Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

On Babies

One of the biggest obstacles, if not the biggest, in front of civilisation is the natality problem. Feminism, jewish conspiracy, black savagery, muslim invasion; all that would be of little consequence if whites were reproducing at a higher rate. It’s a tribal problem, if you care about the future of the white race.

And if you care about the future of Civilisation itself, it’s a dysgenics problem. All high IQ populations, those of Europe and Northeast Asia, have a low TFR. And inside each country, the higher the education level (a good proxy for IQ), the fewer the babies. Recently government statistics in the UK showed that a big percentage of university educated women are childless.

I think we’ll all agree that is a problem.

Of course the trend has been apparent since the 60s, and the causes are anyone’s guess. What has changed?

  • Contraception
  • Female education and entering the workforce
  • General affluence
  • Loss of religious faith
  • Hedonism

These are the factors most talked about. It’s not hard to see how all these factors deter people from having children, and in combination, it’s a miracle that people bother to have children at all.

But there must be something else too, as non western countries are seeing decreased fertility too. See this graph by the World Bank (which I can’t seem to be able to embed here).

See how all the world, except the black countries in Africa, and the bomb testing grounds of the US military, have seen their TFR decline quite fast over the last decades. David Goldman, AKA Spengler made a name for himself by arguing that Islam is dying, and showing their declining birthrates. Why is that happening? Certainly not for a lack of religious faith, as Muslims today, at least in public,  are noticeably more religious than they were 40 years ago. And it’s certainly not general affluence. Myanmar is the poorest country in SEA, yet look at it. Now, as you can see in this other article by Spengler, education, and especially female education has a big impact on the birthrate. Education, even basic literacy, fuels the hypergamy instinct and makes women much less likely to acquiesce to breeding like rabbits with some average chump. Here’s a good example of an Egyptian university professor killing herself after reaching endgame spinsterhood. That’s a cultural trait we could learn from.

There’s a crackpot on that argues that birthrates necessarily fall if you don’t marry a cousin. Well I don’t know. I’ve seen totally unrelated couples of fundamentalist Christians with 12+ children and they seemed to do ok. When I was a teenager I remember wanting to screw my cousin, and most of my friends had similar feelings. Then again we wanted to fuck anything that moved.

Fertility is a very complex thing, subject to many different factors, and in different cultures it’s bound to depend on different variables. One factor that I find is not often discussed is that of urbanisation. Steve Sailer has written extensively on affordable family formation, saying that the higher rent and the consumerist culture in the cities generally disincentives having children. Well that’s true on a global scale, and with urbanisation rates rising all over the world, it’s only natural that the birthrates are also going down. Shanghai recently recorded a 0.6 birthrate. Hong Kong and Macao aren’t far behind. Also read the hilariously clueless housewife comments on the news. Wifi should never reach the kitchen.

African are generally insensitive to any incentives which work with 80+IQ people, but even South Africa, the most urbanised nation in Africa, has First World birthrates. Of course the permanent baby boom down there would sort itself easily if we cut all aid and all bleeding heart idle white ladies and missionary types had to actually earn a living back home. It will happen soon, I think.

So the lesson to raise the fertility rate seems to be get bombed by the USG for 5+ years.

Or, to ban women from going to college (high school?), and get people out of the cities and back to the countryside . If you think about it that was the way things were for almost all humanity until the late 19th century. Which is when the birthrates started to fall. Of course smart people today tend to prefer the cities, and smart women tend to have a longer education. So the recipe for dysgenics will be hard to break. It will probably get worse before it gets better.


12 responses to “On Babies

  1. Lemniscate May 25, 2012 at 18:30

    I think we’re fucked until we figure out a relatively cheap way to boost the IQ of offspring — some sort of genomics based method is bound to be possible in the not too distant future. People will be unable to resist it: a lot of the most ardent leftists still end up sending their kid to private schools, and they will get their kid’s IQ boosted too. It won’t matter so much that the parents doing the breeding aren’t that smart if the technology is good enough. There might well be a critical race between dygenics and the development of anti-dysgenics technologies.

  2. baduin May 25, 2012 at 22:01

    That was the Oswald Spengler’s point in “Der Untergang des Abendlandes” – the cities (which prevail in later phases of the development of civilisations) are population sinks. Moreover, the “city-like” mentality becomes ubiquitous, even beyond the physical cities – and it is also sterile.

  3. RS May 26, 2012 at 07:20

    > some sort of genomics based method is bound to be possible in the not too distant future

    > I don´t think we´ll reach that point before many nations perish.

    It could happen soon, but it might not happen at all. Depends how IQ is determined. Skip the next paragraph if you don’t want gory details.

    It’s probably controlled mostly by relatively few alleles, rare, of fairly large effect. (Few meaning few alleles in each individual, /not/ few alleles in the population — quite the contrary.) The evidence for this is that variance between sibs is a rather large fraction of the population variance (by the law of large numbers, this means rather few alleles are doing the work), and also the fact that common alleles of fairly large effect seem to have been ruled out empirically. Pretty sure this is also true for facial attractiveness (large variance among sibs relative to population), so it will probably also have this same architecture.

    To the best of my knowledge (I’m not 100% confident), embryo selection will be a major pain in the ass if the architecture I just described is true (it’s probably 80% likely to be true). Results might be pretty limited. Perhaps I’m wrong and results could be decent, provided you can sequence something like 100 M people, which you definitely can for $100 B and probably less.

    On the other hand, there could be other methods other than embryo selection.

    If it doesn’t happen, the results will probably be pretty serious and pretty rapid, as the fertility differentials do appear to be quite striking in magnitude.

    • RS May 26, 2012 at 07:33

      Assuming a rare alleles architecture for IQ, the problem is that we are each have astoundingly many rare alleles — and I’m pretty sure(?) most of them are /extremely/ rare. We are very unique at the nucleotide level, though largely in ways that are fitness-neutral. Roughly 99% of these alleles (probably more?) will have a fitness value very near zero, so we have a problem figuring out which ones to focus on. There’s a lot of chaff.

    • spandrell May 26, 2012 at 12:51

      Let’s hope Steve Hsu and the BGI have something up their sleeve.

  4. Janon May 26, 2012 at 22:44

    Given the pace of development of automation technology and outsourcing of jobs from the West, how are these white western babies going to support themselves when they grow up? I’m certainly no anti-natalist, and I’m alarmed by the potential of population replacement in Europe. On the other hand, you probably don’t want to create a giant white underclass either.

    • spandrell May 26, 2012 at 23:50

      I’m not so keen on underclasses, but from a racialist point of view, underclasses are good at having babies. If you care about white genes per se it’s not such a bad thing.

      Outsourcing is already beyond the peak. China is getting expensive, and there’s no other country with enough human capital to replace it. So those jobs that aren’t automated will come back. Automation is a global problem too. The Third World is fed by western charity, if the western native population are going hungry the aid will just come back home. It’s not like there’s not enough food.

      • Lawful Neutral May 27, 2012 at 07:21

        >if the western native population are going hungry the aid will just come back home

        Will it? Our betters have have no sympathy at all for lower class Whites. If they can possibly get away with it, I don’t doubt that they’d feed the Third World before us.

  5. spandrell May 27, 2012 at 13:46

    >Lawful Neutral

    Our betters aren’t evil masters. They still fear the mob. And hungry populations inside the country is a mob waiting for a power hungry leader to raise it. Already foreign aid has been massively cut in southern europe countries in the austerity measures. The only real cuts actually.

  6. Pingback: Father Knows Best: Late Spring Edition « Patriactionary

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s