical Conservative
    Nope, Gen X has assets, so they have quite a lot to lose.
  134. @Stan d Mute
    Your pseudonym is misleading and it’s not even ironic or parodic.

    I humbly suggest that you change it to “The Cucked Conservative”

    Unless you just left off some characters and meant “The Practically Stupid Conservative”

    I’m a married black woman with above-replacement fertility whose household income is 1% level. I’ll stick with my moniker, tyvm.

    • LOL: Truth
  135. @Achmed E. Newman
    Yeah, true they have nothing to lose. It'd hurt those who have been responsible with savings in dollars, but not those who are of the prepper mindset (responsible, but with no trust in the US Dollar). However, ordinary Americans are not prepared for life with no more borrowing allowed, as they are struggling to live as middle-class Americans did in the 1980's, by borrowing. It'll be a shock that they may not be mentally ready for.

    Nope, Gen X has assets, so they have quite a lot to lose.

  136. @Audacious Epigone
    It's more that reproduction is the most fundamental indicator of a people's/ethnicity's/race's love for itself. A people who no longer have children is a defeated people.

    So the Puerto Ricans still on the island are acting like a defeated people?

    Time to cut PR loose to find its own way.

    • Agree: MikeatMikedotMike
  137. @Anon
    Too bad you’re so naive and credulous you believe every bogus study that comes along

    Anon[257] combines nescience, lying, & impertinence into 100% troll.

    For example, low birth-weight greatly increases the combined maternal/fetal survival rate in the absence of routine availability of: caesarean section, symphysiotomy, pubiotomy, &/or antibiotics.

    Shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, preeclampsia, eclampsia, gestational diabetes, and other adverse maternal/fetal conditions are reduced by lower birth rates. So weight management objectives are properly adjusted when outside the parameters of modern medicine.

    • Replies: @APilgrim
    Correction:

    Shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, preeclampsia, eclampsia, gestational diabetes, and other adverse maternal/fetal conditions are reduced by lower birth-weights.
     
    My bad.
  138. @APilgrim
    Anon[257] combines nescience, lying, & impertinence into 100% troll.

    For example, low birth-weight greatly increases the combined maternal/fetal survival rate in the absence of routine availability of: caesarean section, symphysiotomy, pubiotomy, &/or antibiotics.

    Shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, preeclampsia, eclampsia, gestational diabetes, and other adverse maternal/fetal conditions are reduced by lower birth rates. So weight management objectives are properly adjusted when outside the parameters of modern medicine.

    Correction:

    Shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, preeclampsia, eclampsia, gestational diabetes, and other adverse maternal/fetal conditions are reduced by lower birth-weights.

    My bad.

  139. @Audacious Epigone
    216 actually picked that sobriquet because it's the area code he lives in. Yeah, we're culturally appropriating that shit from gangbangers!

    Homie, I’ve been using the 313 since before the gangbangers could count (their crack rocks) that high. When I moved to Miami I used the 305. Now I’m back home and claiming what’s mines.

    Those punk ass bitches stole that shit from me!

    • LOL: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Truth
    Good job, MWF...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeEhTlA9Q7M
  140. @Achmed E. Newman
    AGREED! Johnson was a big flake. I'd voted L a lot in the past, but (2012 maybe) I voted for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. He's a great guy, but I haven't kept up with him. He had moved his family, with maybe some of his congregation, from Cross City, Florida up to western Montana, as a prepper/free-state thing. I respect moves like that.

    Do you respect them enough to freeze your little toesies and make one?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Western Montana is pretty cold, but it's no Minnesota, Dakotas, or E. Montana. The number of Californicators that have moved there probably overwhelms any free-staters. However, as I said, I haven't kept up with them. Chuck Baldwin is a stand-up guy, that was my basic point, oh, along with that Gary Johnson is a flake.
  141. @Stan d Mute
    Homie, I’ve been using the 313 since before the gangbangers could count (their crack rocks) that high. When I moved to Miami I used the 305. Now I’m back home and claiming what’s mines.

    Those punk ass bitches stole that shit from me!

    Good job, MWF…

  142. @Truth
    Do you respect them enough to freeze your little toesies and make one?

    Western Montana is pretty cold, but it’s no Minnesota, Dakotas, or E. Montana. The number of Californicators that have moved there probably overwhelms any free-staters. However, as I said, I haven’t kept up with them. Chuck Baldwin is a stand-up guy, that was my basic point, oh, along with that Gary Johnson is a flake.

  143. @Brett
    The uncomfortable truth for people is that fertility is inversely related to female employment and has no correlation to male employment. Since Republicans still practice a low-key patriarchal model, their women stay at home and have kids. This effect has become more pronounced in research years due to the ease of access to contraceptives which mostly keeps white liberals from having kids that they would have been forced to have several decades ago.

    Keep accommodating single moms with monthly welfare that serves as a spousal income, thereby replacing the American husband. Keep on handing out refundable child tax credits that top out at $6,431, making it easy for the single moms, too, to undercut females with no spousal income—i.e. females who have no access to wage boosters from Uncle Sam. In addition to widowed females and a much lower number of divorced females, these are the females who worked out of necessity in past eras, finding plenty of jobs to keep a roof over their heads since the jobs were not mom-dominated and “voted best for moms” when most moms were married, raising their own children in single-breadwinner households.

    As a single and childless woman who switched parties to vote for Trump, I have decades of voting left and actually show up to vote in the midterms and general elections, but I should not vote for either fertility-obsessed party. Neither party represents my economic interests. Republicans have done nothing to stop the multi-layered, rigged welfare system that undercuts citizens by aiding the immigrant-replacement strategy and, in turn, drives down wages (and hours) for single, childless, welfare-ineligible citizens and single, welfare-ineligible parents with kids over 18.

    And white fertility rates are not bolstered by accommodating dual-earner, married households with non-refundable child tax credits and womb-privileged absenteeism standards. By supporting these measures, Republicans have helped to halve the size of the college-educated middle class, thereby reducing the white fertility rate.

    When dual-earner parents keep two middle-class (or upper-middle class) jobs under one roof, far fewer white Americans can pursue household formation of any kind, not even the dignity of one-person independent household formation in a safe neighborhood, much less household formation with kids in a safe neighborhood. People end up putting it off, thnking I got the required college degree and / or other certifications. Surely, as advertised, the fabled “real job” will surface. At that point they will have kids.

    Come to find out, in the fake-feminist era of womb privilege, almost no amount of absenteeism results in an above-firing mom—with a bigly spousal income and low-wage daycare workers or elderly grandparents raising her kids for her—getting fired. This crony-parent job-protection racket reduces the chances of decent-job access for millions of white college grads (and other qualified job seekers). Most of us white people, and some in minority groups, were raised with strong pressure to refrain from reproducing until we were 1) married and 2) financially independent enough to support children in middle-class style.

    Republicans would be very surprised to hear what Black, middle-class government workers say about the clients behind the scenes. Many of them—more than some Republicans may think—were raised not to have kids when young and unmarried. Other than the “plantation” stuff, which is aimed at welfare recipients who are mostly not registered to vote, I do not hear Republicans pitching anything about conservative social values to middle-class Black citizens, a group that includes quite a few religious types.

    Other minority groups have plenty of social conservatives.

    It is just that many non-voting illegal aliens, and many legal Hispanic immigrants, too, are using the welfare system to pursue stay-at-home, married motherhood, with the father of their children being the single breadwinner.

    They bring in their US-born kids’ SS cards and 8 paycheck stubs from their spouse when applying for benefits. One rock-bottom-low male income keeps them under the earned-income limits for welfare programs, particularly if the illegal alien mom limits evidence of traceable income from the dad.

    The US-born kids qualify them for hundreds in monthly income to add to the household till. They often live in crowded households, with several families under one roof and several womb-productive, noncitizen females, getting paid by the US government for sex and reproduction.

    Do all Hispanics—all of the Catholics and all of the Protestant Hispanics—approve of this? I don’t think so. If they are monolithic on social issues, why does Cruz still win in Texas?

    Do all Asians, including Indian Americans, approve of this social libertinism?

    Ugh, no, it is a safe bet to assume that most Asians do not approve, not enough to encourage their own kids to adopt this way of life even if they vote for Democrats on strictly ideological grounds.

    Seems like there might be some tradionalist Asians. Why don’t Republicans ask Asians what they think of the newfangled, single-parenthood-facilitating social programs? How do Asians think this will effect American society long term? There is a good chance that Asians will respond to rational arguments anout welfare-assisted traditional-family breakdown, as opposed to the purely emotional arguments of Democrats, screaming about mommas and babies at the border.

    Republicans aren’t even trying.

    How about the Muslims? We do not want more mass-scale Muslim immigration for sure, but there are Muslim citizens. They are already US citizens. They vote. They do not appear to embrace libertine social values. What do they think about pay-per-birth single motherhood? When I worked in the EBT and cash-assistance programs, other than the Somalians brought in by reps from Catholic Charities, I saw very few Muslim applicants and zero Asian applicants.

    The majority of welfare applicants were Black single moms with their own paycheck stubs. There were plenty of white people, too, and again, the overwhelming majority were single moms with their own paycheck stubs from temp or part-time jobs, which keep them under the earned-income limits for the programs during working months, whereas the Hispanic moms (at least 1/4th [if not 1/3rd] of the applicants) brought the paycheck stubs of their children’s father. Hispanic legal & illegal immigrants often got the max, with EBT alone for a womb-prolific momma of 4 approaching $800 per month. Welfare is allocated in increasing amounts per birth, including the additional cash-assistance welfare issued in lump sum via the progressive tax code.

  144. @Liberty Mike
    Conservatism, Inc. is too busy demanding that Congress censure Steve King.

    Dear Liberty Mike, The only reason they are removing him from various committees, is because he was too blatant with his disdain for immigrants and minorities. As soon as the dust settles, the party will be right back, practicing it’s subtle brand of racism. The US just cannot be seen as racist and be a “shining city on a hill.” We do not have over 1000 military bases (not to mention black/rendition sites) because we are pacifists. We have plans to dominate Space. We fighting to maintain hegemony over the planet. We would rather build tanks and planes and bombs before we provide our fellow Americans with employment, healthcare and jobs. The section of the country identified with the “depths of despair” phenomenon. We must offer hope to fly-over country, the heartland, if you will.

  145. @Rosie

    It is a societal failure that it is not considered shameful to birth a child you cannot afford.
     
    It is considered shameful, but only among Whites, and that is the problem.

    As the erstwhile custodial majority population, Whites obviously frown upon welfare dependence. I'm not sure that ethos is appropriate to our current situation, where we either have children we cannot afford, or none at all.

    Dear Rosie, Do we risk raising the illegitimacy rate in the majority community to increase majority births? How do we encourage births, especially for the high school educated when they can hardly maintain themselves (opioid crisis)? If they are too proud to seek assistance, how will we expand our numbers? Something will have to be offered to encourage these births (see European/Japanese schemes to encourage childbirth).

  146. @LondonBob
    Tinder should have a racial filter, so tedious swiping left on all the black profiles.

    londonbob ! that will be why london looks like a brown mixed race baby factory showroom then ! lol ! all those white females swiping left their knickers off more like ! lol ! who are you trying to kid who knows anything about london ? !

  147. @LondonBob
    Tinder should have a racial filter, so tedious swiping left on all the black profiles.

    londonbob ! that will be why london looks like a brown mixed race baby factory showroom then ! lol ! all those white females swiping left their knickers off more like ! lol ! who are you trying to kid who knows anything about london ? !

  148. Healthism is launched with an intent to enhance people’s health
    and overall well-being. The brand offers multiple solutions to make healthcare
    accessible and easy. Multiple healthcare centric services
    are bundled up under the brand name Healthism. The journey
    has already started with a privilege health card. The purpose of the card
    is to lower the everyday healthcare expedition of the user.
    The annual membership card can be bought at a price of
    INR 999 and the user can avail discounts at various medical touch points.
    In effect the user saves medical expenditure which are not
    covered by insurance policies. The other services include
    – doctor appointment booking, medical record maintenance, medicine delivery etc.

  149. This is really fascinating, You’re an excessively professional blogger.
    I’ve joined your rss feed and look forward to in quest of extra of
    your magnificent post. Additionally, I’ve shared your web site
    in my social networks

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS