Dawn Brancheau, the 40-year-old White woman killed by a (surprise) killer whale, was married and had no children. But “she loved the animals like they were her own children”, a family member says.
Allow for a moment my angle on this, which I realize isn’t shared by some White advocates: Dawn Brancheau represents a disturbing trend among Whites whereby puppies, kittens, dogs, cats, horses, orangutans and other beasts are considered their “children.” They collect them, work with them, hoard them, fawn over them and spend absurd amounts of money on them. Meanwhile, they have no actual children — and I’m betting it’s not often because they’re biologically unable.
My unclinical opinion is that this is a form of obsessive compulsive disorder, though possibly with a historical root in an evolutionarily-developed survival affinity for animals (unique to Whites) that can provide food and protection. The latter is understandable, but the former is a problem.
White women seem to be able to think of pretty much anything as their children — except natural children from their own wombs: adopted children from Africa, expensive houses, dogs, even killer whales. It has to stop. Dawn Brancheu was fit and attractive and probably would have borne great White children. Instead, she walked in front of nature’s moving train and got crushed. Can you hear the Black comedians joking about this one? (“Da lady got in the tank with killer whales. And guess what happened?”)
I’ll have to give them this one. Talk about survival of the fittest.
Christopher Donovan is the pen name of an attorney and former journalist. Email him.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
Um, wow… I think you are the first person to articulate this but in my experience, you are completely correct. I’m almost ashamed to admit it but I have relatives (married couples) who have never had children but have doted on pets to an extraordinarily unhealthy degree as a substitute. A lot of white folks don’t have kids anymore for whatever reason but there is clearly some serious pathologolgical substitution going on. Thanks, (I think) for this eye-opening article.
I 100% agree with you Christopher.
Until very recently you never had Whites showing Animals the kind of Slavish and Anthropomorphizing devotion that so many Yuppie scum nowadays do.
Many an English Gentleman would love his hunting dog like a friend.
But never would he treat his hunting dog like a Human Baby.
There’s Substitution Disorder going on with a lot of White people nowadays, almost like it would be too “Racist” to bring more White Human Beings into the World, so they think why not satisfy their Paternal and Maternal instincts on an Animal.
The very fact that they have strong parental instincts and yet purposively refuse to use them on children of their own is sickening, and I wonder if Whites who do this shouldn’t be lined up against a wall and shot.
and of course there’s the pc angel too – whites will insist we call them by their native american name, rather than “killer whale”
At the moment I’m caring for 15 cats. Yearning for an American Fox Hound, a black and tan or a Redbone since the last of my five canine babies died a couple of years ago. Hounds make the greatest pets and if you’ve ever had one you know that.
You cannot blame the low reproduction rate among whites on animal lovers. It probably has more to do with advanced societies then it has to do with some twist in our DNA or thinking. I actually know that these are animals and not really my babies. Don”t let your frustration get the best of you and cloud your thinking.
The Japanese, also an advanced society, also has a low birth rate and has gone into inventing robots to carry out labor needs rather than bringing in immigrants. Chalk one up for the Japanese. They hire “grandparents” to visit their homes on weekends because of the loneliness of not having family.
Arabs breed like flies because they’re as backward as Africans and Indians and can count upon whites to feed them. Thats what needs to change.
The Chinese have cut back to allowing only two kids per family and we should encourage other races to stop breeding as well as encouraging more white births.
Any advanced society will show concern for animals and we certainly should not be funding kill shelters since you should tax what you wish to get rid of and not subsidize it. The policies we have toward cats and dogs and the horror of animal kill shelters is a legacy that belongs in a third world nation and not in America.
I think the whales should be released into the wild along with all the elephants in zoos. Some animals are ok in captivity while others are tortured by it and should not be kept except in cases to save their species.
I don’t understand people’s surprise. Killer whales are the aquatic analog of a lion or tiger.
Your point is a good one. Out of the cohort of five or six friends I grew up with, only one(!) has had a child. And that’s not even replacement rate breeding.
Very true. in the Yuppy neighborhood we live in the craze is for those mini or toy dog breeds. People are obsessed with their dogs in a way I do not remember people being when I was a kid and they were considered pets and not family members. Even more egregious are the people who keep large, athletic breeds in their urban apartments. It shows a complete lack of understanding and respect for other species. People have been trained by television to think of dogs as products or fashion statements and not animals with unique physical and psychological needs, which is the truth.
I have to agree with the commenter above who suggested the whales and other truly wild animals should be released. These are dangerous animals that should not be in contact with humans. Captivating them and turning them into a spectacle is disrespectful to the natural world and miseducates the visitors about the true nature of reality.
These animal trainers who think they “love” wild animals are dangerously delusional.
Vets even talk about people being “good parents” to cats and dogs. Ever read the back of a cat food package? Geared to White women, “the taste your cat demands” the “variety you cat needs” etc etc ad nauseum. Watch the commericals, the White woman’s children are CATS, pretty much.
Propaganda, owning the media, the schools, the government, they are laughing all the way to Tel Aviv.
Oh, come on now – that’s being a little rough on the lady, isn’t it? Although I do understand the reference to low White birth rates.
I’m White, but myself have no children (that I know of). Why not? Well, I suppose it’s at least partially my own fault; I value high intelligence (it’s up to 80% heritable) and am somewhat particular about genetic health. Why would I want to have children who lack what I consider sufficient intelligence, or children whose lives would be limited, ruined or cut short by a genetic disease? Resources are growing shorter by the day, and I wanted to maximize the quality of life of my children rather than sentence them to a life of mental or physical disability and medical dependency.
Finally, I married a beautiful and highly intelligent woman of Italian descent (I’m of Celtic-Germanic ancestry). But although her genetic history is clear – no diabetes in her immediate family, no insanity, no cancer, lupus, and so on – we were unable to conceive before she hit menopause. (My sperm count is high, so that was never the problem.)
Now, I’m about six feet tall, I’m considered extremely muscular (at least when I’m not considered “fat”), and I have an extremely high and well-replicated adult intelligence quotient (please pardon the boasting, but it’s documentable and it’s relevant here). My family is long-lived and remarkably free of disease. I might not look like Dolph Lundgren, but I’m not that bad either…still have some hair, even. My family contains many successful people, quite a few medical doctors and even a billionaire great uncle or two.
Unfortunately, I discovered early on that intelligent White women with clean genetic histories are becoming extremely hard to find. Worse yet, I discovered that most of the White women I knew didn’t really care about the intellectual and biological fitness of their offspring, but only about the chance to get cuddly with them for a few years.
Of course, it didn’t help when I discovered that many women of excellent stock actively prefer nonwhites or nightclub-bopping Jews as partners, and that even the ones who don’t have been indoctrinated by the media and education system in ways that are incompatible with my own more traditional and probably more realistic worldview (several of those whom I would have considered as mates explicitly objected to anyone opposing diversity and multiculturalism as America’s best route into the future, insinuating that I was reprehensible and “racist” for daring to suggest otherwise; I was forced to immediately downgrade their intelligence as a result).
So where do my wife and I now live? In the country, with more animals than you could shake a stick at. And it’s not because I didn’t want children; it’s because the genes and attitudes of white women, or at least those to whom I happened to have ready access, have deteriorated to the point at which I was unable to connect with what I considered an acceptable reproductive partner in time to get the job done. Depending of course on one’s walk of life and other incidental factors, fit breeders can be extremely scarce.
About ten years ago, I was encouraged by a friendly psychologist to visit an upscale sperm clinic in Boston (her idea, not mine – she seemed to think they’d jump at the chance to have me “contribute”). I did as she suggested, all documentation in hand. Behind the front desk was a gum-snapping, college-age White female with her nose buried in a copy of Cosmo magazine. It took me a while to get her attention.
To make a short story shorter, I was immediately dismissed by the little twit because I was no longer in my 20′s. She didn’t seem to care whether or not I was fully loaded or shooting blanks; that wasn’t the issue. It turned out that according to the selection criteria applied by the clinic, I’d have been more acceptable if I’d been a twenty-something schizophrenic drug fiend with AIDS. Being less White couldn’t have hurt my prospects either.
So you see, the state of childlessness is not necessarily a reflection of one’s willingness to have children, and this will remain the case until White culture has been substantially rehabilitated. This unfortunate whale casualty may have been a victim not only of a serial-killer Orca, but the female-POV equivalent of my own reproductive situation. Don’t blame her unless you’re going to blame the entire depraved, degenerate culture that was erected around her.
The long and short of it is, we Whites are in an evolutionary catch-22 here. Don’t underestimate the severity of this problem; there are many, many others in roughly my boat. Successful reproduction entails quality as well as quantity, and not all of us are in a position to get it any longer. More power to those who luck out and do, but let’s try to avoid deprecating those who don’t.
“Don’t blame her unless you’re going to blame the entire depraved, degenerate culture that was erected around her.”
I am sorry but such statements are pathetic.
One should not blame society for a situation that is clearly in ones own hands. The notion that is impossible or extremely difficult to find a suitable mate is just an excuse for individual failure.
Yes, it takes EFFORT. When our people carved a nation out of the wilderness, that took effort. To ponder that our people have historically built nations, explored space, etc and now are being thwarted by something so simple as finding a suitable partner, is, well, just stupid and perhaps reflective of a soul that has been corrupted/devalued by anti-white-pop-culture propaganda. Those who think with in such terms need to regain their pride and masculine instinct!
Finding a suitable mate and ensuring the continuation of a genetically sound progeny is relatively speaking not all that challenging . Such defeatism and excuse-making is unbecoming of our people.
For intelligent individuals who are failing/have failed at finding suitable mates the solution is simple: The mating instinct is not driven by abstract intellectual stimulation, even for highly intelligent people. One needs to learn how to stimulate the opposite sex in other ways to get what is wanted/needed.
A failure to do this is an individual failure. The saving-grace is that an such a challenged individual can at any time choose to “man up” and get what they want out of life, if indeed they do want it.
All the white women I know are far more interested in Jew Feminism, BMWs, and their Careers than babies.
eurodele,
Have you tried sites like the FreeSpermDonors Yahoo Group?
Love of animals is probably an inborn characteristic of Whites. Most of our ancestors were farmers for quite a long time (at least 1500 years). We probably have a fixation on animals that comes from quite a bit longer back, from the hunter-and-gatherer days. Its no surprise that people are suckers for the critters.
Someone mentioned “substitution syndrome”, and this is probably a very apt description of what we are seeing. Women have a desperate instinctual need to love, cuddle, protect and guide SOMETHING, and since babies are discouraged, animals are the next best thing. A lot of the answer to this problem lies in children being raised away from the public school system in more natural, traditional environments (dare I to suggest a family-centered neighborhood in a Whitopia, where everyone is homeschooled?) And yes, I will even mention religion, though there are those that will be horrified. Religious types have way more children, and its not only Christians but Muslims and Hassidim as well.
Those who do not have many children should be chastized publicly, they should be made to feel guilty for failing in their duty to the race. Child-rearing is critical, and a healthy society will have heavy pressure on its members to breed. Parents of large families should be recognized publicly as well and celebrated. If you have not had a large family, then get busy!
“Those who do not have many children should be chastized publicly, they should be made to feel guilty for failing in their duty to the race.”
An interesting if not very caring attitude at a time when a rapidly increasing number of Whites are finding themselves out in the streets and dining out of dumpsters. Children from very large but poor families often don’t do very well; children do, after all, require proper nutrition and decent shelter.
The US is already running out of resources; that’s a large part of our current problem. Sitting around trying to outbreed the incredibly prolific “minority” populations of the US will do nothing to increase the White share of the national commons. In fact, soon there won’t be a “national commons” left.
Remember, part of being White is exhibiting the highest possible level of social adaptation by maintaining a sustainable birth rate. Give that up, and Whites move onto the same evolutionary track as overbreeding Blacks, Hispanics and Asians.
Our problem isn’t that we breed too slowly; our breeding rate is a large part of what made our society sustainable up through the mid-1950′s. It is that we allowed ourselves to be swamped with overpopulating races by a hostile minority which used it as a transparent divide-and-conquer strategy, and lie their asses off about their real motives as they steal everything that isn’t nailed down and snicker into their yarmulkes.
We cannot solve that problem be creating a worse drain on available resources. We need to dislodge the parasites.
(BTW, I checked out that “freespermdonor” site – sorry, but I couldn’t stomach having my kid raised by a gay couple.)
What an odd analogy. Would you keep your kids in captivity indefinitely and train them to perform sideshow tricks for strangers?
“The US is already running out of resources; that’s a large part of our current problem. ”
I beg to differ. How is it that India, China and much of the rest of the world manage to support such large populations? If you would argue population density, then how is it that Japan manages to support 100 million people living high on the hog on a resource-poor land area the size of California? Many European nations like Belgium have an even higher population density, and few resources.
When I go to the supermarket, there seems plenty of food available at inexpensive prices. When I go to Walmart, the shelves seem full of goods, also at low prices. The law of supply and demand suggests that if there were actually resource shortages, then prices would be high, and supplies low.
A land mass has a certain carrying capacity. The population of that land mass will generally increase until it reaches that carrying capacity. For the US, the carrying capacity must be over 1 billion people, as it is a massive piece of real estate. It is natural that the population will grow to at least this. And if this is the case, they may as well be Europeans.
“An interesting if not very caring attitude at a time when a rapidly increasing number of Whites are finding themselves out in the streets and dining out of dumpsters.”
I dont mean to be antagonistic, hopefully my comments are not abrasive but in the spirit of an open dialogue. But I think you are overstating the situation a little here. Whites lived very well in the 1950s, and the average income has increased quite a bit since then. Thus, it stands to reason that families could support more kids today than in the 1950s (when fertility was high), not less, so I dont consider my expectation for high fertility to be too unreasonable. Where you live, there may be motley hordes of emaciated Whites eating out of rusty dumpsters like starveling pigs in a trough, like something out of a end-of-the-world movie. But, where I live, life is pretty much going on like normal. I tend to think that my area of the US is more representative of the overall situation than your area.
Lastly, the state of New Jersey is the most densely populated part of the US, and there are still wide areas of green, parks, dairy farms and so forth. If the entire population of the world lived at the same population density of New Jersey, they would take up a land area equivalent in size to Texas. The rest of the world would be uninhabited. Thus, I think the suggestion that the world is overpopulated is a bit overblown. Where there is heavy pollution, starvation and poverty in the world, this is generally due to poor management and low-IQ citizenry. An excellent example is Haiti, a lush, rich land area that has been transformed into, well, Haiti. With different management, the nation could be a food-exporting tropical paradise.
From the article:
Allow for a moment my angle on this, which I realize isn’t shared by some White advocates: Dawn Brancheau represents a disturbing trend among Whites whereby puppies, kittens, dogs, cats, horses, orangutans and other beasts are considered their “children.” They collect them, work with them, hoard them, fawn over them and spend absurd amounts of money on them. Meanwhile, they have no actual children — and I’m betting it’s not often because they’re biologically unable.
A couple of commenters above have noted the recent advent of this phenomenon, and there’s a reason for that. This “substitution disorder”, as Reginald has dubbed it, is a consequence of the development of scientific birth control technologies such as therapeutic abortion and the Pill. In a state of nature, pregnancy for women was not a choice. Making it into a choice via these techniques has some horrific consequences for society, and this sort of thing is one of them. Once the psychic energies that nature intended women to focus on raising children are detached from their normal target and allowed to become free floating, animals are a handy substitute. In fact, from the point of view of individual psychology, animals are in many respects better than real children, since they can offer an unconditional love that makes no real demands. An owner of an animal also has much more control over the relationship than otherwise would be obtainable with children. Unlike children, if animals become a burden, they can be given away or sold. Also unlike children, they can be abused or ignored, and in all but the most extreme cases this will probably be without consequence.
Modern feminism, also the bastard child of abortion and the Pill, has produced a lot of women like Dawn Brancheau, as notable for their shrivelled wombs as for their so-called accomplishments. Technical civilization generally enables the existence of these feminists, who resemble nothing better than their own race of small, weak, penisless men. It is true that a great variety of technologies lie behind creating a Sea World where killer whales may be kept as pets, but only by means of the invention of effective scientific birth control techniques could Ms. Brancheau’s feminist machismo have reached its full potential. I have known a few such women myself. One, for example, is a commercial pilot (with helicopter and jet engine endorsements) who is also a scuba diving instructor and a certified boat captain. I’m not knocking her, though. She’s actually pretty nice, and even somewhat racially conscious, but she’s never married, never had children, and has been so preoccupied with acting out her feminist machismo that she is now too old to have any. She did tell me that she has had time to have a couple of abortions along the way though.
Other bad consequences have flowed from these technologies too. It is important to notice that the great increase in homosexuality that we see nowadays, and also the increase in prestige for that form of behavior, is due in no small measure to the existence of scientific means of birth control. This development within the technological system was a watershed event in evolutionary terms, decoupling sex from the natural, reproductive function it had served ever since life began on earth and making it into something that is now widely viewed as only a lifestyle statement. By their nature, scientific birth control technologies create a large pool of people of both sexes who don’t have children and who won’t have them, either by choice or simply because they are not able to conform to cultural norms. Such people have no stake in the future, and live only for themselves. The existence of this element acts like a corrosive acid on the structure of a society, eating away cultural bonds and decomposing it into individual atoms.
Once the pleasures of sex have been in this way decoupled from reproduction, the inevitable result is equality — between the sexes, because now women can have sex with the same abandon that was previously only the birthright of men, and between heterosexual and homosexual, because heterosexual sex need not necessarily lead to reproductive consequences either. It all becomes just undifferentiated pleasure, a lifestyle choice. This has the effect of raising the prestige of homosexuality, which had heretofore been held in contempt since ancient times, to put it on a par with heterosexuality.
Before the advent of such technologies, women had very little say in whether they were going to have children or not. The biological attractions of the reproductive act are such that virtually all fertile women ended up having them. But now, in what must certainly be a supremely dysgenic move, the genetic fate of the white race has been placed into the hands of the empty-headed, weak-willed, easily-brainwashed sex. As a result, the most intelligent white women often defer having children until it is too late. Even the white women who do have white children often end up choosing to have the children of the more feminine, brainwashed, politically-correct males available to them, because such males fit in better with our politically-correct culture and are therefore more likely to have stable social networks and employment. Some of them — too many of them, no doubt — have even aborted white children and chosen to have trendy niglets instead.
All in all, it’s hard to overstate what a disaster scientific birth control techniques have been to the white race.
I would have more than willingly fathered two or three children by now, but neither the job market nor available white women was every there for me. The reign of destruction against jobs families can be supported on and white women being turned against white men have seen to that. I’ve tried, but after one bad marriage and a series of dead ends, I’ve given up on American white women.
“(BTW, I checked out that ‘freespermdonor’ site – sorry, but I couldn’t stomach having my kid raised by a gay couple.)”
Are you sure you got the right site?
The FreeSpermDonor Yahoo Group has plenty of Heterosexual Woman on it, and in the explanatory e-mail it even offers you the option of saying you only want to donate to Heterosexuals:
“If you will
> only donate for couples or only for heterosexuals, then say so when you post.
> Be prepared to undergo tests for all STD’s as well as a sperm analysis test to
> check your sperm count, motility and morphology. Donors should also take
> folic acid.
>
> Donors are invited to add themselves to the donor database here :
> http://health. groups..yahoo. com/group/ FreeSpermDonors/ database
>
> Donors are welcome to post to the group announcing their availability, but
> please limit such posts to once per month, otherwise the group would be
> overrun with messages from donors.
Good points Adam.
To paraphrase Shakespeare: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the abortion doctors and people who sell birth control to Whites.”
But in lieu of Tom Coburn’s dream becoming a reality, perhaps you and I should start sneaking into the homes of White Women and replacing their Contraceptive Pills with Placebos.
Andrew, either you lead an extremely sheltered life, or you have an enviable knack for screening out unpleasant facts. I can’t find anything in your reply with which I remotely agree.
First, India and China do not support their populations at anywhere near the level on which most people want their children to live. (Or so swears my sister-in-law, who was born and raised in China and is in China right now.) I get the distinct impression that you have no idea how few calories many Asians and Africans ingest each day.
While there is still inexpensive food on supermarket shelves in the US, more and more people will be able to buy less and less of it as the US economy inevitably declines over the next several years. Products are shipped first to areas where people can afford them; as the US grows poorer and other countries richer, more Americans will find themselves precipitated to the bottom of the delivery schedule. (Move around the US a bit, as I have, and you’ll learn that the quality of food available in grocery stores corresponds to average regional income rather more closely than you might think.)
While I’m absolutely delighted to learn that everyone in your neighborhood enjoys patronizing their well-stocked veggie stands, butcher shops, and corner delis between trips to the local coffee shop for caramel double-mocha lattes, I assure you that there are many places in the world where the pickings are far slimmer.
Neither people nor economies are confined to particular land masses; nothing prevents a region from simultaneously importing food and exporting people, especially as the US and Europe continue to function as relief valves for their excess populations and US agriculture is increasingly moved to the global auction block. In the modern world economy, what you call “the law of supply and demand” often means little more than what those who control the markets want it to mean, especially when “demand” does not align with purchasing power.
At a population of 1 billion, the US would be a hellhole. (Better your kids than mine if it comes to that, although if the world were just, it would be you instead of them.) We’re heading there fast. And by the way, far from having “increased since the 1950′s”, real inflation-adjusted income for the average American has been in a steady nosedive since at least the 1970′s. This is a fact that you can easily verify if you care to do so. (Hint: don’t rely on government statistics alone. They’re fudged.)
If the entire population of the world were packed together like the inhabitants of New Jersey, humanity would still need food, fresh water, fresh air, sewage processing, manufacturing facilities, and a very great deal of arable land, plus the water, fertilizer, machinery, and fuel to grow food on it. Unfortunately, demography notwithstanding, there is now only a bit over one acre of arable land per person on this planet.
If you think that this is in any way sufficient for what modern Americans and Europeans consider a decent life, then I’d like to see you try to live on nothing but what you can produce on one acre, especially as the prices of farming necessities like fertilizer, pesticide, and herbicide continue to rise. (If you think that you can farm productively without any of those things, then you don’t know much about the practical side of modern farming.) In fact, lest you dispute the amount of arable land available, let’s make that two acres. I’ll even provide the land.
In short, Andrew, while you and some others may live in a world where growth is forever unlimited and full speed ahead at the nursery, most of the rest of the human race lives in a very different world indeed. That’s why so many people you’ve never met are starving, and that’s why white Euro-Americans, pampered and complacent though some of us may be, need to do everything we can to protect what we still have right the @#$% now, as opposed to lying around the suburban love nest with our significant others, manufacturing lots of pretty little babies for the future glory of the white race. (If only it were that simple.)
If you think that you can ignore these problems or breed your way out of them like a stud rabbit on Viagra, I have news for you: it’s not in the cards. I gather that you like to think of yourself as a survivor, but if you and too many others like you insist on living in denial of reality, it will be you and your innumerable progeny who join the dodo, the saber-tooth cat, and Wiley Coyote as he hurtles to the bottom of Grand Canyon like a cracked anvil.
Forewarned is forearmed. Quantity is nothing without quality. Breed responsibly.
eurodele,
It’s too many Non-Whites that make an area hell, not too many Whites. The average White puts more into the economy than they take out.
Also, you have to understand that America is a net food exporter.
Therefore Americans can’t be going hungry, because if they were they would use their greater purchasing power to outcompete peasants in Africa and India for that US grown food that is now being exported.
Americans are so far away from being hungry that 99.99999999999% can afford the luxury of a Television Set!
“And by the way, far from having ‘increased since the 1950’s’, real inflation-adjusted income for the average American has been in a steady nosedive since at least the 1970’s.”
Yes but if we make the comparison to the 1950′s, current inflation adjusted income is much higher for Americans due to the massive economic growth we had in the 60′s.
BTW, here’s the URL of the Yahoo Group I was talking about in case anyone’s interested:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/FreeSpermDonors/
The total fertility rate of White Americans is 1.9, which could hardly be the case if the situation described in the main post were representative. We are are going through a bottleneck now, it is true, but assuming there is the will to do what must be done, whatever must be done, to save our race from genetic annihilation, panic is not called for.
In places such as Western Europe where population density contributes to a diminution of the quality of life, it would not be so unconscionably horrible to allow the population numbers to gently decline, of course keeping in mind that that decline would have to be arrested at some point with replacement level fertility. Race-replacement immigration and resultant miscegenation is the greater concern. Also of concern is the lack of fertility at the top of the intelligence pyramid. The way to go, in my opinion, is to totally remove all non-Whites (that includes Jews) and mongrels from our lands, then, concentrate first on increasing the fertility of those at the top of the intelligence pyramid. The number, both relative and absolute, of people in our population who possess one or a combination of quantifiable traits putatively considered desirable is either waxing or waning, however minutely; either eugenics or dysgenics is occurring, like it or not. That understanding must be taken in hand and applied at the level of state policy.
Yes it is dumb to get into a tank with a whale, but how far are we going to take this?? Was uber-Aryan animal lover Priestess Savitri Devi (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Man ) actually some sort of weird Race Traitor?!?!?!
The fact is kind treatment of animals is one of the hall-mark traits of the White Race! Better this then some of the disgusting habits of Asiatics! Blog readers were you aware that one bit of folk-wisdom in Asia is that if one TORTURES an animal that it will taste better later when eaten! YIKES! Asians are like violent Ming the Mercilesses in their treatment of our fur friends!
Also on this issue of natalism (I am PROFOUNDLY anti-natalist):
“In the political domain we need to take a stand against the myth expressed in the formula: “There is power in numbers.”
Attempting to base an imperialistic policy on a demographic campaign was one of the serious mistakes of the Fascist ideology that must be denounced without hesitation.
The power of numbers is the power of the mere brute masses; this power is in itself very relative, because even herds need to be guided.
Every true empire is born from a race of conquer-ors who conquered lands and peoples, not because they suffered from overpopulation or did not have “a place in the sun,” but on the basis of a higher calling and qualification, which allowed them to rule as a minority in foreign lands.” — Baron Julius Evola, Men Among the Ruins Chapter 15: The Problem of Births
those whites who are busy saving sea turtle nesting sites and whales, should be made to realize that other races don’t and will not ever, show any interest in doing the same.
In fact, I have a theory – when orientals gain more power in the US – which is very very soon – we’ll start to see some a. its racist to oppose traditional oriental medicines (like tiger penis powder) b. on the right, a ‘free market’ argument to hunt exotic animals for medicine (managed game farms) and a lfiting of the bans on exotic specie ‘medicines’
one disabled student teacher was harassed out of a school with somalies because of his guide dog (muslims don’t like dogs) Koreans and others as we know, eat them… whites who are fawning over animals need to made aware of this. If they won’t stand up for us, perhaps they will stand up for lassie and fido.
Lastly, I completely agree about substitution – particularly with women – fawning over a dog used to be the reserved for old spinsters with no relations – now we see it in 35, 40 year old women….and men! its a sign of an unhealthy society.
side note, one of these ‘gender imbalance articles couldn’t figure out why women with scientific inclinations overwhelming went into vetinary medicine, to the point where the majority of vets are women..isn’t it obvious? but when you live in a society based on lies, reality is hard to see.
The fact is kind treatment of animals is one of the hall-mark traits of the White Race!
One side note, Indians tend to show the same trait.. Amrita Devi “If a tree is saved even at the cost of one’s head, it’s worth it” and in fact take it a bit further than we do.
Eurodele, we are probably reaching the point where your world view clashes fundamentally with mine, and we arent going to resolve this disagreement. I would submit though, that you have bought in too deeply to the world overpopulation myth. Consider:
1) The exact same argument was being made in 1990, “the world has too many people, its unsustainable!” Yet here we are in 2010, with 1.5 billion more people. The standard of living of the US has not dropped (if you wont accept that it has improved). In fact, the overall standard of living in the third world has risen precipitously. “World Bank calculations show that using a poverty line of $US 1.25 per day, between 1981 and 2005 the percent of the world’s population living in poverty decreased from to 51.8 to 25.2. Using a poverty rate of $2.50 per day, the decrease was from 74.6 per cent of the world’s population to 56.6 per cent.” http://global-ejournal.org/2009/03/09/globalization-poverty-reduction-and-economic-rights/
2) World population is expected to increase an additional 2.3 billion by 2050. Thats an increase of about 35%. How will that change things much? At any rate, its going to happen, and your call for Whites to lay down their arms in the global population arms race is foolish at best.
3) My example about the world living in an area the size of Texas is meant to show that there are huge areas of uninhabited land world-wide. In the US, take a flight, and observe all of the vast land area that has no houses as you fly over. We could easily triple our population and our population density would be nowhere near Germany’s. Do the Germans have such a poor standard of living? They have 80 million people living on a land area smaller than Montana. Are they crowded like rats in a gutter? Ive been there, and they are doing fine. To get Germany’s population density, the US would need something like 2.5 billion people.
4) You dont seem to realize that food production techniques are constantly improving. An acre of land today yields much more than it did a few decades ago. However, in most areas of the world, farming techniques are primitive, and dont take advantage of methods that would dramatically increase yields. Most food is just carbohydrate, carbon+water, two very common substances. A little doo doo, energy and water, and voila, you have some food. There are all kinds of technologies that are available to grow food, but cant be used because the price of food is so cheap, they arent profitable. Hydroponics is one such method that comes to mind.
5) There are vast tracts of land area that could easily be farmed, but are barren today because food is so cheap, its not profitable. For example, the deserts of the southwest could produce huge yields with irrigation from Canada’s plentiful water supplies. There are many such areas around the world. Most homes in the US could have gardens that supply most of a family’s vegetable needs, as they used to in the 1940s and before.
6) When there is increased demand for an item (like food), the supply will also increase. The above areas are only some of the potential means where this will happen. If food prices doubled, every Tom, Dick and Harry would be working overtime trying to figure out how to make a fortune in the food business. You seem to think that food-growing technology has just stalled somehow, and wont see new inventions and techniques arise in the future. In fact, agricultural yields improve every year, just like computers get better and better each year.
“Forewarned is forearmed. Quantity is nothing without quality. Breed responsibly.”
Quantity is also extremely important. Look at Taiwan versus China. What nation must ultimately win in this contest? Obviously China, because it has population quantity, and thus it is all but foreordained that the mainland will absorb that island in time. Quantity give you power, it always has and always will. Quality is important, but a small population of Whites has little chance against an overwhelming horde of non-Whites. You see this in South Africa, where the Whites are outnumbered 10 to 1. For the Boer, quantity would make all the difference, but as it is, they are doomed.
So get out that viagra and start boning the old lady! (Excuse my crudity, I went to public school).
The fact is kind treatment of animals is one of the hall-mark traits of the White Race!
That’s true and we should be very proud of that. Unfortunately, it’s still not enough but it’s no question that we are much better to animals than brown and black people and even high-IQ East Asians.
http://dl.ziza.ru/other/122009/18/demotiv/029.jpg
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45470000/jpg/_45470331_firefighter_ap.jpg
The treatment of animals as children is not the problem but one of the symptoms of the problem. These people could just as well have children AND their dogs, cats etc. Just like it’s the case in millions of families.
andrew- the issue becomes quality of life- i relish our wide open spaces, and in the US it was easy for working man to own a lot of land because of low population to land ratio. New jersey, you forgot to mention, used to be garden of the east – now america is a net food importer. do you think that’s healthy.
Let’s be fair about animals too- until a century ago whites were much more brutal towards animals – there is a famous life magazine photo of a small down in ohio beating a fox to death that shocked the country – until a couple of hundred years ago the sort of baiting and animal fighting that blacks enjoy were enjoyed by whites too (cock fights, bear baiting, etc)
) You dont seem to realize that food production techniques are constantly improving. An acre of land today yields much more than it did a few decades ago
read the ominvore’s delimina – or better still Christian libertarian joe salatins books -our food is much less nutrious than it was – and industrial farming techniques have left us with essentially sterile topsoil i used to think such information was ‘nutty’ but the facts are there- grass fed beef is better for you, free range eggs, milk from grass fed cows…also if you read about industrial farming of animals – it is pretty damn cruel -
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2005/may/23/00007/
in addition industrial scale farming creates a social structure that is ‘bad for us’ while smaller local farmers create more of a sense of community and wrest more control in the middle classes.
Pitbull:
Don’t feel like you’re alone with family members who act like Dawn Brancheau-lite — I have the same thing going on. It somehow creates a pit in my stomach to watch it. I’ve also seen it in the law offices I’ve worked in: attractive women in their 30′s and 40′s who “just don’t need the hassle” of children, but who have dogs and cats they dote on.
Yeah, that whole existence of the race thing: Who needs the hassle?
Heinous Henry:
Yes, regard for animals is a white trait. I wouldn’t dream of persuading whites to treat animals the way non-whites do. I just think it goes to grotesque proportions too often. Dawn Brancheau, like Jane Goodall, is a great example (I might have even mentioned Goodall in my blog).
@Me,
I agree with you that it would be best if we could preserve our environment as much as possible. I love the great outdoors, the National parks, and all the wide open spaces too. However, even in densely populated areas such as Japan and Germany, there are lots of green areas and parks, development is planned out very well. As these and other nations demonstrate, there is no reason why increased population must come at the expense of the environment to the extent that you see in poorly-managed nations such as China and India.
The thing to realize though, is that the issue at hand is the very survival of our people. In a very real sense, it is a type of war, fought with immigration and birth rates. In a life-or-death conflict, you are often faced with critical choices. Whites MUST have a viable population, of sufficient size. If that means the nation must be impoverished, then so be it. If that means the environment will be degraded, then that will have to happen. For me, the ultimate goal is not prosperity or securing wide-open spaces; its about survival of the Great Race. I think that a reasonable minimum population for Whites in the US is 500M, which would allow the nation to maintain its world power status (remember that our national security is also at issue here with population).
However, with all that said, I see no reason why all goals cannot be met; a large population, a healthy environment and economic prosperity. Most other first-world nations have achieved this, and there is no reason why the US cannot.
“our food is much less nutrious than it was – and industrial farming techniques have left us with essentially sterile topsoil i used to think such information was ‘nutty’ but the facts are there- grass fed beef is better for you, free range eggs, milk from grass fed cows”
You are probably right about this, but I dont think that our food is that bad. I see very few malnourished people out there, in fact the problem seems to be with too many obese people. Life expectancies are high, so whatever the state of the food supply is, it cant be that bad. Jack Lalane uses regular store-bought fruits and doesnt seem to be suffering any ill effects from it. If you really want to extend your lifespan, the best thing you can do is eat 1/3 less calories than your body wants.
“Let’s be fair about animals too- until a century ago whites were much more brutal towards animals – there is a famous life magazine photo of a small down in ohio beating a fox to death that shocked the country”
If the picture shocked the country, that implies that most people believed animals should be treated well. There are always cases of animal abuse, but generally, people do well by their animals, especially farmers that depend on them for their livelihood. That being said, you are going to think Im a total barbarian for saying this, but I see no problem with animals fighting. I am a traditionalist. If animal fighting was okay for our ancestors, then its fine for me also. I do not believe that animals have rights, they are the property of their owners and I think giving rights to animals degrades our own rights as humans. Andrew Jackson was notorious for his love of cock-fighting, dog-fighting and human-fighting, which he enjoyed gambling on. And we need more people like him, tough as nails. Did you know that as a boy, he refused to shine a British captain’s shoes, who then sliced open the side of his face with a saber? One Andrew Jackson is worth a hundred wimpy, blubbering animal rights activists to our cause.
Good grief, Andrew.
Psychometrically (IQ-wise), white people are most of the way up the scale which divides the Blacks of sub-Saharan Africa (the bottom of the relative scale) from the East Asians of China, Japan, and Korea (the top of the relative scale; forget about Ashkenazi Jews, that seems to be based on verbal acuity alone and was probably fudged by Jewish psychologists with an ax to grind).
In addition to a relatively high mean IQ, whites may have a higher IQ variance; the tails of the bell curve may extend farther out from the bell, so that White IQ’s are distributed over a wider range with more high-end “outliers”. In principle, along with considerations involving creativity, environment, and personality, this would help explain why whites produce more “sublime geniuses” than the other races…why people like Archimedes, Aristotle, Pythagoras, Euclid, Galileo, Newton, Leibniz, Gauss, Euler, Maxwell, and for that matter Shakespeare, were white instead of black, brown, or yellow, and why White European civilization is the pinnacle (thus far) of human development.
But one does not have to be a Galileo or a Newton to handle simple math. Consider the following highly simplified equation:
C = AF/K
that is,
C (total carrying capacity of the planet) = A (arable acres available) x F (food produced per arable acre) / K (food required per person)
This little algebraic equation determines certain numerical relationships. You cannot deny these relationships and simultaneously point to Archimedes, Aristotle, Pythagoras, Euclid, Galileo, Newton, Leibniz, Gauss, Euler, Maxwell, and for that matter Shakespeare as your kinsmen. To do so would be to inhabit a plane of existence as far below theirs as is the grub below the eagle.
The arable acres required per person has a theoretical minimum of about 1/5 acre using the most high-tech intensive farming methods theoretically possible. In practice, nothing like this extremum has never been achieved and probably never will be on anything approaching a global scale; it assumes unlimited water and fertilizer, very low pollution, 0 soil erosion, 0 waste, a pest-free environment, perfect weather, and pure vegetarianism at bare subsistence levels. Maybe you can see how very, very unlikely that is, how many draconian police-state regulations it would take to get close to it, and how very unpleasant most people would find it; if not, then you know nothing about agriculture, nothing about real-world economies, and nothing about human society.
A much more realistic estimate, the one usually applied in the real world, is a little over an acre per person, say about 1.25 acres per person. To go with the most reasonable estimate and then add a little, say that there are eight billion arable acres on earth (that number is actually lower and is constantly shrinking due to desertification, conversion to human habitat as population rises, and other degradation processes).
Then applying the above equation, we find that the earth is already very, very close to its maximum carrying capacity right now.
Yet peeople are still starving! Why? Because of distribution problems relating to economic inefficiencies, distribution bottlenecks, political disruptions, natural disasters, bad weather, locusts, and so on. It follows that every mouth of any color now added to the human population brings us closer to population crash and an associated psychological phenomenon called a “behavioral sink”, i.e., a steep rise of aberrant behaviors in overcrowded population density situations…violence, rape, homosexuality, neonatal cannibalism, you name it. (Sound familiar? We have plenty of social experimentation tanks to monitor even now, including not just African cesspits but certain neighborhoods in various American cities.)
Concisely, if you think it’s OK for the US to have a population of 1 billion, then you think it’s OK for your children to either (1) live in an oppressive police state the likes of which you can’t imagine there in your little Jersey suburb, or (2) subsist on starvation diets in a behavioral sink wherein they must constantly fight tooth and nail for their very lives, which of course have been immeasurably cheapened by what you call “the law of supply and demand” as applied to human population.
This raises an important question: if this is the world you want to leave your innumerable descendants, then what is it about you, as a White person, that makes you better-adapted to survival on this planet than a Black, an Hispanic, an East Asian, a dodo, a saber-toothed cat, or Wiley Coyote? And as regards your “deservingness”, what gives you the right to breed like a fieldmouse on fertility drugs?
In other words, you can practice your “breed and breed and breed” strategy only at the expense of losing all reward and all justification for your existence and that of your descendants, and of infinitely distancing yourself from the greatest White achievers of modern civilization on both moral and intellectual scales.
Are you beginning to see how evolutionary psychology and its interdisciplinary ramifications actually work now? We are already in a situation in which we need to use our intelligence, our discipline, and our resolve instead of resorting to high-r breeding strategies for which we have neither the time nor the physical resources.
Please take the time to think a little before attacking your keyboard again. The welfare of your descendants could depend on it.
I’d like to approach this from a biological perspective.
There was another killing of a female trainer by an Orca in Victoria, B.C. a number of years back–and we knew this whale (he recognized our children by sight and would come up to them and stick his tongue out). You will see that most trainers killed by Otrca are FEMALE. This is because a male Orca is a mammal and the female hormones of a human trigger an unfulfillable sexual response. The same thing sometimes happens with male bears. So, we have a frailure to recognize basic biology.
The second biological point is that this stud-whale has killed multiple times–but is kept alive by Anheuser Busch for breeding purposes. What sick group wants to produce animals that want to kill humans? It has sired 15 offspring.
Finally, you have a good point about white females. The racial-death conditioning they have been subjected to creates “acceptable” substitutes for normal maternal impulses…like dogs, cats or Orcas!
It’s simple. Animals are child-substitutes. She can’t afford to stay home with kids, so she mothers animals instead, as they can tolerate long hours of separation from her.
Since the policies of liberalism (that is, Jews + White lackeys) have made family formation unaffordable for White people (who, due to our extreme K-strategy wish our children to have good lives) White women are transferring their mothering instincts onto animals.
White people wish to live in safe (i.e., White) neighborhoods. Anti-White, pro-minority policies mean that safe neighborhoods are very expensive – requiring the wife to work full time in order to make the payments.
Feminist cant notwithstanding, fulltime employment is NOT compatible with mothering infants and toddlers. So she forgoes the kids and collects pets because animals ARE okay being separated long hours from her while she works. Or she works as an animal trainer where she spends her working hours with her child-substitutes, then leaves them to go home. Either way works. But abandoning her helpless infant/ toddler in fulltime daycare for infants is just too gutwrenching, so she chooses pets.
Eject the liberals, eject the non-White invaders so real estate prices can return to sanity so she can stay home in an affordable White neighborhood, and the birthrate will bounce back up to optimum for the environment.
Over at my blog I frequently employ the phrase “conservatives may be dumb, but liberals are bat-shit crazy. Who’s worse off?”
Where’s that come from? I once saw a cable “science” show that maintained that the difference between ‘tame’ and ‘domesticated’ is that tame animals are born wild, then trained; but domesticated animals apparently suffer from a genetic defect that causes them to bond with humans as if we were their family. Essentially, they are crazy, and must seem so to their ‘wild’ counterparts.
This is the problem with liberals. Like KM’s post below about Wisconsin, liberals look at the gangs of blacks and immigrants destroying “diverse” communities as harmless, sacred creatures who need to be nurtured and protected from predatory “racists.”
This is yet another reason why A. Kurtagic is right: arguments are not the issue; your opponents [modern liberals, not necessarily the Old Left] are basically crazy.
Heinous Henry,
Uber-Aryan animal lover Priestess Savitri Devi lived in a time when the White birthrate was above replacement rate and much higher than it is now.
Therefore there was less of a moral obligation on her to have children than there is on White Women today.
“Also on this issue of natalism (I am PROFOUNDLY anti-natalist):”
You know what every conqueror and great man had in common?
They were born.
Chew on that one, smarty-pants.
“In the political domain we need to take a stand against the myth expressed in the formula: “There is power in numbers.”
It isn’t a myth.
Obviously there are other relevant factors, but without sufficient numbers you have nothing whatsoever.
As Andrew wisely pointed out, just look at the Whites in South Africa. They are far superior to the Black South Africans, and yet they have so little power that THEY ARE BEING GENOCIDED OUT OF EXISTENCE.
Why do they have so little power?
Because they are outnumbered.
Even if numbers don’t always translate into power, numbers too small relative to other racial groups will ALWAYS translate into powerlessness.
A powerlessness like nothing so much as the powerlessness of a gang rape victim.
@Eurodele,
First, let me thank you for the refresher course on “the Bell Curve”. Naturally high-IQ individuals are valuable. But the majority of Whites will be near the average for the foreseeable future. No nation or people can be great without a legion of soldiers, construction workers and the mass of other people that are necessary to build, defend and pay the bills.
Second, I will be cautious before attacking the keyboard, as I am prone to churning out ideas that you are so quick to dismiss. You do realize though, that the ideas I have presented on the potential to increase food supplies are the majority position among experts, people with excellent credentials in their field. Your position is the minority one. So, rather than being exasperated only with me, you may as well be exasperated with the mainstream agricultural establishment as well, for they are surely bigger dunces that am I, as they came up with the ideas I am presenting to you.
Third, as far as your equation goes:
C = AF/K
This is all very well. But you have made some assumptions that are questionable. These are:
1) You assue that all arable land on earth has been identified. However, you disregard a great deal of potential arable land. There are large areas of wasteland that could be put into production with irrigation (such as the desert southwest of the US and Mexico, as well as vast areas of Africa and Asia). Likewise, there are many small plots that would be used as gardens if food prices rose to high levels (gardens were extremely common in the past). In fact, huge areas of previously arable land have been removed from production due to land development. Much of this could be razed, putting the land back into production, if there were a pressing need to do so.
2) You dismiss the idea of Hydroponics, apparently. However, this is a proven system of growing food. Look through the pages of Popular Mechanics and you will find countless proposals for methods to grow plants in multi-story facilities using hydroponics. Such facilities would expand arable land quite a bit. Check out one article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/opinion/24Despommier.html
There have been many other ingenious proposals put forward to increase food production that are also promising, but are just not feasible because food is so cheap (see my supply/demand point below).
3) You dont seem to include the Sea in your calculations. There are vast coastal areas that could be used for raising fish and other edibles.
Fourth, you are really making quite an assumption when you say that the earth is getting very, very close to its carrying capacity. Lets look at the evidence:
1) I have shown you that substantially LESS people are in poverty or starving than in decades past, in spite of increased population. Why do you ignore that? That is decisive evidence.
2) Food prices are quite low, typically a small part of peoples’ overall budget in developed nations. When adjusted for inflation, they are lower than in the 1950s or 1970s. Why dont you put much stock by the Law of Supply and Demand? If there were a shortage of food, there would HAVE TO BE higher prices according to the laws of economics.
I understand that several billion people sounds like a big number, and its hard to imagine that the earth can support them. We also have images of starving masses of Ethiopians and South Americans in our heads. But trying to determine the carrying capacity of the earth by just arbitrarily choosing a population number is not logical or scientific. You need to have some type of compelling evidence. Therefore, if you would argue that we are near carrying capacity, I would respectfully ask you to show that:
1) There are increasing shortages of food world-wide (less food is being produced/consumed per person each year).
2) There are more malnourished people now than in the past.
I dont think you can demonstrate this, because the available evidence is otherwise (assuming such evidence has not been doctored for consumption by gullible individuals such as I).
Until you can provide reasonable evidence for your argument, I must once again repeat my call for humping like madmen. Every White Nationalist is equipped with a bazooka and two grenades, and must use them to the fullest extent possible. Fire in the hole!
Reginald says:
As Andrew wisely pointed out, just look at the Whites in South Africa. They are far superior to the Black South Africans, and yet they have so little power that THEY ARE BEING GENOCIDED OUT OF EXISTENCE.
Why do they have so little power?
Because they are outnumbered.
Even if numbers don’t always translate into power, numbers too small relative to other racial groups will ALWAYS translate into powerlessness.
Partially right, and partially wrong. As the example of the Jews shows, racial cohesion can sometimes compensate for small relative numbers. Yet as I have taken pains to show, white people are not Jews, and don’t have such cohesion. South Africa and the fate of its remaining whites is another sorry demonstration of that.
Adam,
Even the highly Ethnocentric Jews are powerless in those Countries where the race that outnumbers them is strongly Ethnocentric itself.
This is why Jews are completely powerless in every Middle Eastern Country except Israel, where they are the majority.
This is also why they were briefly powerless in Germany.
“Therefore there was less of a moral obligation on her to have children than there is on White Women today.”
I can concede this point as it makes sense from the Natalist view-point, but will counter with a paraphrase from Tom Metzger: ‘The problem is not enough Whites… it is too many Browns!!!’
“You know what every conqueror and great man had in common?
They were born.
Chew on that one, smarty-pants.”
Laugh out loud, good zinger.
However it misses a general point, smaller numbers endowed with a will to power will be more effective a mass of natalist spawned degenerates spewed forth into a dystopian-diverse quagmire. This is really what Baron Evola and myself are basicly getting at.
The very last flickering jew propaganda unit plugged into my living room wall has been occupying a muddy hole at the local trash dump, with the rest of the garbage, for quite some time now. My home feels so much cleaner, somehow.
A couple nights ago while visiting friends their propaganda unit was turned on and an ad for a product young people are attracted to came on, showing a group of very trendy, unmarried, young, clearly identifiable Whites (males and females, late 20’s-early 30’s) and their living arrangements (which slyly made the point they were single/childless – and HAPPY!!). They were all having fun, fun, fun of the highest order, living in très trendy surroundings, high tech, yipeee, etc, and all blissfully childless. Didn’t notice any pets, but that’s not my point.
A comment on another article posted at this blog said, in part, “We have our work cut out for us…” to wake up members of our race to their planned marginalization/elimination.
We sure do.
The above anti-White-children ad (with its slyly disguised theme) was screened during prime viewing time, in what I would guess is a popular draw card show. I think quite a large number of young White people would watch this particular show. The jews that own the television/advertising propaganda industry (and the industry which manufactures the product being promoted, of course) know that too. That’s the whole point.
So, can we get around those hundreds of millions of deliberately racially poisonous, flickering jew propaganda tubes in the living rooms of the West?
Good luck. Once we’ve nailed the racial cancer of television, we’ll go after Hollywood.
Oh, by the way, there were no token blacks, browns, yellows in this particular ad, which would be odd in the jews “diversity is wonderful” propaganda campaign at any other time, I’d guess, but obviously not when it comes to the “rewards” of childlessness scam. I could be wrong, of course. Those of you still choosing to subject yourselves to daily doses of the jew propaganda poison in the comfort of your own living rooms can let me know.
–
I really must applaud you, Andrew – you’re something else.
You observe that “No nation or people can be great without a legion of soldiers, construction workers and the mass of other people that are necessary to build, defend and pay the bills.” That’s true, at least as long as we have wars to fight. However, nothing precludes a rise in the average IQ of soldiers and construction workers (it would be a very good thing, wouldn’t it, if White soldiers and construction workers were actually smart enough to resist the attempts of the Jews et al to counterfactually indoctrinate them, which most of them currently are not). In any case, I now understand that what you and your wife are doing is…cynically churning out cannon fodder and hod-carriers. At some point, your kids may figure this out.
You write that “the ideas I have presented on the potential to increase food supplies are the majority position among experts, people with excellent credentials in their field.” First, I doubt that this is really the case, particularly as regards “majority”; the majority of scientists are too cautious to offer speculative pie-in-the-sky technology as a quick fix for urgent problems. Secondly, as I have already mentioned in another thread, credentials of the type on which you seem to be fixated can no longer be trusted.
These days, most people bother to obtain credentials (at great expense in time and money) only because those credentials are worth money when sold to the highest bidder. Thus, one cannot believe pie-in-the-sky carnival barkers calling themselves “scientists” just because they can flash an advanced degree or two, a well-padded job history, and a few glowing letters of reference from their fellow crooks and sellouts. One needs to look very carefully at the content of their opinions. After all, if things were still the way they’re supposed to be, Kevin MacDonald wouldn’t be quite so beleaguered by the consummate BS artists of academe.
You say that I’ve made questionable assumptions, including “all arable land on earth has been identified”. That’s absolutely true, at least given the present meaning of “arable”. The earth has been exhaustively photographed from orbit and its surface characteristics duly registered, and people have been crawling all over even the remotest parts of it for decades. To suppose that they’ve somehow managed to overlook vast tracts of potential farmland is a bit of a stretch, don’t you think?
You also say that I “dismiss hydroponics”. No, I don’t. If you like, you can build a greenhouse over your acre, if you can find the energy and materials, and install tanks, if you can get the water and nutrients with which to fill them, and you will still run into hard theoretical limits. These have to do with the fact – and I’m surprised that you missed this – that you will have relied on the production from a much larger land area to obtain your tanks, construction materials, energy, water, nutrients, and so on. People who think that we can rely on technologies intended for spaceships and geodesic domes to “feed the world” often don’t account for this little detail, whose importance I advise you not to underestimate.
Farming the sea is another pie-in-the-sky technology, especially when one considers that aquaculture is predicated on the collapse of natural ocean environments. As mariculture facilities are now run, they pose a threat to ocean habitat and wild fish populations. Farmed fish tend to escape into the wild, causing genetic pollution in wild stock; worse, the standard operating procedure is to feed carnivorous species like salmon with protein from wild fish, which of course merely converts one kind of fish into another and does absolutely nothing to reduce human dependence on the already badly overfished ocean. And let’s not forget that any intensive form of aquaculture that involves dense concentrations of sea life also creates a source of pollution and disease that is very hard to contain in the ocean environment.
Next, you say that “the only responsible way to expand fish farming is to establish a stringent environmental framework that takes the health of the wild ocean as seriously as the economic potential of the domesticated ocean. The success of the one must not be premised on the other.” How true! The problem is that we don’t yet know how to do this, and there is absolutely no guarantee that this problem is solvable. (Yeah, I know – you and your kids can chow down on delicious algae-burgers until the sea-cows come home! But there are still major problems.)
In short, Andrew, we have urgent overpopulation and undernourishment problems right now, and they are at least partially thanks to starry-eyed people who say “Damn the torpedoes, proceed at full throttle!” and then scour the Internet for any hopeful little scrap of futuristic hyper-optimism that might help bolster their case and justify their high-r reproductive behaviors. I’m sure that if you think about it a little, you will see that this is not exactly a secure, or brilliant, strategy for advancing into the future.
And now we come to what I consider your prize howler: “You are really making quite an assumption when you say that the earth is getting very, very close to its carrying capacity”. Yet, I just gave you data, and an equation, which imply exactly that! But despite my appeals to your intelligence, you have managed to completely ignore them.
Your adorable insouciance suggests a parable.
1. Henny Penny, a fluffy white hen, says “The sky is falling! The sky is falling!” She brandishes a clipboard covered with the mathematical chicken-scratchings that prove her case.
2. Chicken Lickin, a nearby rooster doing his high-r breeding business in order to preserve chickenkind, pries himself off another hen long enough to look up and respond “BS, sister. Sky’s still up there, just like always. NEEEXT!” Soon he is engaged in another frenetic attempt to solve the chicken-or-egg problem by putting each inside the other.
3. The sky falls, crushing Chicken Lickin, his hens, and all of his chirping descendants like bugs.
4. Meanwhile, Henny Penny has been forced to retreat into an underground CoG (Continuity-of-Government) facility, there to serve as a line-breeder for the Kosher chickens who managed to reserve most of its space for themselves while the Chicken Lickens of the world fussed and flapped like raw cadets at Colonel Sanders’ Thigh and Drumstick Academy on Cluck-n-Pluck Day.
You see, all of those dire warnings you’ve decided to ignore were based on a general factual situation, even if some of the numbers were wrong and the projected timescale was contracted. An intelligent person knows how to distinguish the factual situation – “in a world with finite resources and time-dependent extraction technology, population growth is inescapably limited” – from the numbers attached to it, e.g., a specific date for the inevitable global population crash. If a limit obviously exists for some process, an intelligent person doesn’t deny this on the grounds that some pundit of yore prematurely called out the wrong number.
Instead, an intelligent person looks at what he knows must be true, e.g. an equation like C=AF/K, and plays around with the numbers until he sees what’s happening. Then, if necessary, he gets his ass in gear and modifies his behavior to permit the survival of his kind, hopefully including himself and his own family. In so doing, he adapts to the real world and thereby enhances the survival prospects of him and his race.
Otherwise, he and his kin are destined for the Final Fricassee that all chickens secretly dread.
See how it all works yet?
Old news.
Gordon Gekko: That’s the one thing you have to remember about WASPs: they love animals and hate people
Wall Street, 1987
Heinous Henry,
+100 on that. I’ve quoted the same Evola passage on my blog many a time, but to no avail.
HH: “a paraphrase from Tom Metzger: ‘The problem is not enough Whites… it is too many Browns!!!’
I guess you mean not not enough.
Keep posting stuff like this i really like it
eurodele,
Why do you care so damned much about the World?
This site is for Pro-White people, and therefore why should we give a shit whether a few hundred million economic parasites in Africa starve to death at some point in the future because of what you precious formula says?
The question is whether America is near carrying capacity, and anyone except a goddamned self-pitying overly picky moron like you can see that we’ve never been further away from starvation than we are now.
Really, the average American spends a tiny percentage of his wealth on food, and in spite of this the average American would actually be HEALTHIER is he ate HALF as many calories per day than he does now.
So clearly, America could easily maintain 600 million people without the slightest difficulty, and even if all advance in the field of horticulture inexplicably halted tomorrow.
Also you’ll notice that all the Countries where even a minority of the population go hungry have one thing in common: Whites are not the majority.
So if you want to stop people in America from starving, stop Whites from becoming a minority.
One good way to stop Whites from becoming a minority is to have children.
I notice you haven’t responded to me pointing out to you the option on FreeSpermDonors where you can specify you’ll only donate to Heterosexual Woman, or even that you’ll only donate to Married Woman.
Typical population control nut behavior. You’ll seize on any reason to avoid reproducing, but ignore it if one of your reasons for not reproducing is exposed as utterly baseless and without merit.
you can see that we’ve never been further away from starvation than we are now.
the food we eat is unhealthy which is one reason for obeseity – corn fed beef w hormones, etc.
industrial, chemically fertizlized crops have less nutrients as well – so one can be fat and be ‘malnourished’ – or in our case, semi-poisoned.
Land is also important from another stand point -it is natural for whites to want open land, with lots in reserve, the ability for a man to own a few acres rather easily – both of which are imposibilities in high density countries – the more densely populated we are the less freedom we have and the more a society requires central control.
“So clearly, America could easily maintain 600 million people without the slightest difficulty, and even if all advance in the field of horticulture inexplicably halted tomorrow.”
Reginald, if the 600 million were all White people, it would be not so bad, far less bad than the future as it is projected to be of 200 million Whites and 300 million mostly-Mestizoes.
BUT, the ideal, in my opinion, is to eject those 300 million Mestizoes so that we 200 million Whites can enjoy a clean, uncrowded country with plenty of forests, clean and lovely streams, lakes, countryside and roads that are not jammed day-and-night and we all can own some private land — as it was in the 1950s.
Us 200 million have PLENTY of smart White men who can manufacture the weaponry necessary to convince the 300 million Mestizoes that Mexico’s a better place to be.
ALL we lack is the will.
Our real problem is Asian overpopulation. But since they’ve already got 3 billion +, they are so far ahead of us that even if the White birthrate were to skyrocket to become a billion White people in 50 years, they’d be billions ahead of us.
We can’t win by breeding. We must win by rediscovering our ethnocentricity and using our smarts and inventiveness to create weapons systems to let the Asians know, mess with us, we’ll nuke you again.
B’s right.
Incidentally, Reginald, in response to your outburst (!), I actually registered over at the fertility group you recommended on a tentative basis. To be honest, I don’t know whether I’ll do anything else; I’d have to talk it over with my wife, and then I’d have to somehow assure myself of total anonymity, since details relevant to my suitability as a donor might, in certain combinations, give away my identity to any sufficiently motivated amateur detective. (I wouldn’t be able to reveal much more than that I live somewhere in the central Midwest.)
Peace, White boy.
Listen to the Neko Case song. She hit the nail on the head in this tune. Also check out Aleander cockburns most recent counterpunch post about the enslavement and revolt of the killer whales.
@Eurodele,
Okay, lets talk about a real pie-in-the-sky food technology. You build a 270-foot tall ware-house type building, 1 acre in size. It is divided into 50 “stories” (similar to shelves), each 5 feet tall. Each story contains soil, an irrigation system, and UV lights, and a high-yield food crop is grown there (this is a tested and functional system currently). You then build a complex of these buildings, with the energy coming from nuclear power (with reprocessing and fast breeder reactors used, thus using little fuel and producting little waste). Water comes from reclaimed sewage from a nearby city. This is a system that would multiply arable land area 50X, so 1000 such buildings is equivalent to 50,000 arable acres. They could even be built underground. The system is tested, and their are plans available, why couldnt something like this work?
“You see, all of those dire warnings you’ve decided to ignore were based on a general factual situation, even if some of the numbers were wrong and the projected timescale was contracted.”
I recognize that the earth has a carrying capacity. However, a good case can be made that this is a far higher number than the earth’s current population. A reasonable figure for the earth’s carrying capacity is 15B, as some have suggested.
“In short, Andrew, we have urgent overpopulation and undernourishment problems right now”
There have always been, and probably always will be, food problems in the third world. But again, these are related to the low-IQ populations of those nations. Zimbabwe was doing well for a while with its White farmers, but after removing them, that nation now experiences food shortages.
To better understand the carrying capacity of the US, lets look at India again, a nation with an average IQ of 81 (according to
Lynn). In 1995, with a population of over 900M, the nation was a net food exporter (http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers20%5Cpaper1999.html). There was not a major problem with famine, as the government subsidizes food. India’s land area is one-third the size of the US. Think about it: even with its primitive farming practices, low IQ population and smaller size, it still fed almost 1B people! Even today, its still mostly self-sufficient, and is planning to be a net food exporter again by 2025.
Do you really suggest that the US, with three times the land area, its greater intellectual capacity, better infrastructure and a host of other advantages, could not equal what India is able to do? Even if our population was only as capable as India, the situation suggests that the US could feed 900M people with 3X the food that Indians lived on. But you know very well that the high-IQ population of the US is vastly more capable, and there are a vast array of potential ways to grow more food. In fact, if we were to somehow replace the population of India with Northern Europeans, that nation would fairly quickly rise to first-world status, in spite of the challenges.
200 years ago, Europeans on average lived on less quality food than the Indians do today. Their lives werent particularly horrible. If the US had its 1B Whites, there is no reason why the government would be any different. India has this, and its still basically a democracy. The average Indian is not a miserable, unhappy human being, either. They go about their lives, raise their families and are generally content. A future with 1B Whites living at the same level as the Indians do would be much preferred to a future where Whites are doomed to extinction.
Lastly, I have to second Reginald’s analysis. If worst came to worst, the US would take what food it needed, and the third world would be left holding the bag.
Andrew, I absolutedly have no doubt that smart White Americans could figure out how to feed 1 billion souls if they had to. I just think that daily life in that kind of overcrowded cluster f*** is no heaven on Earth for European-derived man.
We’re not Indians. We’re not adapted to living one on top of the next guy. We’re Euros. We need to each possess our own homes and some land, have access to nature and not live our lives stuck in a freeway jam.
200 million IS the ideal number of people in America, and they should be all White, and we should physically eject the mestizoes overrunning us back south of the border where they belong.
We only need find our ethnocentricity and will.
Our men are far smarter weapons inventors and better warriors than any other race, with kill rates of dozens or hundreds to one. Let’s play to our strengths.
Andrew, no one – least of all me, at this point – disputes your ability to cook up imaginative ways to combine construction materials, growing media, fresh air and water, plant nutrients, high-tech machinery, and above all energy, into agricultural powerhouses supposedly capable of blasting through all theoretical limits on agricultural production, thus enabling human population to double, nay, triple, without human civilization missing a beat!
But as you exercise your Promethean imagination, have you ever wondered why, if these dreams of yours are such practical means for the efficient, economical production of food, we don’t already see any of them in the real world? I mean, sure, we see greenhouses, a few hydroponic facilities, some scattered fish farms, and so on. But why, given all of your ingenious imagineering, do we not see anything like your creations dotting the landscape everywhere we look?
I think I may know the answer. I want you to try thinking of “food” not as something that just magically appears in New Jersey suburbs, coalesces on your plate, and leaps into your tummy whenever you feel hungry, but as a more or less generic substance that is conserved under certain chemical transformations the way energy is conserved under temporal displacement of a closed system. After all, in addition to the vitamins and minerals that are in it, its main value to us is that it contains the energy to fuel human metabolism and growth.
Now, as we know, energy cannot be caught, confined and concentrated without cost, and we also know that getting enough of it is already so difficult that most countries are short of it and must devote large portions of their economies to obtaining it. This often applies to fresh water as well. The situation is even more obvious regarding things like fertilizer, which are both finite and nonrenewable. In the US, we already import most of our fertilizer, and it is getting pricier by the day. In 2007, we already imported well over 50% of our nitrogen fertilizer and 90% of our potash. and developing countries are now competing with us for supplies.
Ever hear of the second law of thermodynamics? It’s a law of physics which says that the entropy of a closed macroscopic system never decreases, or equivalently, that there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine. What you are trying to do is the agricultural equivalent of building a perpetual motion machine. It sounds impressive, it looks fancy on paper, it is designed with the precision of a Swiss watch! But as long as you need fresh water, growing media packed with nutrients, and energy to run the ventilation and irrigation systems and all those high-wattage grow-lights inside it, it’s all just a daydream.
Now, you might be able to operate one of your agri-towers, or two of them, or maybe even a hundred of them for some finite amount of time. But pretty soon, you’re going to start running out of things that you need to keep them going, and the prices you will have to pay for these things will eventually rise to the point at which you might as well propose that the hungry masses dine in elegance and style on a generous diet of Dom Perignon, beluga caviar, pate de foie gras with truffles, and petits fours baked by Marie Antoinette herself. Or maybe soylent green.
Last but not least, as others have mentioned here, European mankind is not a school of sardines or a bacteria colony. We need freedom, space, the room to move without stepping on each other’s toes. It’s in our genes. Yet you talk as though you and your kids can be perfectly happy after some kind of Orwellian centralized planning bureau grabs every square inch of arable land and just about everything else on the planet in order to feed some ridiculous number of people, and herds everyone into steel-and-concrete hives where they lead lives not so different from those of of naked mole rats. (Naked mole rats may be pale and pink just like us, but that’s where the similarity ends.)
So my questions are these. (1) Are you and your kids really of European ancestry? (2) If so, how well do you think your descendants can adapt to extreme population densities of the kind you advocate without becoming psychologically indistinguishable from the people of India, China, or Mexico? (3) And if this is where we’re heading, then why all the fussing and fuming about “preserving our race and our culture”?
eurodele
“But why, given all of your ingenious imagineering, do we not see anything like your creations dotting the landscape everywhere we look?”
Because food is so cheap at this point in time that it isn’t worth the capital investment.
“If so, how well do you think your descendants can adapt to extreme population densities of the kind you advocate without becoming psychologically indistinguishable from the people of India, China, or Mexico?”
In Germany they’ve adapted to a population density more than triple ours without it turning them into Hindoos, Chinese, or Mexicans.
If anything, Germany is a nicer place to live than America is.
Crime rates are lower, for just one thing. And the murder rate is nearly six times higher in the US than in Germany.
“Incidentally, Reginald, in response to your outburst (!), I actually registered over at the fertility group you recommended on a tentative basis.”
That’s really good to hear. These sorts of sites are an option that far more high IQ White Men should be giving serious consideration to.
“agricultural powerhouses supposedly capable of blasting through all theoretical limits on agricultural production, thus enabling human population to double, nay, triple, without human civilization missing a beat!”
Exactly! I also forgot to mention in my last post that unlimited energy could be obtained from giant solar arrays out in space, beaming it down to earth using microwaves. But, I wasnt sure if you would buy that one.
“have you ever wondered why, if these dreams of yours are such practical means for the efficient, economical production of food, we don’t already see any of them in the real world?”
As Reginald noted, this goes back to economics. At low food prices, an elaborate system requiring energy cannot compete with standard agriculture. It would be profitable if food prices were to double or triple though. The marketplace is an amazing institution. Since you have been kind enough to teach me about IQ variance, I should return the favor by teaching you about the factors of supply, demand and price, and how they operate in encouraging innovation and substitution. My pie-in-the-sky scenario is just one example of a method to grow more food. When prices rise, a multitude of food producing methods that are not profitable at present can be expected to become common. You could expect the backyards of America to become fruitful once again, and the greatest minds in the world would be put to work to find solutions. Theoretically it is possible to build a closed system, where sewage is recycled completely into agriculture, etc. While this is probably not achievable, there are many ways to increase efficiency, such as using self-composting crappers (these are also proven to work, providing nutrient-rich composted crap).
At any rate, assuming that the great minds of our day are too dumbed down, and agricutural technology and methods have stagnated, we still have the shining example of India to inspire us.
“European mankind is not a school of sardines or a bacteria colony. We need freedom, space, the room to move without stepping on each other’s toes. It’s in our genes.”
If the US had a population of 1B, our population density would still be less than half that of Western Europe. Do you really think that the West Europeans have it so bad? It seems quite livable to me over there. You seem to be clinging to this dark end-of-the-world scenario, rather than evaluating the high population future scenario in more reasonable terms. One might say your imagination is not lacking either, though it has a more apocalyptic bent, as opposed to my grounded, steadfast realism mixed with prudent imagination.
“(1) Are you and your kids really of European ancestry?”
Oops, I thought this was a site for Siamese Nationalists. This is embarrassing.
“(2) If so, how well do you think your descendants can adapt to extreme population densities of the kind you advocate without becoming psychologically indistinguishable from the people of India, China, or Mexico?”
I doubt that very much evolution is occurring due to living in high population density areas (most people are having children, not just a select few who thrive in crowded areas). Humans are very adaptable. Again though, the “extreme population density” you are referring to is less than 1/2 that of Germany.
“(3) And if this is where we’re heading, then why all the fussing and fuming about “preserving our race and our culture”?”
You are making another assumption that 1B people in the US would create a totalitarian hellhole. Even in China, with its 1.3B, circumstances are still livable (population wise). Im sure your relative enjoys living over there. A very important issue here is that the US must be able to compete as a superpower if it wishes to continue promoting its “Pax Americana”. Without our influence, the world would probably sink back to its normal warring, chaotic ways, likely with very bad consequences.
An important book that basically foretells the future is “IQ and the Wealth of Nations”. China, with its relatively high-IQ population, can be expected to rise to have a standard of living similar to Taiwan or Korea. Two hundred million Americans cannot compete with 1.3B Chinese. An important element of our survival is our national security, which is based in large part on the wealth produced by the nation, which is in turn based in large part on the population of that nation.
Since you have given me some questions, let me ask you one as well: You are surely aware that White children are a mere 5% of the world’s population. Many nations of Western Europe have White birth rates approaching 1 child per woman, meaning that each generation halves itself. Whites do not reproduce themselves even in the US. So what is your solution to this? Have even less children? That sounds like a good strategy to you?
But capital investment isn’t the real problem, now is it, boys? After all, the Jews who run the world’s central banks can print as much money as they like in the form of usurious debt to be slavishly paid off by the Euro-American Golem in blood, sweat, and tears, without creating anything of real value whatsoever. As I made perfectly clear, the limiting factors in agriculture are fundamentally independent of money. They consist of natural quantities that money can’t buy once their supplies run out – topsoil, water, energy, fertilizer, and so on.
This tendency of yours to fall for the time-worn, low-IQ switcheroo whereby things like natural resources, public infrastructure, and industrial plant are gradually replaced in the minds of gullible goys with effortlessly-minted Jew money, and hard science is replaced with “economics”, is quite an old story. I’m surprised that either of you still falls for it, since it is precisely how certain highly-placed Jews have managed to swindle our race out of nearly everything that our ancestors carved and constructed, at tremendous cost, from the real material environment of our planet. It’s why you dutifully tithe to them every year at tax time…to rent back from them what your ancestors once left to you on the mistaken assumption that their own precious descendants would have the brains and balls not to fall for the transparent scam from which they had courageously escaped.
Incidentally, Reginald, the White population of Germany – now swamped with Muslims and other non-Germans hostile to native European culture – is divided into (1) people who are freaking out about the situation, and (2) people who have psychologically degenerated to the point at which they cannot be recognized as “Germans” in the traditional sense. So kindly spare us any further delusions about how Germany lights our way into the overcrowded future. The majority of good Germans are instinctive non-overbreeders who are already sick to death of living in the middle of the big, overcrowded mudpie into which Germany has been transmogrified around their ears, and every other German is…simply a mess.
Finally, Andrew, you ask me a question: “Whites do not reproduce themselves even in the US. So what is your solution to this? Have even less children? That sounds like a good strategy to you?”
I made it perfectly clear that I wanted children…still do, to some extent. However, unlike many Whites, I cared a bit too strongly about their health, intelligence, and comfort to simply “do what comes naturally”. To put it bluntly, my problem was this: I don’t have enough kiss-ass in my nature to crawl on my knees to some liberated, mud-sharking piece of Jew-bait and say “Please, please, goddess – just bear my children! I forgive you for being a liberated, indoctrinated, interracially promiscuous, TV-watching bimbo! If you like, you can divorce me, take my kids away from me, and clean me out! But please, please, please! Don’t deny me the privilege of kissing your aerobicized patootie and making good little PC, properly multiculturalized babies with you!”
People wonder why our race seems to be tripping over its own feet in its eagerness to dive head first into the evolutionary toilet bowl. I submit to you that the answer really has very little to do with “overly selective” people like me. It’s at least partially because our culture is already so far gone that decent White women are no longer nearly as plentiful as once they were, non-castrated White men are no longer nearly as plentiful as once they were, and the most intelligent among us, as concerned for our race as we may be, secretly can’t stand the majority of our kinsmen and kinswomen any more.
From the viewpoint of the most intelligent white males, the quickest and most direct solution would be to tie each of the egotistical little dimwits called “White women” down for a few minutes and gently impregnate her with the sperm of a highly fit White male. But we are morally, culturally, and legally prohibited from doing that. So until a scintilla of evolutionary good sense manages to smuggle itself into their moronic little heads – and I duly apologize to all of the intelligent White women out there, whose rarity makes you all the more valuable – we’re between an evolutionary rock and a hard place.
I’d like to be able to tell you that uncritical, low-IQ males can fill in for fitter males in the gene pool, but that simply wouldn’t be honest. They can’t. So once again. please breed responsibly. The welfare of your progeny could depend on it.
“Many nations of Western Europe have White birth rates approaching 1 child per woman, meaning that each generation halves itself.”
Seems at least a likely possibility to me that the collapsing birthrate is due to several factors, that if corrected, the birth rate could quickly bounce back.
1. Perhaps Germany’s very overcrowding is what is driving the desire not to have kids. Some underlying natural population-control mechanism is manifesting itself as “selfishness” “consumerism” ‘feminism.” The White birthrate is halving itself, so the population will drop, but it’s a fallacy to project trends to infinity and assume the halving will continue until there are no Whites left. If living conditions improve, the young women can all have 3 or 4 or 8. Our people have done it before, like after the Black Death in Europe killed 25% of the population.
Personal anecdote: I live in Wyoming. Appreciate the vast open spaces, clear air, outdoor fun. I visited New York City. People climbing over people. Constant noise. Grime. No sun, only constant shade from highrises. Yuck. THAT’s what you call “livable”? THAT’S the future you want for White man so he can compete with Yellow man? I’ve lived in CA. 2 hr. / one way freeway commutes are no fun. No time for family, only stress. THAT’s what you want for Euro Man?
I say, nuke ‘em if we must. Money for nukes? Get rid of our economic parasites and watch the Can-DO spirit of White man reassert itself. 200 million smart White people can certainly produce enough wealth to build enough nuclear-warhead-tipped ICBMs and warships to protect ourselves. We already did it once, with only 150 million people.
“But capital investment isn’t the real problem, now is it, boys? After all, the Jews who run the world’s central banks can print as much money as they like in the form of usurious debt to be slavishly paid off by the Euro-American Golem in blood, sweat, and tears, without creating anything of real value whatsoever.”
*********************************************
Yeah, they can do that.
But would they then spend it on Capital Investment in a Business that has very low profits because of the low price of food?
Obviously it would make more sense to pocket the cash instead.
The point of saying there isn’t enough Capital Investment for higher cost forms of Agriculture is not to say that there isn’t enough Capital out there to pay for the higher cost Agriculture.
The point is that even if our Economy was swimming is Capital, no one would blow it on Investing in a Business where the product is too cheap to ever get your money back.
Even if you’re a Jew who stole the Money from Goyim using the Federal Reserve or whatever to extract it from the Taxpayers and/or China, there no reason to invest your ill-gotten gains in a loser industry where the market is saturated to a freakish degree and where producing more of the product would entail spending more money per unit than the companies already in the Business are spending.
Maybe it would make sense if you could turn it into a scam to scam the rubes, like the Dot Com Bubble, but that only works with industries that are a whole lot sexier than growing food out of dirt and mud.
“I made it perfectly clear that I wanted children…still do, to some extent. However, unlike many Whites, I cared a bit too strongly about their health, intelligence, and comfort to simply ‘do what comes naturally’. To put it bluntly, my problem was this: I don’t have enough kiss-ass in my nature to crawl on my knees to some liberated, mud-sharking piece of Jew-bait and say ‘Please, please, goddess – just bear my children! I forgive you for being a liberated, indoctrinated, interracially promiscuous, TV-watching bimbo! If you like, you can divorce me, take my kids away from me, and clean me out! But please, please, please! Don’t deny me the privilege of kissing your aerobicized patootie and making good little PC, properly multiculturalized babies with you!’”
***********************************************
Interesting point.
One thing to bear in mind is that the sort of White Woman you’re describing here isn’t the kind of White Woman who’ll be having many children anyway.
Also the last way to knock that sort of woman up is to say “please goddess”.
What they really want is basically to be treated like dirt by a jerk-off Alpha stud.
What you should’ve been doing was wearing a Bandana, acting like a Tough Guy, and Negging like the Wind…
“From the viewpoint of the most intelligent white males, the quickest and most direct solution would be to tie each of the egotistical little dimwits called “White women” down for a few minutes and gently impregnate her with the sperm of a highly fit White male.”
Sounds good.
“But we are morally, culturally, and legally prohibited from doing that.”
*****************************************************
Dammit!
“So until a scintilla of evolutionary good sense manages to smuggle itself into their moronic little heads – and I duly apologize to all of the intelligent White women out there, whose rarity makes you all the more valuable – we’re between an evolutionary rock and a hard place.”
***************************************
Interestingly the White Woman who accept sperm donations seem much more interested in things like a man having a high IQ or working in an intellectually demanding industry.
That’s why the kinds of fake macho losers who are banging sluts left and right would never stand a chance in the Sperm Donation game.
Also this explains why the only High IQ White Scientist to successful implant his seed in a female celebrity was the 160 IQ one who donated the sperm used to produce Jodie Foster’s children.
There’s just something about the Sperm Donation process that brings the Eugenicist out of Women, possibly because their unconscious mind doesn’t have to worry about such silly questions as whether the Man’s political opinions will hurt her social standing or whether she’d enjoy having sex with him for decades into the future.
Even if a Woman is too promiscuous to actually have a chance of having sex with the father of her child decades into the future, if her pregnancy plan involves having sex the libidinal parts of her unconscious mind will desperately try to calculate whether a man is Alpha enough to keep her happily plowed over the long term.
Of course if a man actually is Alpha he’ll probably leave her after not very long, but most females are too stupid and egotistical to understand this.
“Incidentally, Reginald, the White population of Germany – now swamped with Muslims and other non-Germans hostile to native European culture – is divided into (1) people who are freaking out about the situation, and (2) people who have psychologically degenerated to the point at which they cannot be recognized as ‘Germans’ in the traditional sense. So kindly spare us any further delusions about how Germany lights our way into the overcrowded future.”
It is complete and total idiocy to blame Germany’s considerable present problems on high population density.
During Hitler’s Reign the Germans had a High Birth Rate, Racial and Cultural Confidence, and a tremendous degree of physical courage.
And guess what?
During that time Germany only had 18% fewer people than it has now!
Just before World War II Germany had 69 Million People, which means their Population Density of 500 people per Square Mile was 700% more than America’s today.
This means that America could have 2.1 Billion People, and still be no more crowded than one of the most Pro-White and Cultivated Societies to ever exist.
And the thing is that though Hitler wanted living space, it was because his reading of Malthus caused him to envision the German Race greatly expanding its numbers over time.
So when America has 2.1 Billion People, I’ll follow Hitler’s example and start calling for America to either expand its territory or reduce its birth rate.
In the mean time, I see no reason to oppose the expansion of Humanity on our territory other than the fact that the people doing the expanding are our Racial Rivals and for the most part our Moral Inferiors.
Hispanics who have Children should be deported, or at least be forced to have all their Government Assistance cut off.
Also, all Blacks should be sterilized, or at least forced to become Homosexuals.
But Reginald, I am an “alpha stud”. I’m around 250 pounds and conspicuously muscular. I have a deep and assertive voice. I’ve been employed as a cowboy and construction worker (and in other more refined. more cerebral fields.) I”ve ridden a bike for many years, the kind with swastikas painted on it (commissioned by the previous owner, a gang biker I knew). I have a decent-sized farm which I work entirely by myself with the help of four tractors and other large machines.
Given a total lack of conscience, I could have knocked up many women. Perhaps unfortunately for posterity, I couldn’t bring myself to do that, especially not with the kind of women amenable to that kind of undemanding reproductive arrangement. The children would have been so disadvantaged that as far as concerns my personal reproductive utility, it would have been a waste of my time. Many of the others were actually put off by what they considered the excessive masculinity or even the brutishness of my character and attitudes. Those were the ones whose asses I’d have had to kiss, and in the final analysis, they just weren’t smart enough to merit the effort and humility. I consider myself very lucky to have met my wife.
Regarding the “freespermdonors” email list, I’ve been over the first few pages and have not uncovered a single mention of IQ. The prospective recipients – even the heterosexuals – just don’t seem to care, and neither do the donors. Worse, many of them don’t write in a way that screams “intelligence” at you. I get the impression that they might have a very hard time caring for a any child at all, much less properly nurturing one with superior intelligence.
So you see, we do indeed have a problem here, and there’s no easy solution in sight.
But anyway…thanks for the tips, studley.
“During Hitler’s Reign the Germans had a High Birth Rate, Racial and Cultural Confidence, and a tremendous degree of physical courage.”
Right. And the Germans were libidinous and busy baby-making precisely BECAUSE they thought they’d win the war, and thus have living-space to spread their growing population out into.
But it’s a viable hypothesis, when a population is (or feels) trapped and the pop density is high then the baby-making stops.
“So when America has 2.1 Billion People, I’ll follow Hitler’s example and start calling for America to either expand its territory or reduce its birth rate.”
Nah. Better the other way around. America expands its territory and the baby-making rate will naturally take off. How about this, as a purely hypothetical intellectual exercise, of course: We nuke China now. Send them no aid to rebuild. When the last Chinaman dies, we wait a bit for the background radiation level to die down, move in to the newly empty territory and commence making lots and lots and lots of White babies.
“Given a total lack of conscience, I could have knocked up many women. Perhaps unfortunately for posterity, I couldn’t bring myself to do that, especially not with the kind of women amenable to that kind of undemanding reproductive arrangement. The children would have been so disadvantaged that as far as concerns my personal reproductive utility, it would have been a waste of my time.”
Yeah but the thing to understand that if you don’t knock them up, some other much stupider guy will just knock them up instead because most Alpha Studs other than you aren’t very high IQ at all.
Therefore the children of these Women will even more disadvantaged.
What I’m saying is that your decision constituted a tremendous opportunity cost.
I guess when you think about it, it’s a real shame that being conscientious can be such a Darwinian Disadvantage nowadays.
It certainly wasn’t like that in the Victorian Era, for example.
This is a problem we see all over the place, where the in many ways best people are so morally developed that it stops them from competing in the ways needed to win.
It’s like when the great British Politician Enoch Powell refused to run for Prime Minister for the sake of some moral scruple, leaving England in the hands are a far inferior man who helped lead the Country to a living hell where untold Myriads of Innocent people have died for no reason.
Plus if he was Prime Minister the quality of his Leadership would’ve been diluted by the inferior people in Parliament.
But in spite of this, Enoch Powell made a horrible mistake.
Though our understanding of this truth shouldn’t cause us to deny him credit for his virtues.
“Many of the others were actually put off by what they considered the excessive masculinity or even the brutishness of my character and attitudes. Those were the ones whose asses I’d have had to kiss, and in the final analysis, they just weren’t smart enough to merit the effort and humility.”
Yeah, that’s understandable. To pretend to be inferior in terms of your masculinity, as opposed to pretending to be superior, would be very demeaning.
I had no idea you were muscular enough to provoke a fear response in some types Women. It’s a stupid reason for a Woman to not be attracted to you, but the thing is that Feminism has taught all too many females to fear really strong masculinity, at least of a feral sort, when of course what they should fear is signs of degeneracy and/or African Descent.
It probably isn’t all that relevant, but gym meatheads often have problems in the Women department because there too far outside the average to be considered attractive to the average woman.
Instinctual bias toward assortive mating and all that sort of thing, you know (even the weirdoes who mate outside their race have been found to mate assortively on things like height, weight, and personality).
“Regarding the ‘freespermdonors’ email list, I’ve been over the first few pages and have not uncovered a single mention of IQ. The prospective recipients – even the heterosexuals – just don’t seem to care, and neither do the donors.”
To be honest you don’t seem to understand how a website like this works.
I have no personal experience with this particular one, but how it usually works is that the Website is basically just a way for a Woman to get in contact with a number of potential donors that she can correspond with by e-mail to see if there’s any she wants to use.
The ones interested in IQ will ask you about it during that part of the process.
There are other Websites I didn’t tell you about where more information on things like Education, Income, Work History, Interests, Personality Traits, and Medical History are prompted as a requirement for even being in the database.
To be frank, I wouldn’t even consider a donor database of which the make-or-break criteria include education (irrelevant to genetic fitness), income (again irrelevant), and work history.
Let me explain. Part of the problem with human evolution at this point is that we have distanced ourselves from nature, and cheated natural selection, by replacing genetic fitness with artificial fitness criteria which have come to depend, for example, on one’s psychological tolerance for Jewish indoctrination.
Whites who are highly intolerant of Jewish indoctrination have greatly reduced chances of success in in academia, and this is highly likely to affect their income and work history. For example, my present farming income is much lower than it would be if I could still stomach working for the miscreants now in charge of American society.
One might as well ask donors whether they are willing to brown-nose their inferiors and accept salaries from them, and let them donate their seed only if they answer “Yes!” Anyone who calls that “eugenics” had better get himself a dictionary.
But what you suggest might be worth a look anyway.
“But capital investment isn’t the real problem, now is it, boys?”
If we are going back to my example of food manufacturing using 1-acre large buildings, the capital investment is not an insurmountable obstacle. Steel and concrete warehouses are affordable to build.
” the limiting factors in agriculture are fundamentally independent of money. They consist of natural quantities that money can’t buy once their supplies run out – topsoil, water, energy, fertilizer, and so on.”
Okay, lets look at that:
Topsoil: As you know, the “fertile crescent” was fertile 6000 years ago, and is still doing fine. I have a garden which uses dirt from a construction site mixed with some compost from the dump, and things grow nicely. Dirt and compost are easily obtainable.
Water: As you know, most water used by humans is wasted. If water from showers and sinks was piped to treatment facilities, it would be enough to supply the agricultural needs of that population in most cases. In any case, Canada has abundant water supplies that could be piped into the states.
Energy: This is also a false limitation. We have 46 million tons of currently available nuclear fuel, which is roughly equal to 2,400 years of world oil usage (using modern plants that have just 10% efficiency in releasing fissile material). Solar power also has potential. A solar farm the size of Wales in the Sahara could power all of Europe, for example.
Fertilizer: If most human excrement was composted (a proven, inexpensive system), this alone would provide a great part of agricultural needs. However, only a tiny part of fossil fuels are used to make inorganic fertilizer (5% of Natural Gas production). Since the US alone has 250 gigatons of proven coal reserves, which can be used to make fertilizer, there must be enough for 10,000 years of fertilizer production at least.
Your limitation of capital or other items just doesnt stand up to scrutiny. There is the concrete, steel, dirt, water, energy and so forth available, as well as the expertise and workmen to put it all together. If there was a real need to do so, we could absolutely make food factories like I have described.
“The majority of good Germans are instinctive non-overbreeders who are already sick to death of living in the middle of the big, overcrowded mudpie”
They are undergoing demographic suicide. If this continues for another century, Germany will be a corpse. This hardly seems like a recommendation for a people who want their kind to survive.
“However, unlike many Whites, I cared a bit too strongly about their health, intelligence, and comfort to simply “do what comes naturally”.”
So you had no kids? And you think that is responsible behavior on your part? I dont think its much to crow about.
“I don’t have enough kiss-ass in my nature to crawl on my knees to some liberated, mud-sharking piece of Jew-bait and say “Please, please, goddess – just bear my children!”
With an attitude like that, its no wonder you had problems attracting potential mates. Women are selected by nature to be very good at being wives and mothers. Thats 75,000 years of natural selection. Yes, there are some bad apples out there. But the majority of women are of good quality, and there are millions of absolutely amazing ladies. I am surrounded every day with beautiful, caring, decent women everywhere I go. Most single women would give their eye-teeth for a good man.
“as concerned for our race as we may be, secretly can’t stand the majority of our kinsmen and kinswomen any more.”
Quite frankly, you sound like a dick. If you cant stand your kinfolk, and despise them, perhaps you should contemplate whether you are the problem, not them. Personally, Im glad I didnt have a dad like you. And I wouldnt let any of my daughters marry a guy like you either.
“I’d like to be able to tell you that uncritical, low-IQ males can fill in for fitter males in the gene pool, but that simply wouldn’t be honest.”
Every low-IQ redneck out there who at least has common sense is a benefit in some way to the race. Every warm body on our side helps. For example, if there were a million retards, who donated 10% of their Social Security check to TOO each month, that would be $70M per month for Dr. MacDonald to flood the internet with, which alone would probably be enough to ignite the awakening.
Since the US is a democracy, every vote is important. I dont see how having a high birthrate would change the average IQ of the population very much. Yes, it helps to have high IQ people. However, without the masses, the elite are nothing. And as long as there is a White race, however low-IQ it becomes, there is the potential of reversing this in a few generations using artificial insemination.
Sheesh, Andrew. You’re wearing me out.
Again, my point is that capital investment isn’t the real problem. To Jewish banking oligarchs, money is cheaper than dirt in terms of actual labor. After all, dirt must be located and shoveled.
The fertile crescent is still fertile because at the present time, water and fertilizer are still available there. This does not imply that they will remain available. In fact, we can see that they won’t.
Too bad waste water now tends to be contaminated with everything from pesticide to Prozac. Many of the contaminants are not removed by treatment facilities. Canada, BC at least, has already tried to overcharge us for water; we can’t even afford to water California’s illegal Mexican immigrants that way.
A solar farm the size of Wales would take an equal chunk of land out of circulation without even replacing the food energy thereby lost from plant photosynthesis. Proposals to rely on nuclear energy are stupid to the point of insanity. First there’s the fact that they are break-even at best, especially when the cost of waste disposal is considered. Worse, the waste can’t be safely disposed of at all. I could go on.
The coal-to-fertilizer idea may have promise. But even so, converting coal into fertilizer would take … you guessed it, energy. Forgive me, but you sometimes remind me of one of those cartoon characters who slams a dresser drawer shut only to have another drawer pop out and whack him in the kneecaps.
You say that “my” “limitation of capital” doesnt stand up to scrutiny. But it’s you and Reginald who have placed the emphasis on capital expenditure, not me.
You say that in a century, Germany will be a corpse, and that this hardly seems like a recommendation for a people who want their kind to survive. No, it isn’t…not from me, anyway. I suggest that you talk to Reginald if you want to argue about that.
No, I had no kids. Yes, I’m sure that this was responsible behavior on my part. I’ve already explained why.
Attracting mates was never a problem for me. Approving them as permanent partners and agreeing to their terms usually was.
When it comes to women, there are levels of “good”. “Good” for you means a woman capable of having and raising kids…apparently, almost any woman at all. For me, it means someone who not only won’t degrade my own genetic stock beyond the point of no return, but who has attitudes, interests, and behavior patterns that I can stomach long enough to raise a family with her. That’s a tall order these days.
You’re not the first person who ever called me a dick. (Of course, there was a price to pay for some of those who did.) But these days, it’s just a matter of keeping your eyes and ears open. After all, if you agreed with everything your racial kinsmen are doing out there, you wouldn’t be over here hoping to better the prospects of White humanity.
Judging by your output thus far, none of your daughters would qualify for a guy like me. They’d need another 30 or 40 IQ points to even get into conversation range. Try upbreeding gradually for a couple hundred years, then get back to me.
I’ll bet I know a lot more rednecks than you – these days, I do a little farming – and some of them are pretty damned mean and stupid. (Of course, others are great guys.)
The problem with White “retards” is that even if they could afford to donate to TOQ, they can’t understand a single word written by its contributors.
The true elite (as opposed to the socioeconomic elite) can get along without the masses. The reverse is not true. I agree regarding AI, but only with the right donors and recipients. Unfortunately, we probably don’t have “a few generations” left before it’s too late to start.
“1. Perhaps Germany’s very overcrowding is what is driving the desire not to have kids. Some underlying natural population-control mechanism is manifesting itself as “selfishness” “consumerism” ‘feminism.” The White birthrate is halving itself, so the population will drop, but it’s a fallacy to project trends to infinity and assume the halving will continue until there are no Whites left. If living conditions improve, the young women can all have 3 or 4 or 8. Our people have done it before, like after the Black Death in Europe killed 25% of the population.”
The problem with Western Europe is that after the Whites are a minority, they lose all power. In fact, as the percent of minorities grows, so does the level of immigration, as the Muslims are in favor of more Muslims. This is why a large White population is so critical. My thinking is that the biggest factors affecting the birthrate are the high taxes (making it very expensive to bear children) in conjuction with the “liberal” and “politically correct” view of world overpopulation that we see in this forum (where you are made to feel guilty for breeding).
“Personal anecdote: I live in Wyoming. Appreciate the vast open spaces, clear air, outdoor fun.”
I bought 40 acres of Wyoming land on ebay a few years ago, 10 miles west of Casper. I still havent visited the state though. I would like to build a ranch there someday. It sounds like a great place to live.
“Get rid of our economic parasites and watch the Can-DO spirit of White man reassert itself. 200 million smart White people can certainly produce enough wealth to build enough nuclear-warhead-tipped ICBMs and warships to protect ourselves.”
National security is more than just having nuclear weapons though. Currently, the US is the top dog, and its economic might is one of its most powerful tools to get things done. The US can strong-arm other nations into nuclear non-proliferation treaties, establish alliances across the globe that discourage warfare, and so forth. Denmark, with its small population, can do none of these things. No one pays any attention to the Danes. Even Canada, with its wealth of resources, can be safely ignored. The basis of the US’s wealth, and therefore its strength, is its large population. The US has done a lot behind the scenes preventing terrorism, especially the nuclear variety. We can spend huge sums doing this because of our wealth. Each year, as technology grows, weapons of mass destruction become cheaper to obtain.
Imagine a future where China has eclipsed a multicultural US. It is almost a foregone conclusion that China’s GDP will overtake that of the US, as it has recently overtaken Germany, and will soon overtake Japan. The only real law of international relations is the Might makes Right. If the US goes the way of Brazil, and the Red Dragon rises triumphant, the Chinese will be able to order the world as they will. Do not expect them to be the kindhearted steward that the US has generally been. What they need, they will take. When they need resources, they can easily colonize Africa (which already has over 1M Chinese colonists).
Yes, the US homeland is secure from China’s aggression, but as we become indebted to them, and lose our White majority, we will become more of a client state. That is extremely risky for us. A better future scenario would be a US with sufficient population to match or exceed China’s GDP, and thus maintain our power and influence in the world, so that we can pursue our interests, and not become another Canada.
@Eurodele,
“A solar farm the size of Wales would take an equal chunk of land out of circulation without even replacing the food energy thereby lost from plant photosynthesis.”
The point is that desert areas (especially those near the equator) have a lot of energy-producing potential.
“Proposals to rely on nuclear energy are stupid to the point of insanity. First there’s the fact that they are break-even at best, especially when the cost of waste disposal is considered. Worse, the waste can’t be safely disposed of at all. I could go on.”
Modern nuclear plants are over 10X as efficient as the 1970-1980 versions in the US today, and are quite safe. France’s nuclear program shows that this is quite viable. France re-processes spent fuel so that it can be used again (and again). This creates 20% of the normal waste, all of it low-level stuff (reprocessing is illegal currently in the US due to terrorism concerns, so we end up with mountains of waste).
“The coal-to-fertilizer idea may have promise. But even so, converting coal into fertilizer would take … you guessed it, energy. ”
I am not sure if you are kidding here, but the energy for the process comes from the coal itself. You turn the goal into natural gas (using catalytic gassification), then create standard synthetic nitrogen fertilizer from the natural gas.
“Forgive me, but you sometimes remind me of one of those cartoon characters who slams a dresser drawer shut only to have another drawer pop out and whack him in the kneecaps.”
I forgive you. Its amusing that you think you are winning the argument though.
“When it comes to women, there are levels of “good”. “Good” for you means a woman capable of having and raising kids…apparently, almost any woman at all.”
One of the requirements is that she must have big jugs.
” For me, it means someone who not only won’t degrade my own genetic stock beyond the point of no return, but who has attitudes, interests, and behavior patterns that I can stomach long enough to raise a family with her. That’s a tall order these days.”
Something tells me you are not the easiest person in the world to get along with. Perhaps you would agree.
“You’re not the first person who ever called me a dick.”
I guess I mean that you are sort of a misanthrope. Assuming you do in fact have a high IQ, it seems to be common that profoundly gifted people often have trouble relating to others. I knew such a person in high school, he had a very difficult time, getting kicked around and ridiculed.
“Judging by your output thus far, none of your daughters would qualify for a guy like me.”
My mom says I got a 98 on my IQ test, and she was very proud that I got an A. So don’t underestimate my brain smarts cuz Im not as think as you dumb I am.
Anyway, high IQ is great, and its certainly something to be proud of, but its not the ultimate test of biological fitness. Actual achievement speaks a lot louder, and I am wondering if you are all IQ and no bite. What is your IQ anyway? Do you really think that you stand out at TOO or TOQ? There is no shortage of gifted people on the staff of either. Dr. MacDonald must be in the 160 range (professors being the highest IQ occupation). Its not the vocabulary he uses or type of writing that betrays this, but rather his ability to see into the heart of the matter, and his use of good judgement and common sense.
“I agree regarding AI, but only with the right donors and recipients.”
Getting back to your eugenics proposal, why would the recipient matter so much? Why wouldn’t it be beneficial for a 100 IQ lady to be impregnated with 180 IQ “seed” (assuming both individuals are otherwise genetically fit)? Do you happen to know how IQ would be affected in such a situation? My guess is that the children’s IQ would tend to be an average of the parents, unless either parent’s IQ was a major outlier from his or her family line.
“Unfortunately, we probably don’t have “a few generations” left before it’s too late to start.”
Its never too late until the game is over. And the game isnt over until Whites are down to just a few million, which even in a very bad case scenario, wont be for over 2 centuries.
Andrew,
According to the eminent Prof. Richard Lynn, if a Woman with an IQ of 100 has a baby where the father has an IQ of 160, the child will average out to having an IQ of 130.
That’s better than 97.42% of the White Population.
So if the father had an IQ of 180, the child would probably average out to 140 and be better than 99.62% of the White Population.
Andrew, you’re asking people to take your word for it that solar cell technology offers a viable solution to global energy (and related agricultural) problems, whereas nothing of the kind is yet the case. Even if equatorial deserts have energy-harvesting potential, the burden of proof is on you to show that it is enough to significantly increase the planetary carrying capacity.
For example, you might want to think about the maximum distance for efficient power transmission in the modern power grid – the equator is a long way from most of North America and Europe. (Beyond a certain distance, transmission costs mount rapidly.) And what happens down at the solar energy farm when the sun goes down? In particular, you might want to tell us how you plan to store electrical power on the global scale you seem to be imagining until such a time as it can be used (no, a convenient sandstorm doesn’t always appear at dusk so that you can switch to windmills). These are rather more serious problems than you seem to think they are, and there are others where those came from.
Modern nuclear power plants (1) are inherently unsafe (think Chernobyl and nuclear terrorism); (2) require enriched uranium, of which the global supply is limited and which takes a lot of time and energy to mine and refine; (3) produce dirty and dangerous waste for which no satisfactory disposal technology has ever been devised. Your wishful claim that nuclear waste can be safely and endlessly recycled inspires very little confidence, if only because it flies in the face of real-world experience and engineering. (Even if you think that nuclear power is tres chic because France and other European countries use fission reactors, the actual reason is that their backs are against the wall – they have no other way to make power, and would eliminate their fission reactors in a heartbeat if they could afford it.)
Like I said, manufacturing nitrogen fertilizer from coal (among the several kinds which are necessary) may have promise, but that says nothing about the actual efficiency of the process. I suspect that this would be a very costly way to produce nitrogen fertilizer. Such costs are superficially monetary, but they always come down to…something else that you can’t have if and when you need it, e.g., more energy from natural gas. Again, you slam one drawer of an overfull dresser, another pops out and whacks you in the schnozz. It doesn’t take a genius to see that we’ve just about run out of “low hanging fruit”, technologically speaking. Your whole notion that we can afford to rely on pie-in-the-sky technology is simply unrealistic.
Look, here’s what happens. People complain about running out of things. Some reporter finds a scientist or an engineer and asks him what can be done. At first, the scientist is flummoxed. But the reporter is tapping his pencil on the desk and staring, so the engineer scratches his head and says, “Well, that’s a real tough situation. I suppose we might start thinking along the lines of X. But then again, in order to do X, we’ll need to solve a whole bunch of other problems, like (blah, blah, blah).” Then the reporter puts out his story, glossing over the “other problems” for impact. Then a guy like you comes along, gets himself into an argument, furiously searches the Net for anything to support his case, finds the article, fails to notice any mention whatsoever of other problems, and declares the situation resolved.
You’ve got to learn not to do that.
I must say, Andrew, you really had me going when you passionately and empathically declared that “the majority of women are of good quality, and there are millions of absolutely amazing ladies. I am surrounded every day with beautiful, caring, decent women everywhere I go!” If you were to make your way down to the Lonely Hearts Club and say that to a group of spinsters, no doubt you’d be in the breeding business in an even bigger way than you already are!
But sadly, we now learn that when it comes right down to it, your appreciation is limited to women with big, juicy racks…and just when White Womankind was about to bestow on you its coveted Catch of the Year award!
There are a few high-end experimental IQ tests out there that purport to measure up to IQ 200 and beyond, but to a clinical psychologist, the last word on IQ is a standard test like the WAIS or RAM. If you can max out the WAIS, that’s about as high as your IQ can be accurately measured (as opposed to “estimated”). I’ve maxed out the WAIS, and not that long ago. Maybe Dr. MacDonald can do that too; it wouldn’t surprise me.
However, that’s beside the point in our current discussion. I only mentioned it apropos of my own perspective, as a White person, on this poor Orca victim’s possible reproductive situation, for which she was being heartlessly criticized post mortem. If the subject of IQ makes you uncomfortable, we don’t need to dwell on it here.
By the way, I’m sure that your daughters, such as they may be, are smart and pretty. It’s just that being called a “dick” doesn’t exactly bring out the warmth and fuzziness in a person.
“Andrew, you’re asking people to take your word for it that solar cell technology offers a viable solution to global energy (and related agricultural) problems, whereas nothing of the kind is yet the case.”
Its true that all of this is still theoretical. However, we do have functioning solar farms. European nations are planning to build a sahara desert project:
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/06/22/worlds-largest-solar-project-sahara-desert/
There are of course challenges with sandstorms and politics, as well as major capital costs, but the project seems doable. Whether or not it will ever be completed is of course indeterminable. In North America, the Sonoran desert (US Southwest and Northern Mexico) has a similar line of latitude as the Sahara, and would perhaps offer a smiliar potential (especially the undeveloped Mexican desert areas). As far as transmission of power goes, Wikipedia states that, “Long-distance transmission of electricity (thousands of kilometers) is cheap and efficient, with costs of US$0.005–0.02/kWh (compared to annual averaged large producer costs of US$0.01–0.025/kWh”, and the longest powerline in existence is 1000 miles long (in the Congo).
“Modern nuclear power plants (1) are inherently unsafe (think Chernobyl and nuclear terrorism); (2) require enriched uranium, of which the global supply is limited and which takes a lot of time and energy to mine and refine; (3) produce dirty and dangerous waste for which no satisfactory disposal technology has ever been devised. ”
Its true that there are problems with nuclear power, but technology has improved substantially since the first plants were built. They are much safer (Chernobyl, built with old Soviet technology and engineering is probably not a fair comparison to modern reactors). There are costs associated with mining Uranium, but it is expected that there is enough of this fuel source to last mankind for 47,000 years (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Uranium_depletion). This implies that there is at least the potential to produce a lot of power this way, though it would probably be more costly than what the US is doing now. In France, where Uranium is re-processed, a family of four yields on average an amount of high-level nuclear waste the size of a cigarette lighter (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html). There is no perfect solution for storage, but underground mountain sites seem to be a reasonable method.
At least theoretically, there is enough power to run food manufactories (food is currently grown indoors using UV lights and so forth) and provide for the needs of increased population. Although this would work theoretically, obviously I cannot prove that it would all work in practice as no one has put together a large enough system to date.
” Then a guy like you comes along, gets himself into an argument, furiously searches the Net for anything to support his case, finds the article, fails to notice any mention whatsoever of other problems, and declares the situation resolved.”
All I can say is that in my mind (and I am just a layman), it seems reasonable that the US could comfortably support a much larger population. You have pointed out potential problems, and there would certainly be many serious challenges. However, when looking at the success of other nations, and having a lot of faith in American ingenuity, it seems doable to me. Note that there are also serious geopolitical risks involved with not having a large population of Whites.
“But sadly, we now learn that when it comes right down to it, your appreciation is limited to women with big, juicy racks…and just when White Womankind was about to bestow on you its coveted Catch of the Year award!”
In my experience, most women do not really want a guy who is “sensitive”. They want someone who is in charge and can take care of them. I think that relationships work best when the male undertakes his traditional role as the head of the family, the decision-maker and the patriarch. In my view, women are generally a lot happier in such a relationship, and they also like being admired for their body parts.
” I’ve maxed out the WAIS, and not that long ago.”
After looking this up, that would equate to a Stanford-Binet IQ of 196, is that right? If so, that’s pretty high, there must be just a few people in the US with that score.
“this poor Orca victim’s possible reproductive situation, for which she was being heartlessly criticized post mortem.”
She was probably a very caring and sweet lady, and would probably have made a great mom.
“If the subject of IQ makes you uncomfortable, we don’t need to dwell on it here.”
Im not sure what my IQ is, but of course its blatantly obvious that I must be a super-duper smart guy, so I am very comfortable talking about the subject. I do understand that most truly great and accomplished individuals throughout history have had very high IQs (this is an important quality, though such things as drive, ambition, vision, morality, character, good sense, etc. are also necessary to some extent). Actually, I have designed a plan that I seriously do intend to implement in the future. The idea is that I assemble a group of families together. Each family would help support one or more single ladies, or be married to them polygamously. Each of these ladies would bear several children through artificial insemination with very high quality “seed”. All of the children would be homeschooled, and raised to become the leaders of a movement to help lead the awakening of Whites. In 20-30 years time, there would be a large number of very intelligent, capable, well-trained individuals arriving on the scene exactly when they are needed the most (near when Whites are reaching minority status). I think that raising children now is the most effective thing that any White Nationalist can do. In fact, if Dr. Pierce had concentrated his efforts on this, he would have had a much greater impact on the movement.
Here is a picture of a polygamist with 49 children and 239 grand-children:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/02/polygamists/anderson-text
The guy with the cowboy hat is truly a stud, and an example for us all.
I saw an interesting move last night. It’s called “The Road”.
After an unnamed catastrophe that reduces the earth to a cool, dim wasteland (perhaps the intended inference is an asteroid strike whose destructive magnitude rivals the one that supposedly wiped out the dinosaurs), the few surviving remnants of surface-dwelling humanity – as opposed to Jewish humanity in CoG facilities, an unspoken but intelligent background assumption – are reduced to either cannibalism, or to being hunted for food by roving bands of cannibals. Bearing out the predictions of etymology, almost all of the survivors seem to be White survivalists of the kind now reputed to belong to militias and other groups of potential anti-ZOG insurgents. (Assumably, most of the Africans and Hispanics have already eaten each other.) Life for the handful of White non-cannibals is absolutely intolerable and ostensibly futile.
A population crash and global race war for dwindling resources could have much the same effect. (Extreme overpopulation and competition for the basic necessities of life would almost certainly result in complete, intensely violent racial polarization.) The wizened, cowboy-hatted Mormon “stud” in your picture would not survive, and his low-IQ descendants would stand a very good chance of being roasted on spits and consumed by the very lowest kind of humanity.
Admittedly, this outcome would conduce to the survival of animalistic redneck cannibals, thus possibly allowing the short-term survival of a new form of (White) humankind limited to the descendants of, you guessed it, animalistic redneck cannibals. But try watching the movie, and then ask yourself what the White race would really be worth by the light of its own moral propensities if this scenario were to occur.
Now, such a scenario is only one possible future that we face. (While some might see it as no possibility at all, such a blanket denial can be safely dismissed on its face.) However, it is a future that can only become more likely if the White genome becomes even more saturated with low-intelligence high-r breeders. I suggest that you watch the movie, if only to get a glimpse of the various kinds of future that could easily unfold for us if we don’t start getting a few lucky breaks.
Is the White race worthy of survival? Once again, we come back to your “deservingness” criterion, and to my observation that nonsurvival moots ethics. Nevertheless, I submit to you that our feet are being held to the fire right now, in the sense that if we do nothing to regain political ascendancy and command of our own national resources, we will be completely disarmed in the face of any global natural disaster.
My point in bringing up the “The Road”, or for that matter any other semi-realistic post-Apocalyptic story, is that there are many possible futures from which high-r breeding cannot save us. The only way we can guaranty our own survival is to do something NOW to retake what we rightfully own. So, if you can, try to understand that your high-r breeding is not a legitimate substitute for spending more of your time, money, and energy doing what needs to be done in the short term.
Remember, any race can breed, and the hard, cold mathematics of reproduction assures us that Whites have been and will continue to be numerically outbred by Blacks, Mestizos and Asians. While we do need to create new people – no doubt about that – squandering our collective energy on low-IQ, or even average-IQ, quantitative breeding activities stands a very good chance of being a losing strategy at this point in the game.
Just a little food for thought. Take it easy, papa.
“To be frank, I wouldn’t even consider a donor database of which the make-or-break criteria include education (irrelevant to genetic fitness), income (again irrelevant), and work history.”
eurodele,
It’s more that you have to give the information before you can join, once you get approved (and there’s no minimum income or education level required to be approved) it’s up to the female subscribers if they want to care about what you put in the slots, and what they consider desirable.
“Let me explain. Part of the problem with human evolution at this point is that we have distanced ourselves from nature, and cheated natural selection, by replacing genetic fitness with artificial fitness criteria which have come to depend, for example, on one’s psychological tolerance for Jewish indoctrination.”
I see what you are saying here, and considering my low tolerance for the education system I’m hardly in much of a position to disagree with you.
Still, you seem to (rightfully I think) place a lot of stock in IQ.
And the thing is that years of education has been found to have a substantial correlation with IQ, with many studies finding the correlation to be 40% or more:
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1984-30440-001&CFID=6646747&CFTOKEN=95647812
So while there may be negative traits relating to subservience selected for if a woman prefers a more educated man, there’s also a very important positive trait that’s being selected for as well.
Perhaps one would even say the most important single positive trait.
I do realize that with really extreme examples like you and Bill Gates, and if I recall correctly Bobby Fisher, the relationship can break down in an extreme way that you wouldn’t necessarily expect based on the strength of the general pattern.
“Whites who are highly intolerant of Jewish indoctrination have greatly reduced chances of success in in academia, and this is highly likely to affect their income and work history. For example, my present farming income is much lower than it would be if I could still stomach working for the miscreants now in charge of American society.”
I understand.
Actually, there’s one donation site I know of that doesn’t prompt for income:
http://www.free-sperm-donations.com/register.htm
With this site the females involved have to pay a fee, though it’s free for the men.
The prompts are:
Country
State
Age Group
Height
Natural Hair Color
Ethnicity
Eye Color (from what I hear blue eyed men are preferred)
Blood Type
Relevant Health History
Marital Status
Highest Level of Education
Note that options for this question are: School of Life, High School, A Levels, Work Related Qualifications, NVQ, Graduate Degree, Post-Graduate Certificate, Post-Graduate Diploma, Masters Degree, PhD, Other (specify in comments).
Current Job or Career
Reasons for Joining
Type of Donor
Note that options for this question are: Known (child can request info at 18), Anonymous (child not given any info), Undecided
Any Involvement After Conception?
Hobbies and Interests
Personality Traits
Additional Comments
So you could certainly put your remarkable IQ in there, or even just allude to having an extremely high IQ on the idea that more information could be provided further along in the process.
@Eurodele,
Okay, for now, lets assume that there is a very serious crisis on the horizon. For the purpose of this discussion, lets even concede there is an overpopulation problem and a problem with all manner of resources running out soon. Add that to the problem of White displacement and political dominance by an alien elite, and things look grim for our race in the future.
What exactly do you suggest is the optimal strategy to address the problem for a WN? That really gets to the heart of what I am concerned about.
“I saw an interesting move last night. It’s called “The Road”.”
I did see the road, and enjoyed it, I especially liked the way they showed the White father acting in a manly, traditional way, protecting his family, sacrificing himself when needed to ensure his son’s survival. It was awesome stuff. You dont see this in movies very often, where Whitey is usually portrayed as a weak, selfish nincompoop who is deserving only of scorn.
“My point in bringing up the “The Road”, or for that matter any other semi-realistic post-Apocalyptic story, is that there are many possible futures from which high-r breeding cannot save us.”
There have certainly been major extinction events in the past that would create a situation like “The Road”, asteroid collisions being just some of them. However, for the next few centuries at least, such an event is probably unlikely. The most likely scenario is that current anti-White trends continue (immigration, displacement, political disempowerment, etc.) I am no expert at probability, but I would say that this scenario has a 90%+ chance of occurrence, while “The Road” or a similar apocalyptic scenario has less than a 2% chance. Therefore, unless you expect us to be really unlucky, the most logical thing to do is plan for the displacement scenario.
In this case, or just about any other scenario, why wouldnt having a large group of well-informed geniuses be of great benefit to the situation? Lets assume that you are in fact a brainiac. If I could take a magic wand and make 100 clones of you at age 20, who had all been well educated in the problems facing Whites, wouldnt that be a very helpful thing to do? I understand that just having high quality “seed” does not ensure geniuses, and the talents of children would be watered down by having 110-120 IQ moms. However, Reginald’s information suggests that such children would still be very smart.
“The only way we can guaranty our own survival is to do something NOW to retake what we rightfully own.”
This is exactly what Dr. Pierce, Revilo Oliver and a whole host of other people thought, back in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. But here we are many decades later, and Whites arent gone yet. Even by 2050, Whites still have a population of 200M in the US, with an even bigger population elsewhere in the world. I agree with you wholeheartedly that we should do something now, but I would suggest that having lots of high-IQ children (who are well-educated and raised well) would be the most effective strategy. One our biggest weaknesses, possibly THE biggest, is the lack of intelligent, talented leaders. Those are just not easy to come by, and having a nice big group of them arise in the future would be a game-changer.
“So, if you can, try to understand that your high-r breeding is not a legitimate substitute for spending more of your time, money, and energy doing what needs to be done in the short term.”
What do you think would be more effective than my high-IQ breeding strategy? Please explain why having as many high-IQ individuals in the future as possible would not be hugely advantageous.
“squandering our collective energy on low-IQ, or even average-IQ, quantitative breeding activities stands a very good chance of being a losing strategy at this point in the game.”
I think ideally, we would want to have as many Whites as can be supported on our resources, who have the highest genetic quality possible.
“The wizened, cowboy-hatted Mormon “stud” in your picture would not survive, and his low-IQ descendants would stand a very good chance of being roasted on spits and consumed by the very lowest kind of humanity.”
You are assuming that he and his progeny are low-IQ. As contrary evidence, it surely cannot be easy to handle so many wives and children, especially when it takes huge quantities of resources to support them. This suggests that our stud is much more capable than average, I just do not see how a dummy could accomplish what he did. Since IQ is largely inheritable, it stands to reason that his children would have similar attributes. Check out this video of a Mormon guy with 20 wives and 120 children:
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/inside/4292/Overview#tab-Videos/07797_00
If you look at the guy, or listen to his children speaking, do you get the sense that they are mentally deficient? They seem perfectly normal to me (and I suspect that a guy that can support so many wives and children has got to be pretty sharp. Even Sir Isaac Newton would have been hard-pressed to do the same). Your own stone-age ancestors were no doubt polygamists producing plentiful pods of precocious punks just like this guy.
Your link doesn’t work (from here) at the present time, Andrew, so I haven’t yet managed to view your “high-IQ” polygamist or his kids. But when I do, will I see anything to change my opinion?
I doubt it. As a matter of fact, should I ever have children, your prolific Mormon and his 120 kids will be trying with all their might to displace my progeny from the resource pool, which comes very close to displacing them from the gene pool. Indeed, if they are at all like you – that is, if they are high-r breeders who imagine that the resource pool is theirs to squander as they like on their own unexceptional progeny – then they may even succeed in doing so. (And people wonder why the superintelligent often don’t bother to breed!)
You have, after all, admitted that “it takes huge quantities of resources to support” the kids of such people. Hasn’t it occurred to you that the offspring of the superintelligent may have better things to do with their lives than fight with the kids of less intelligent people over a rapidly dwindling pie? Obviously, there’s nothing the matter with a little generosity and a healthy dose of competition, but would you by any chance be huffing airplane glue?
That’s what people with your breeding preferences never seem to get: you can’t go too far in your efforts to displace people of other races from the local resource and gene pools without displacing superior members of your own race from the local resource and gene pools in the bargain, unless explicit measures are taken to stop this from happening.
By the way, I didn’t realize that you were implementing a “high IQ breeding strategy” of your very own. Typically, one would expect such a strategy to involve the close participation of known high-IQ people, preferably the most extreme specimens available.
Just for the sake of curiosity, would you mind explaining to us the exact nature of your strategy?
“As a matter of fact, should I ever have children, your prolific Mormon and his 120 kids will be trying with all their might to displace my progeny from the resource pool, which comes very close to displacing them from the gene pool.”
eurodele,
They’d be trying to do that no more than they’d be trying to displace the progeny of Non-FLDS Whites who are far inferior to you.
I agree that if a White Subpopulation has lower intelligence than the average White, and at the same time an extremely high fertility, this could create serious dysgenic pressures down the road.
As you have pointed out, the historically unusual level of per capita prosperity we currently enjoy will not last, and therefore intensified resource competition even within the White Race is inevitable.
As a result of this, a Tribe of Stupid Whites with tons of Children could use their numbers to push around members of Higher IQ White Groups, causing some White Groups with higher IQs to go extinct.
So let’s say a group of Whites with average IQs of 90 have 100,000 extra children, but it comes at the expense of a 100,000 average Whites having one child each never born because of brutal resource competition.
If the average White has an IQ of 100, that would be a very dysgenic thing, as it would lead to there being less high IQ people in the White Population.
The problem, though, is that you fail to consider the complete lack of evidence that FLDS members are below the White average in intelligence, and ignore the substantial evidence that the average FLDS child is higher IQ than the children of the average American White.
For example, from the school years from 1997-2000 children who attended the then FLDS dominated public school in Colorado City, Arizona, were given Stanford 9 Standardized Achievement Tests from Grade 2 through 11.
While at earlier ages, where IQ is far less heritable, they scored merely average or below, by the 11th Grade in the average year they were at the 57th Percentile of Reading, the 53rd Percentile of Language, and the 61st Percentile of Mathematics.
A critical thing to understand about these results is that neither the FLDS children nor their parents were in any way selected for traits differing from the FLDS average.
And making this result even more remarkable is that the overall Arizona 11th Grade Percentiles were 44th for Reading, 42nd for Language, and 52nd for Mathematics; which makes it clear that the FLDS Children scored even higher on the test to make up for the lower scores of the 20% of students at the school who were Non-FLDS.
So if at some point 100,000 Non-FLDS Whites have to have one child die each so that FLDS members can have 100,000 extra children, it would be highly eugenic and actually something to be applauded.
“Your link doesn’t work (from here) at the present time, Andrew, so I haven’t yet managed to view your “high-IQ” polygamist or his kids. But when I do, will I see anything to change my opinion? ”
I think so. There are tons of blonde, blue-eyed nordic kids! No one has a portruding forehead, buck teeth or is walleyed. Try this link:
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/inside/4292/Overview#tab-Overview/07797_00
Click on “Video” to see the video. Or just search the internet for “national geographic” and “bountiful”.
“I doubt it. As a matter of fact, should I ever have children, your prolific Mormon and his 120 kids will be trying with all their might to displace my progeny from the resource pool, which comes very close to displacing them from the gene pool.”
I would look at these Whites as allies for your own children. In a world that will be 95% non-White (5% of the world’s children are of European descent), all Europeans will have a pressing need to band together. You stated before that you didn’t see a need for the masses. But if tomorrow morning, you woke up, and there were 1 million 100-IQ whites camped en masse outside your house, ready to pledge their allegiance to you as their fearless leader, you would have tremendous power to change the US (you could take over 3 states with those votes, for example). If you found 100 super high-IQ individuals camped outside, wanting you to lead them, you wouldn’t be that much better off than now. And with no one camped outside, you are left with very little power to change the world at all, even if you are . The masses do help, and they are needed for the elites to get anything done.
“You have, after all, admitted that “it takes huge quantities of resources to support” the kids of such people. Hasn’t it occurred to you that the offspring of the superintelligent may have better things to do with their lives than fight with the kids of less intelligent people over a rapidly dwindling pie?”
I see it more as competition between groups. Whites, who do not even reproduce themselves, are a dwindling group. They are in competition with the Hispanics, Asians, Indians, Arabs, Africans, etc. who do reproduce themselves and then some, and want what Whitey has. Human survival is a team sport, after all. As a White, it benefits you to have other team members. It is very natural that as time goes on, Whites will be forced to coalesce and develop a solid ethnic identity, as the competition for resources becomes ever more fierce. What other choice will they have? In the future, any progeny you have will benefit tremendously from co-ethnics who will be there to support them. Please remember that as indicated in the latest TOO article, there are many groups quite hostile to Whites, who would celebrate the European gene pool being erased permanently from the earth (your genes included). I think that you should consider the hordes of hispanics, battalions of blacks and arsenal of asians as the competition, and the plethora of polygamists and brigade of breeders like me as your allies.
” would you by any chance be huffing airplane glue?”
No, but sometimes I smell my socks.
“By the way, I didn’t realize that you were implementing a “high IQ breeding strategy” of your very own. Typically, one would expect such a strategy to involve the close participation of known high-IQ people, preferably the most extreme specimens available.”
Im still about 18-24 months away from starting this. I know another individual at the Occidental Dissent blog who is interested in participation currently.
“Just for the sake of curiosity, would you mind explaining to us the exact nature of your strategy?”
I mentioned this in my previous post:
I do understand that most truly great and accomplished individuals throughout history have had very high IQs (this is an important quality, though such things as drive, ambition, vision, morality, character, good sense, etc. are also necessary to some extent). Actually, I have designed a plan that I seriously do intend to implement in the future. The idea is that I assemble a group of families together. Each family would help support one or more single ladies, or be married to them polygamously. Each of these ladies would bear several children through artificial insemination with very high quality “seed”. All of the children would be homeschooled, and raised to become the leaders of a movement to help lead the awakening of Whites. In 20-30 years time, there would be a large number of very intelligent, capable, well-trained individuals arriving on the scene exactly when they are needed the most (near when Whites are reaching minority status). I think that raising children now is the most effective thing that any White Nationalist can do. In fact, if Dr. Pierce had concentrated his efforts on this, he would have had a much greater impact on the movement.
Some additional details:
1) I envision eventually gathering about a dozen families together, with perhaps 10-30 women who would be bearing children. This would probably be the maximum of people that I would be able to manage (there will need to be constant coordination, contact and support to keep everything together).
2) Obviously, you want the mothers to have the best genetic quality. However, because high-IQ women are rare, it is probably more reasonable to expect to be able to attract women in the 110-IQ range. They would need to be young-ish (in their 20s preferably), decent, normal and healthy, without any significant inherited problems. There are a lot of single women out there that could be attracted to this kind of program (I know a couple of them already).
3) The adopting parents will need to be dependable, decent, moral people, who are committed to raising their adopted children. In any case where things didn’t work out, I would bring the moms into my household.
4) The high-IQ seed would ideally be from really smart people, especially those that are accomplished in leadership (assuming that this is an inherited trait). According to Reginald’s information, if a 110-IQ woman was impregnated with 180-IQ “seed”, the resulting children would have an average IQ of 145, which would be good leadership material (it is likely that there would be a wide spread of ability though). I have contacted an individual who worked with Robert Graham in his “Repository for Germinal Choice”, who still operates a “genius sperm bank” in California, although he only has 3 available donors (who are very accomplished individuals though). According to Slate magazine, Graham’s efforts resulted in something like 200 children. Only two are known about, one is a guy with an IQ of 180, the other is a girl with an IQ of 150. This is encouraging evidence that the project would be successful.
5) A big part of the success of the project is education. I am currently studying online to get my teaching credential (finishing in December), and plan to teach for a number of years to strengthen my skills in this area (I also get income from a side business I have). Having already done student teaching in public schools, I understand what a boondoggle they are, which is why homeschooling is necessary (the average homeschooler is in the 80th percentile in academic achievement). I envision a very traditional program, concentrating on Western Civilization rather than ebonics, including outdoors activities like hiking, hunting and adventure rather than not being permitted to run on the playground.
The project is going to be a challenging one, with a lot of work involved, but its going to be my legacy and life’s work. I cant imagine anything more worthwhile that I could spend my time on. And its going to be awesome!
I got through on that link, Andrew and Reginald. The Canadian Mormon children of whom you write seem to be attractive and at least not conspicuously stupid. I’m almost pleasantly surprised! But I’d have to see the results of a few genetic and psychometric tests to be sure that this particular breeding exercise has not been harmful to the long-term prospects of humanity in general.
After all, if (e.g.) half of these children were to end up in medical facilities because they suffer from some sort of genetic disease – and by the way, we can’t necessarily tell whether this is the case yet, or even hazard an educated guess based on mere superficial examination of their parents – then they might well constitute so heavy a drain on total resources that not even the political and military support provided by their healthier siblings could make up for it.
What each of you has written provides food for thought. However, some parts of it – in particular, the idea that gifted and empathic leaders, who may need more nurturance and a larger share of resources to fully realize their potential, can be expected to emerge from a situation in which resources are evenly divided by law among increasingly many (mostly unexceptional) children – in some ways contradicts my own experience, not to mention a considerable body of developmental and educational theory.
Trust me when I say that despite the attention sometimes lavished on gifted children and seeming public enthuiasm for “gifted education”, the reality of the situation is really quite abysmal. The more gifted a child – especially a White child, who is much less attractive to PC educators than one of the “minority” (non-White) children whose minds are such “terrible things to waste” – the more likely it is that he (or she) will be systematically alienated by other children and their parents through a combination of selfishness, resentment, meaningless competition, and sheer resource-starvation.
But these problems may be solvable, and you’ve definitely given me a lot to think about.
@Eurodele,
“I’d have to see the results of a few genetic and psychometric tests to be sure that this particular breeding exercise has not been harmful to the long-term prospects of humanity in general. ”
I agree that in-breeding is a concern. Obviously genetic variety is essential to the health of a population. If I had 20 wives, I would have most of them being impregnated by “genius seed”. The town of Bountiful, Canada, would then become a famous birthplace of Canada’s most accomplished.
“the idea that gifted and empathic leaders, who may need more nurturance and a larger share of resources to fully realize their potential, can be expected to emerge from a situation in which resources are evenly divided by law among increasingly many (mostly unexceptional) children – in some ways contradicts my own experience, not to mention a considerable body of developmental and educational theory.”
Gifted children – particularly the profoundly gifted – certainly need a lot of nurturance. This is a subject I have been doing quite a bit of reading on. I think a big part of successfully raising them related to just not screwing them up, not expecting them to be “normal” and not putting them in a school situation where they will be ridiculed outcasts. A lot of their education will probably be self-directed, with the child seeking out material of interest while being guided by the parent.
I believe that having peers is also important, which is why I want to work with other families. As someone from a fairly large family (7 kids), my best friends having also been mainly from big families, I can say that having a lot of kids can be a really great thing when growing up. I think this is a built-in factor as we have evolved living in large families (since the dawn of Whitey, just about every family was large until the 1950s). Benjamin Franklin’s family had 13 children, and its probable that the majority of the greatest men of the West had many siblings. This does require wise and loving parents though, fortunately mine were this way. If you watch the Duggar family (19 kids, they have a reality show on Discovery channel), I think you will get a sense that the (homeschooled) children are very happy and well-adjusted. In childhood, there is just no substitute for siblings that have cameraderie, you end up with best friends for life that are always there for you.
Anyway, it sounds like you may have some insights on education for the gifted. If you would like to send me a quick email at gm [at] lordsofconquest [dot] com, I would like to contact you once I have my program underway, and possibly get some advice.