Time
Time magazine has dedicated its latest issue to reassuring infertile White liberals that living “the childfree life” in a dense urban area is superior to raising children in the suburbs.
See “Childfree Adults Are Not Selfish” and “I Just Don’t Want To Have a Child” and “The Declining Birthrate Doesn’t Spell Disaster” and “Do Children Bring Happiness – or Misery?”
Southern Nationalists and White Nationalists spend a lot of time bickering in the OD comments about small points of disagreement, but this is one issue on which there should be a broad consensus.
A White Nationalist is someone who believes in the 14 Words: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children.” A Southern Nationalist is someone who believes in “the survival, well being, and independence of the Southern people.”
Therefore, the single most important thing that a White Nationalist or a Southern Nationalist can do to further the White race or the survival of the Southern people is to become the mothers and fathers of the next generation of White children. It is also the most positive and practical way to advance either cause.
Is this an issue in our own movement? Does our own personal behavior conform to our most fundamental beliefs about White survival? Are we too guilty of living “the childfree life” like the decadent liberals on the Time magazine cover?
In Defending The Master Race: Conservatism, Eugenics, and the Legacy of Madison Grant, Jonathan Spiro quipped that the majority of America’s most prominent eugenicists in the 1920s and 1930s were themselves childless:
“It is wondrous to witness the vehemence with which such childless figures as Madison Grant, Harry H. Laughlin, Charles W. Gould, Wickliffe P. Draper, Henry H. Goddard, C.M. Goethe, A.E. Wiggam, Frederick Adams Woods, Kenneth Roberts, Seth K. Humphrey, Francis H. Kinnicutt, John Harvey Kellogg, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, and Charles Stewart Davison set about attacking the genitals of the lower breeds.”
In our own times, Pat Buchanan who is the author of The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization and Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive Until 2025? is himself childless. Sam Francis and many other prominent nationalists never had children.
In a Southern Republic or a White ethnostate, would birth control and abortion be illegal? Would the divorce laws be changed? Would our culture continue to treat sex as a recreational activity – like in the modern United States and elsewhere in the post-Christian West – or would it be a procreative activity like it was in the past?
What are the long term social and economic consequences of fifty years of “the childfree life”? Is this sterile way of life even sustainable in the long run? If not, how should we replace it after we take power?
Note: I’ve turned the comment moderation system off for now. Please keep the OD comments civil and productive. I’m sure that everyone is getting sick and tired of having to wait for me to approve every comment.
As someone who has aging grandparents, I know they are a lot of work, even when they are in retirement homes. No one will be there to look after these people, when they reach that certain age. They are going to regret it.
Articles like this are soma, meant to reassure the devout adherents of liberalism that the rising black abyss they sense is all in their imagination. Genetic extinction of one’s line causes a very real and palpable sense of despair. The Creator or “Nature” if you will, gave this dread feeling to ensure the survival of species. It gnaws at men, it makes women go absolute nuts.
“Is this an issue in our own movement? Does our own personal behavior conform to our most fundamental beliefs about White survival? Are we too guilty of living “the childfree life”?”
Well, I’m under 30 and officially above replacement now, so I’m doing my part.
Of course, this is why liberalism is doomed. As long as white conservatives – and I don’t mean those GOP turncoats – keep having the kids that white liberals don’t want then I think that we have a chance of preventing the destruction of our civilization at the hands of African and Hispanic savages.
This is why they are so hell-bent on running the schools and churches out of one DC office. They need to steal everyone else’s kids since they aren’t having their own.
Look at the childbearing hips on that model in the time cover photo. Hope those don’t go to waste.
Time is owned and run by Jews so this is nothing new and what we have come to expect from our enemies.
The good news is that no one reads this rag outside of the major urban centers. I’ll be quite honest – I could care a less if these liberal Whites breed or not. Let them and their insanity die out. Good riddance.
As far as their good genes and IQ? Don’t concern yourself with it. Some of our most brilliant geniuses were bred by simple farmers and brought up on rural farms. As a matter of fact, these urban assholes for the most part produce worthless children who die from drug overdoses or commit suicide due to mommy/daddy issues.
There are still a lot of White people. The big problem is not that we are not breeding enough, it is that the other races coming in are breeding twice as fast and on our dime.
Immigration is the key issue for our cause. We solve this issue with extreme measures and the breeding issue becomes totally irrelevant.
THEY don’t need nearly so many hard-working, reliable whites now, since they have droids http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/rise-of-the-droids-will-robots-eventually-steal-all-of-our-jobs-2 — and They’ll import more dark savages to dilute and assist in lording over the remaining whites.
As a an engineer who specializes in automatic controls… not skeered of droid armies. T-800 is long ways away.
Meet ATLAS! ie. The Terminator – From Petman to ATLAS DARPAs Killer Robot is almost complete!
Suitable music for Atlas video.
Ulfric is right about Newsweek. A particularly malicious of Jews set even by the standards of Talmudic hatred run Newsweek.
I already have kids, and I wouldn’t have waited so long to have them if I knew how good it would be. I’ve done my part. The rest of you back away from the computer, or put down your phone, tablet or mobile device, and go find a woman like the one in the picture with the nice hips.
@ No one will be there to look after these people, when they reach that certain age. They are going to regret it….
Just talked to an older person, in 60s, without kids who said they did not “regret” the future they saw for themselves, but FEARED it—- however, they saw no future for people of their type in the u.s. and never had. From birth, they’d been told they ‘killed all the indians, enslaved all the blacks, renegged on the treaties, gassed the youknowwhos, burned witches, dragged homosexuals, were (since it was a southern wasp) responsible for all of world colonialism and all of world slavery, the villian in trash movies by foreigners like Greg Isles novels, Django, etc, etc….”
They didn’t believe a WORD of it, lol. HOWEVER, they knew they had been born into a “culture” (if you can call it that), where this would be the social position of their own children and something not to be done to anyone you loved.
The person saw it as a personal sacrifice, so that no children would have to grow up in the u.s., under such gross circumstances, despite FEARING FOR THEMSELVES.
The wrong choice, imo, and pretty twisted thinking—- but that was their thinking on it.
They’d tried to “get away,” (moved a few times when there were only 3 t.v. channels much of their live), and tried to get degrees etc. (buy a better place on higher ground so they could raise kids)—- anyway, they said they never got to a nice enough place where they could stand to see what their kids would be raised in.
This is probably more common than you’d think— judging from how the media tries to spin the “single good life.”
Mention it, b/c I have heard it more than once. It is a whole train of thought that is “under erasure,” a victim OF THE SILENCE—- b/c not even many of the whites can admit what they’ve felt it’s really like to live in the u.s., how little of a real future (where they could practice their culture, language, history, way of life, instead of trash t.v.) they saw for themselves or any children, topped off by the fact that in the Centralized Hybrid-left-right-wing fascist economy (fascist economy with “left” think-tanked social controls)— they weren’t even going to be able to keep much of their own money EVER, (the fruits of the creativity and resources GOD had blessed THEM WITH, for their USE, for THEIR OWN FAMILY, not for a bunch of Welfare-or-Warfare State Dependent Tards—- whether on military, welfare proper, administrative, state employed, whatever.
The real thinking of such people is UNDER THE SILENCE.
If you really get to talking to them—– they sound more like Magda Goebbels
Oh—
Talked to 2 different MEN, both in forties also (late forties, both cases) who had vasectomies for the same reason. One had a child, the other (white blonde-blue) never did. The former guy was also blonde, brown eyed.
Life had sucked and they would not wish the crap on anyone, they told me.
This REALITY of many people cannot be spoken—- but must go UNDER THE SILENCE b/c it does not fit the reigning-narrative.
Also, just talked to a woman in menopause, no kids—who said she’d felt too guilty as couldn’t afford them, she didn’t think. (Another blonde, not being of the sort to get the All IMPORTANT ANCHOR BABY status.) It had so crushed her spirit, though, that I suspect that’s why she was on about 3 different kinds of “mood stabilizers” with what sounded like one of those bogus “mental health” diagnoses of the Deathcare Industry.
Of course, it is hard to get real people to talk about these things in true honesty.
It is horrible for them to admit the failure of the society, how little it cared for them, how little they could foresee anything even vaguely good around them (really, speaking honestly, and not just in their perky public faces, where they —like everybody really—just go on about how swell things are)
Russia has a policy in force, to PAY citizens who have babies, and lots of them! They are turning their negative, to a positive. Something should be learned from this, for the West.
The SOLE delimiter of a rising or falling civilization, is their birthrate. Rome stopped having children, and the next thing you knew, the greatest civilization of the ancient age succumbed to the Vandals, Goths, etc. – all of whom believed that having large families was a good thing.
The pre-Schism Church (seeing that the ‘heathen tribes’ were of the same ethnicity/race as the degenerate Senators and Public Officials of Rome) encouraged births of their conquerors, as they catechized them. Gaining their clue from the quiverful theology in the O.T., the church until Rome only required Bishops to become celibate, as, to this day, priests in the Orthodox Church can (and should) marry and ‘procreate the race.’ It was only the filioquist Papacy that mandated clerical celibacy, and instituted the ‘dualism’ inherent in most Thomistic rationalism, that deprecated the family, women, and children.
The mark of a dying church, is the absence of a baby’s cries in the sanctuary. In any future Whites only civilization, the desire to at the very minimum, encourage ‘replacement rates’- plus one of EVERY married family, should be a hallmark of the government’s legislative, and prophetic vision. We don’t need no stinkin’ Messicans, or Blacks, if there are enough of “our Own” ready to do work, that ‘Whites won’t do.’
Heck, a teenage kid can pull weeds, mow lawns, and use his excess energy to dig ditches, during ‘construction season’ (summers) as they did in the 1930’s with the WPA, or as college-aged young men used to do, to earn enough to pay for the next year of education, and learn alongside the oldsters, whose common sense, and maturity will shape and mold the next generation, to NOT commit the fallacies of a state, that segregated by age grouping, their citizenry, in order to CONTROL them.
Never again.
Secesssion. Now. Today. Forever.
And God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion….
“The real thinking of such people is UNDER THE SILENCE. If you really get to talking to them — they sound more like Magda Goebbels”
Very commonly true.
This is a complicated topic and these are important issues to consider.
I personally feel that if whites had their lands to themselves, these topics wouldn’t matter quite as much. I talk to some people in the movement who make a huge issue about how whites are a minority of the world’s population. Well, if we still had our countries to ourselves and had never stupidly shared our technology with the rest of the world, I don’t think being a minority of the world’s population would be such an issue.
So in a perfect world where we could get that first issue resolved, then we can move on to my next point…
I definitely want AT LEAST 3 kids (at least). I think the main reason whites are having less kids is because of how expensive it is now and because of how much whites are currently getting taxed. Of course, if my first scenario I went into above plays out, whites won’t be getting taxed so much anymore and it won’t be so expensive to live a moderate middle class lifestyle.
Once we get those first two issues cleared up, then we can start considering incentives for white families to have more kids. While something like that perhaps can wait ( I don’t see how we can clear that issue up without the first two being resolved that I mention), there are other topics Hunter goes into that really are more important to jump to……….While we are clearing up the diversity issue, we need to be clearing up the feminist issue. And when I say “feminist issue” I don’t mean the usual blame game that starts up in comment sections of this movement where most white women are getting labeled unfairly as “mudsharks”, “feminists” and “sluts”.
When I say “feminist issue”, I mean, let’s go after the people AT THE TOP in our political leadership who were responsible for, and who still are responsible for, these unfair policies against males that were put into place a few decades ago. I agree that it is VERY important to get those issues cleared up while we are clearing up our diversity issues, but the diversity issue should come first and foremost.
After all these other issues are out of the way, I think the concern people have in this movement of whites not multiplying enough, will fix itself on its own. Once we clear up the other three issues, marriage and children will be more attractive for whites again.
Whites are also having fewer children because infertility/sterility rates have skyrocketed. Could be Francis or Buchanan had that problem. Many people freak out over it and spend thousands on treatments, others just accept it and move on. I know this — not many family men can afford to be politically controversial. Most family men also don’t really get their kicks from taking part in cultural shit storms.
People like Buchanan and Francis are invaluable. They are the Priest class, and can carry the culture of 1000 family men who are otherwise not so inclined or, at the least, time-limited. For whatever reason, and I’m going to guess it’s because God chose not to bless them with children, the love they weren’t blessed to give to their own families they gave to their larger genetic family.
Have kids if you can. If you can’t, be a Father of another sort.
As my readers know, I write a lot about Mormons, LDS. I note they manage to have healthy, large families even in Liberal urban areas. They tend to cluster in housing and schools. The urban public school systems are so desperate for bright function (White) kids, that the system caters to them, finds math centered magnet schools, schools teacher Latin and Mandarin Chinese. Taking Mandarin Chinese is a good choice these days, of course lower class Blacks aren’t going to do it and some bright Asian kids will be in the class. There is very little or no White East Asian, high Asian tension in public schools everyone wants to be above underclass Blacks.
Real Americans are proud of having ancestors who fought in the Indian war. This includes the Indians. The others are tourists.
What Ulfric said…..
A few things:
would birth control (be illegal)
YES! I know this is a really unpopular position, but the truth is that There is SO MUCH EVIDENCE that’s being suppressed about the dangers of womans birth control. Womans oral birth control causes cancer, and the breast cancer explosion perfectly correlates to the introduction of oral birth control. There are other problems as well, like the poisoning of the water supply with estrogen!!! This issue has actually effected me personally, My own wife now needs gaul bladder surgery due to complications from YAZ!!
and abortion be illegal?
Only for whites, “decriminalized” for minorities
Would the divorce laws be changed?
Whats the point of the fight if we don’t go back to Marriage 1.0 in the end?
Re: Occigent
It is possible. It occurred to me to write something about fertility issues, but that can’t explain why so many nationalists are not having children, or why so many of those who do only have one or two.
I know more people who are divorced than who are still married. That’s frightening.
Economic conditions matter a lot too. Both parties but especially the conservative Republicans have foisted policies on the country leading to 40 years of wealth extraction from the white middle class and stagnant wages. Most Whites aren’t going to have a lot of kids in such uncertain conditions.
On which planet in this solar system have the conservatives been putting policy in place for 40 years? Not here on earth that’s for sure.
Nixon was a conservative? Bush I a conservative? Bush II a conservative?? Really????
Reagan was, that’s true but he was held in check by a Democrat Senate and house, which is why his focus was foreign policy. Clinton got MFN status for the Chinese, but you didn’t see the devastation of this until the Bush years, hence Bush II got blamed. Other than Nixon, who was a flat out socialist with a (R) after his name, and he admitted as much later, the worst thing the Republicans before Bush II and the war was the repeal of Glass-Speigel, but even that has Democrat fingerprints all over it.
I have 3 on the ground, and working on #4. Will probably stop there though. Chirruns be expyonsive when you gots to pay fo dem yosef. Hey! Wait a minute…bamboozled again!
I believe that my grandmother has around 11 brothers and sisters. She was born during the Great Depression in Georgia.
Everyone has made some good points about feminism, economic conditions, the anti-male divorce laws and family court system. Birth control is unquestionably the biggest causal factor in the decline of the White birthrate.
Requires government incentives spur fertility. Minimize the cost. Annual spenditure kid’s cloths (same price as adults)in thousands. Cost of Day care center both spouses work. Medical expenses. And on. 15 k a year. full time job of nursery the mother for 16 years grom morning, noon and night . Although there was a time when most had extended families nearby or neighbors relieved her from her duties.
Clinton gave us NAFTA and GATT, but the white middle and working class did better under him than any republican.
You need to definite your terms. I don’t know what definitions you have in mind, but if you’re referring to some idealized form of economic conservatism that has never existed in practice and never will, I don’t see it as relevant. Modern economies are mixed economies that have both state and private sector actors in the markets. In the economy that we have, in the world as it exists, self-described conservatives have been major supporters of neo-liberal policies, deregulation, privatization, bailouts, corporate welfare, undermining unions, privatizing profits, socializing costs, promoting “free trade” and numerous other polices favoring the super-wealthy. Conservative economic policies have absolutely wrecked the white middle and working class and therefore contributed to the reduced birthrates.
Clinton also gave us the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
The decline of the economy under George W. Bush was largely the result of three things: free trade, Greenspan’s policies at the Fed, and the unshackling of Wall Street under Robert Rubin.
Bush largely continued the policies of Clinton. Obama has largely continued the policies of Bush.
A fair point and true as well. I mentioned both parties in my comment. Remember the Glass-Steagall repeal was passed by a GOP congress. But for this, Clinton would have had nothing to sign. Reasonable people can disagree, but my perception is that many people who lean right don’t appreciate the damage conservative-libertarian economics has caused. Jack has a good economics post up. If this topic takes off, I’ll comment there. I don’t want to clutter the children thread with too much economics.
There are tons of kids being born in Denmark. Danish children too. It seems like a good place for a working man to raise a large family. The tax rate might piss off yanks but, the eye candy with long legs that ride about on bicycles…and the lifestyle makes up for taxes. They are also incredibly pro American and seem to travel a great deal. They have an incredibly restrictive border policy in modern terms. If you have a blonde fetish it’s also perfect. Just a thought.
Also the blacks seem to be very servile here. When and if you see them they go around the public parks picking up cans and bottles to recycle to get by. It’s extremely rayciss if you get the drift of it.
Ok, i’l just withhold comment on the economic stuff, like it matters anymore anyway.
But I just want to say that Lew, go back and look at your arguments now, they are all over the place, first bashing conservatives, then saying that well yea Clinton passed NAFTA and GATT (before the Republicans took the house in 1995), you know Clinton did MFT which caused total devastation of the manufacturing base, but then somehow back to blaming conservatives policies?
I mean I would think your just trolling if I didn’t see your work here as a regular poster.
About the Glass-Segal repeal, yes, the Repubs proposed this, but Clinton DID sign it and is culpable. This is the same rational for blaming Reagan “The Great” for Amnesty I, he did sign it. But the funny thing is, look at the campaign contributions since the repeal, donations flipped, from most of wall street money going to Repubs to most wall street money going to Dems. Kinda fishy right? Kinda of hard to believe Dems didn’t have a LOT to do with this behind the scenes, right? Didn’t Chelsea get some high-paying job at GS soon after?
“I believe that my grandmother has around 11 brothers and sisters. She was born during the Great Depression in Georgia.”
Mine too. This is why I don’t get the whole “kids are too expensive” argument. Maybe if you have to buy each one a new iphone every year, but come on. After the first, economics of scale kick in and each one costs progressively less, and the cost per child trends down toward a general maintenance cost.
Jack Ryan wrote:
As my readers know, I write a lot about Mormons, LDS. I note they manage to have healthy, large families even in Liberal urban areas. They tend to cluster in housing and schools.
I respond:
I don’t know if you saw this, but some fool on AR last week called the Duggar family “welfare leeches and moochers,” because they belong to a church and have a “reality” “show.” And that fool is a St. Louisan, too, I’m sad to say.
The Duggars are only doing in spades what I have failed to do so far, and that is, reproduce.
Now, as for the subject matter at hand, Steve Sailer has proven that in terms of Presidential politics, in the last four election cycles, the Republican Party is the party of white adults involved in traditional nuclear families, while the Democrat Party is the party of everyone else. While today’s Republican Party is hardly nationalist, I think that analogy holds for the WN/EN movement: The future base of the American (or Southern) nationalist movement will be those same white adults involved in traditional nuclear families.
The reason I say this is that I keep reading this silly notion that WN/EN can and should ditch the “social issues” (what are race and immigration but social issues?) and appeal to white people not involved in traditional nuclear families, such as LGBTQMIAPDLOLPLPLTH, young singles, non-married cohabitants, childless married couples who want to stay childless, etc., in order to be able to tap in to what they claim is all this latent energy out there for WN/EN in Blue State America that is inhibited by “creationism,” “pro-life,” etc. Aside from the fact that I see absolutely no evidence that The Great Liberal White Nationalist Pumpkin could ever arise from the pumpkin patch (other than a few Melinda Jellibys of the world), the simple fact of the matter is that “nationalism” is and will always be the province of people engaged in “nationalism” (from the Latin word that means “to be born”) in the literal sense of the word. How can white people that don’t want to procreate be receptive to WN/EN when they’re not even “nation”-ing?
You can point at me and my lack of either children or wife as an example of a “non traditional” WN/EN advocate. The difference is, I have aspirations in that verve; I want to be married and to have children.
It’s too bad that our schedules didn’t match up when I was in St. Louis. You’re so much closer to the CofCC headquarters than I am. My girlfriend has some pretty little friends who share her racial views. 🙂
HW:
I was about to ask: How could you find your St. Louis g/f before I did? She’s right here in my town but slipped right under my nose. But at least she’s in good hands 🙂
But now that I know there’s more in that stable…I’m much happier. I hope to meet some of those “pretty little friends.”
My first order of business, though: I’m going to have to leverage some of the relationships I’m about to make in my new job to see about getting this Turner/transfer law repealed, which I’m sure your g/f has briefed you about, and it was constantly newsworthy the week you were here. I’ll e-mail you at that “Prozium” e-mail box to tell you stuff that’s not for public consumption.
I want to add something, hoping it doesn’t stir up tension, but I can’t stress enough how important it is, when we discuss these topics, for us to focus and direct our blame and anger towards our liberal elites who put us in this mess. I want to applaud the people commenting here for not turning this discussion into a gender war, which is way too easily the case when these topics come up on Amren and The Political Cesspool.
Furthermore, this movement attracts a lot of single people of both genders, who haven’t necessarily chosen to be single still. They are single due to circumstances most of the time, and not necessarily by choice. This topic is sensitive for them, so this is why when we discuss it, it is very important to attack the root cause of the problem instead of judging people or making generalizations about one gender vs. another.
And if we want to step back and examine this with an even wider lense, I would say the majority of white people who are childless by 30 in this current day and age, are that way mostly due to circumstances. White people in my age group (under 35) who grow up in collegiate families, to give one example, are pretty much expected to go to college, and getting married under 25 is often frowned upon.
I am under 35 and I am currently with a great Southern man, who I share many values with. I hope it leads to marriage, but it takes two people to make that decision, not just one. The Western world made a big mistake when moving away from arranged marriages and instead moving towards “marrying for love”. When we “marry for love” and choose our partners, we are very vulnerable. Every time we enter a relationship, we are risking heart break, and we never have control over what the other person decides to do.
That aside, I can’t tell you how many times I have attended an Amren conference, and tend to get a little hurt when a speaker gets up and gives the usual lecture about how “women who marry after 30 are a problem”. I firmly agree that the situation in itself is a problem, but not necessarily the women involved.
Our system is very messed up. We need to focus on roots of problems instead of making generalizations about particular groups of whites as a whole. Most whites aren’t the problem. The problem is our leadership.
These child-free people are not fit for survival. Natural selection will take care of them soon enough. Many people with children are already angry because they don’t want their own children to pay for the old-age care of these selfish idiots. Once the third-world colonisation of the US is complete, social security and all the rest of it will disappear and these idiots will be on their own.
Think about taking a woman’s life, and “flipping” it around just a little:
Get married early, have children at 18 – 22 instead of college, you are at maximum fertility, and have plenty of energy to chase the brats around. You have clear memories of what your parents taught you still at that age young are and can raise the kids right.
Does a woman at 18 – 22 really know what she wants to do with the rest of her life? Know what she is going to like and want to do in 20 years?
So raise a family and put your life into it. By the time you are 35 – 37, still young in my opinion, the kids are all grown, you are a fully mature and wise woman, who now has the time and wisdom to do anything you want, get an education, homesteading, teaching, or just helping the family raise grandkids!
Does this really sound so bad?
Peak Finance,
I didn’t really say anything in my post disagreeing with you or implying that it is ideal for women to be delaying child birth. I am not sure if you are talking to me or not.
To address your point, I hardly meet any white women who are really choosing to delay having children in their 30’s. As I said in my post, women are having children later due to circumstances.
Maybe it is because I am a Southerner, but I really don’t run into the stereotypical feminist career woman who “doesn’t need a man” very often at all. Most white women I know have these Cinderella dreams where they meet a man in college and get married by 24 or 25. I am one of those women who had that dream.
All I am saying is regardless of our dreams and what we would like to have had happen in our lives, the reality of the current situation is that due to how our society is structured, things don’t always go as planned. Most of us aren’t getting married as soon as we would have liked to. That is the reality of the situation.
Blaming women instead of addressing the root of the problem doesn’t help anything.
Very true.
It’s hard to find the right person to get married and have children with these days. There are a lot of single and childless people in the movement who aren’t single and childless by choice. There are probably even more people who are unhappy because they are “settling” on convenient relationships with mates who aren’t fully compatible with their racial and cultural views.
It doesn’t help matters that there is so much resentment and venom in the movement – by that I mean the White Nationalist movement, not the Southern Nationalist movement – over the outcome of bad relationships. There are lots of cynical “wounded soldiers” on the internet who are lashing out at women in general because they have been scarred by broken hearts, forced celibacy, and bitter divorces.
At the same time, we need to remember that there are men like Michael Hill, James Edwards, and Peter Brimelow who are happily married in stable, loving relationships and who have produced White children and grandchildren. Personally, I think we just need to go back to the system we had in the South before the 1960s.
I’m extremely fortunate to be in a relationship with a Southern woman who I am fully compatible with in every way. In fact, I wrote this blog entry mainly because these issues are weighing heavily on my own mind at the moment … in a good way, as my anxiety about being 32 years old, single, unmarried and childless has finally abated. 🙂
Oh and I forgot to mention…in regards to skipping college, I addressed that in my previous post also. A lot of women don’t have to choice to NOT GO to college. If your parents have been saving for it since you were a baby, and that is part of their plan, do you really think the average 18 year old female is going to stand up to her parents and say “no, I am not going….I am going to go out and find a husband by working at Wal-Mart”.
I’m also glad this hasn’t turned into a gender war, because most white women do want all of these things. A good man, a family. The liberal media has told us not to have children because the world is overpopulated. But it’s overpopulated by non-whites. Our people only make up about 8.5% of the worlds population.
We’re also so concerned about money; oh we don’t have enough money to have kids. Well, that’s bullshit! People had lots of kids with little or no money for centuries. This stupid concept of having children only if you have a lot of money is a liberal propaganda to keep us from breeding. But don’t be foolish, marrying over 30 is a problem because fertility is less of an option and time is not on your side.
I’m only 23 and I’m the perfect age for baby bearing. I wouldn’t want an arranged marriage, because I couldn’t imagine being intimate with a man I wasn’t in love with. Although, marrying for love has tended to blow up in our faces hasn’t it? So that’s a difficult issue in my opinion.
Most of the time, the old ways are the best. In the old days though, we didn’t sit around for years and wait for a perfect man that doesn’t exist to have children with. We were married at a young age, and started our large families soon after. My mother comes from a large southern family, one of 9 kids, and my grandparents started when my grandmother was only 20.
All I’m really looking for is a smart man who shares my values and that I’m sexually attracted to. There’s more to it than that of course, but if you’re too picky, you’re never gonna get that large white family that you want.
I think I’ve found what I’m looking for, and I’m not gonna wait 10 years to start having kids with him either. I plan on getting married soon, and starting a large family, with at least 5 kids. If I waited till I was over 30, I’d be lucky to have a couple. Good luck with getting what you’re looking for, and I wish you well. But that’s not the ideal way I’m looking for.
Fortunately for men, we stay fertile for much longer in our lives, but women start to run into fertility issues as they age.
The major problem that men have is what I call “missing the window” … growing so old that we are still fertile, but being so old that we are unable to attract a younger woman who is of childbearing age.
My own view of the question is fairly simple, as I believe that those who consciously and deliberately reject parenthood are worthless contemptible parasites. These people cherish and celebrate the gift their own lives represent, but openly and adamantly refuse to give that same precious gift of life in return. Whatever it is in their lives that they value, whether it is art, science, architecture, baseball, mathematics, film, theater, music, is because of people, meaning other people’s children. Children, for chrissakes, represent life. Without children, there are no people, and without people there is no music, theater, baseball, opera, science, etc. etc. Do these hateful fools truly not understand this simple fact?