Grim reality of why the West's white race is now a dying breed
We will have to change societal rules devised in the 1960s and 1970s if we are to halt the steady decline in the western population, writes Desmond Fennell
LAST WEEK the news came from the United States that white people will be in a minority there in 2042, eight years sooner than previously predicted, according to US government projections. The reason for this is that in North America, as in Europe, the white population is not reproducing itself.
White women in western societies are producing on average fewer, sometimes much fewer, than 2.1 children per woman - the number of children required for the maintenance of a population. As things stand, therefore, the white race in the West is a dying breed.
There have been many instances of human groups not reproducing themselves, to the point of self-extinction or absorption into larger groups. The most common case has been a previously isolated tribe, when an outside agency has invaded and disrupted its way of life. The set of behavioural rules its members had worked out for themselves, and that made sense to them as a framework for life, gets disordered beyond repair.
They find themselves trying to live by a combination of rules that are partly remnants of their system, partly alien rules imposed on them. This haphazard combination does not make sense to them as a framework for life. So increasingly the will to reproduction flags, because it does not make sense to them to bear children into a senseless life.
It is likely that there is a similar reason for the flagging will of white westerners to reproduce their kind. Their historical background is in European or western civilisation which first took shape around a thousand years ago. That its core set of rules made sense is evidenced by its long endurance and by the mighty will to reproduce which it generated. Westerners overflowed from Europe to populate much of the world.
Then, beginning at the end of the second World War, white westerners, first in the United States, then in America's post-war European satellites, embarked on a great experiment. For the best of reasons - the pursuit of more justice, wealth and empowerment for all - they replaced many of the rules of European civilisation with new rules. Or rather, their democratic governments did this, employing left-liberals as their ethical guides, and enjoying enthusiastic support from the business corporations. The main rush of rule change took place in the 1960s and 1970s. Most white westerners, especially the younger generations, have made the new rules their own and have been living by them, or trying to.
The new collection of rules includes some of the old rules. It covers every sphere of behaviour: personal, interpersonal, male and female, parental and juvenile. It comprises, besides dos and don'ts, do-as-you-like rules.
People always assess for sense the collection of rules presented to them as a framework for life. They do so instinctively, drawing on generations of inherited experience. The point I am making is that this new collection of rules which white westerners have given themselves probably does not pass that litmus test. Probably it strikes growing numbers of them, deep down, as senseless, and therefore as a life framework which it does not make sense to bear children into.
That would not be surprising, given that it was thrown together in a very short time and based on idealistic theories rather than lived experience.
I have in mind an instructive parallel from the history of the Soviet Union. There, too, led by Russia, an idealistic experiment in rule-making was undertaken, with Marxist-Leninism as the ethical guide. In the latter years of that experiment, Russians noted with dismay an increasing fall in their fertility rate. The prospect appeared that they would become a minority in relation to the growing populations of the Union's Asian republics. In those populations, strong inherited cultures had rendered the impact of the Marxist-Leninist rules much lighter or next to null.
It is unlikely, even if the explanation I am offering for the flagging fertility of white westerners is accepted as valid, that any serious corrective measures will be undertaken. Our post-European collection of rules is the basis on which our successful consumerist system has been built, and everyone in power wants that to continue.
But if the reality were different, and white westerners could act in their own long-term interest, they would institute an authoritative, critical examination of their prevailing rules system. And that would begin - but only begin - by scrutinising the prevailing, "politically correct" rules that bear on women's lives, and particularly on motherhood.
• Desmond Fennell's latest book is About Being Normal in Abnormal Circumstances (Athol Books). His website is http://www.desmondfennell.com/
LAST WEEK the news came from the United States that white people will be in a minority there in 2042, eight years sooner than previously predicted, according to US government projections. The reason for this is that in North America, as in Europe, the white population is not reproducing itself.
White women in western societies are producing on average fewer, sometimes much fewer, than 2.1 children per woman - the number of children required for the maintenance of a population. As things stand, therefore, the white race in the West is a dying breed.
There have been many instances of human groups not reproducing themselves, to the point of self-extinction or absorption into larger groups. The most common case has been a previously isolated tribe, when an outside agency has invaded and disrupted its way of life. The set of behavioural rules its members had worked out for themselves, and that made sense to them as a framework for life, gets disordered beyond repair.
They find themselves trying to live by a combination of rules that are partly remnants of their system, partly alien rules imposed on them. This haphazard combination does not make sense to them as a framework for life. So increasingly the will to reproduction flags, because it does not make sense to them to bear children into a senseless life.
It is likely that there is a similar reason for the flagging will of white westerners to reproduce their kind. Their historical background is in European or western civilisation which first took shape around a thousand years ago. That its core set of rules made sense is evidenced by its long endurance and by the mighty will to reproduce which it generated. Westerners overflowed from Europe to populate much of the world.
Then, beginning at the end of the second World War, white westerners, first in the United States, then in America's post-war European satellites, embarked on a great experiment. For the best of reasons - the pursuit of more justice, wealth and empowerment for all - they replaced many of the rules of European civilisation with new rules. Or rather, their democratic governments did this, employing left-liberals as their ethical guides, and enjoying enthusiastic support from the business corporations. The main rush of rule change took place in the 1960s and 1970s. Most white westerners, especially the younger generations, have made the new rules their own and have been living by them, or trying to.
The new collection of rules includes some of the old rules. It covers every sphere of behaviour: personal, interpersonal, male and female, parental and juvenile. It comprises, besides dos and don'ts, do-as-you-like rules.
People always assess for sense the collection of rules presented to them as a framework for life. They do so instinctively, drawing on generations of inherited experience. The point I am making is that this new collection of rules which white westerners have given themselves probably does not pass that litmus test. Probably it strikes growing numbers of them, deep down, as senseless, and therefore as a life framework which it does not make sense to bear children into.
That would not be surprising, given that it was thrown together in a very short time and based on idealistic theories rather than lived experience.
I have in mind an instructive parallel from the history of the Soviet Union. There, too, led by Russia, an idealistic experiment in rule-making was undertaken, with Marxist-Leninism as the ethical guide. In the latter years of that experiment, Russians noted with dismay an increasing fall in their fertility rate. The prospect appeared that they would become a minority in relation to the growing populations of the Union's Asian republics. In those populations, strong inherited cultures had rendered the impact of the Marxist-Leninist rules much lighter or next to null.
It is unlikely, even if the explanation I am offering for the flagging fertility of white westerners is accepted as valid, that any serious corrective measures will be undertaken. Our post-European collection of rules is the basis on which our successful consumerist system has been built, and everyone in power wants that to continue.
But if the reality were different, and white westerners could act in their own long-term interest, they would institute an authoritative, critical examination of their prevailing rules system. And that would begin - but only begin - by scrutinising the prevailing, "politically correct" rules that bear on women's lives, and particularly on motherhood.
• Desmond Fennell's latest book is About Being Normal in Abnormal Circumstances (Athol Books). His website is http://www.desmondfennell.com/
28 comments:
Perhaps we should also start asking why many nationalists who bleat about the 14 words have no children?
Simon Darby is one of those people. How can he go on about the demise of our race when he isn't reproducing himself? How many other nationalists don't have children?
Isn't ONE Simon Darby enough ? He is a waste of space as it is. :-)
Simon Darby is Homo-sexual.
Isn't ONE Simon Darby enough ? He is a waste of space as it is. :-)
12 November 2008 19:38
Yes!
People who don't have children will leave the genetic pool and usually deserve to. Lack of reproduction is a sign of natural weakness.
How many kids did Hitler have you bunch of tossers???.
A man who is born to be a dictator must step forward... leaving the rearing of children to you bunch of internet gossiping women.!!!
Yours sincerely
...the boy from Brazil!!!!!!!
People who have lots of kids are usually feckless dole scroungers.
More kids = more benefits.
The poor kids are denied all the decent things in life and eventually get low paid shit jobs, they then go on to repeat the cycle.
You remember them from school, the smelly kids, national health specs with elastoplast over one eye, free school diners, a mom who looked like she had never washed her hair, most of her teeth missing
and swollen fat legs, clad in leggings........
thats your family that is,
Bring back Barker!!!
I did not agree with him, on lots of things... but at least he wasn't so fucking BORING!!!!!!!
Well I've had six. How many have you all had?
Simon Darby is a "supposed" I.T. (information technology) expert. How come that he doesn't know the difference between
G.P.R.S. (GENERAL PACKET RADIO SYSTEM) and G.P.S (GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM). From your own blog Simon, N96 or otherwise, G.P.S. would be used to determine the speed of your train, not G.P.R.S. Your arrogance and sloppiness will be your undoing. DE
How many kids did Hitler have you bunch of tossers???.
A man who is born to be a dictator must step forward... leaving the rearing of children to you bunch of internet gossiping women.!!!
Yours sincerely
...the boy from Brazil!!!!!!!
12 November 2008 21:37
I take it you don't have any children of your own?
Simon Darby is a "supposed" I.T. (information technology) expert. How come that he doesn't know the difference between
G.P.R.S. (GENERAL PACKET RADIO SYSTEM) and G.P.S (GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM). From your own blog Simon, N96 or otherwise, G.P.S. would be used to determine the speed of your train, not G.P.R.S. Your arrogance and sloppiness will be your undoing. DE
12 November 2008 23:26
Darby watches SF all day long, and that's as much as he knows about IT. He's a state operator, a fraud, and a childless scumbag.
The poor kids are denied all the decent things in life and eventually get low paid shit jobs, they then go on to repeat the cycle.
Decent things in life!
Like an X Box, colour TV, and £200 pair of trainers stitched by kids in China from leather that cost 60p?
FUCK OFF YOU MORON
How many kids did Hitler have you bunch of tossers???.
He didn't have any because he was a Zionist patsy incapable of getting it up. May be he was a poofta like Griffin and Darby? Hitler lead his people to oblivion because he thought he was more powerful than the Jews. No one is more powerful than the Jews which is why we need to take up arms and burn the fuckers. BOMB ISRAEL NOW
Why did Darby and NG sack Jon Waker he was a good man. Hope Scotch smithy SCREWS him in Court
Just look at the posts in response to the article.
Is this why nationalism is not a greater political force?
"Lack of reproduction is a sign of natural weakness"...a ridiculous sweeping statement
Parading such ridiculous prejudices, referring to Hitler, swapping obscene insults.
Are we really going to lead our people and nation anywhere but the dust bin if we continue thus?
Bill Jax
In response to an informative, interesting, highly relevant article, the comments are....?
Ridiculous sweeping statements, references to Hitler, obscene insults.
Is this one of the reasons why nationalism is not a greater political force in our country?
What matters...in response to this article...is how we change the 'rules' that seem to deter white westerners having children.
Not whether one person in particular has children or how many or why he has none.
Even if Simon Darby is 'a zionist patsy, or a 'poofta' or suffers from 'natural weakness', that does not answer the question of what we are going to do about our unwillingness to reproduce.
We are leading our people and nation nowhere but the dustbin if we cintinue like this.
Bill Jax
Desmond Fennell's entire essay is worth reading for the light it sheds on the predicament of Western man. Fennell traces the development of the current senselessness to America in the thirties when traditional European values were replaced by liberalism. Fennell notes three similar revolutions at this time, the others being German and Russian, which also replaced European civilization with untried values. As with most experiments only the American revolution s been a 'success'. This success must be qualified because what it has substituted for traditional Christian civilization is, as Fennell points out, a mishmash of incompatible values which cannot sustain a civilization and which result in an underlying sense of senselessness, manifest by the West's declining fertility.
I'll mention two criticisms I have of his essay. He fails to include the role of the Jew in this narrative of decline. He also draws an ultimately optimistic conclusion: our present crisis may be transitional as man's need for meaning will found a new civilization. As civilizations tend to require religious revelation for their founding, and as the time of revelation may be past, is there a basis for such optimism?
Could Simon Darby explain why the video files on the BNP TV website are in .wmv format? Surely real nationalists would use an open source file format rather than a proprietary file format from Micro$oft.
This problem has been caused by many things, partly by the lack of a decent future for the children people have borne, partly by feminism which had told women that they should be earning and doing what were typical male roles in society, partly because people who work and have children are penalised whereas people who don’t work and have children are rewarded and partly by the corrupted attitudes of people who believe their life’s are enriched by money and gadgets and not by the reward of children and family life. The worse the problem gets the more unlikely it will be that people will want to have children and I bet many white parents today wonder if they have done the right thing bringing children into such a corrupt, decaying and violent society
Could Simon Darby explain why the video files on the BNP TV website are in .wmv format? Surely real nationalists would use an open source file format rather than a proprietary file format from Micro$oft.
13 November 2008 13:20
Perhaps Darby could tell us what 'Pulse Media' is?
I would imagine that the video issue would be down to the webmaster not 5IMon. Two simple Simons in positions in the party, no wonder we haven't got any M.P.s yet.
Jack of all trades isn't Darby?
I.T. expert, antiques dealer, businessman, deputy leader, destructive organiser.
James Bond he is not. James Bondage, well that's a different story for another time.
Why are white people not having children? Simple.
The men are nothing more than giant babies, wanting to cram sugar into their mouths all the time. Feckless and feminised, in reality, they're not men at all.
The women? Greedy and stupid. Obesessed with materialistic crap, all they care about is themselves and some bogus 'career'.
just found out from a reliable souce that Collette and Hannam stabbed jon walker in the back,thats why gri££ had to sack him.
Lancaster bnp Chris
The reason for the lack of children is too much money. People are now obsessed with their holidays and so on and don't want kids in the way. Before they could not get a lot of things however hard they tried so placed children more highly in the scheme of things.
It's the women who make the decision whether to have children. Try working with the young ones. Obsessed with Hello, Starbucks and their hols. They've lost touch with being feminine in my view. Sort of half copies of effeminate men now a lot of them and brainwashed by feminism.
The reason for the lack of children is too much money. People are now obsessed with their holidays and so on and don't want kids in the way. Before they could not get a lot of things however hard they tried so placed children more highly in the scheme of things.
15 November 2008 00:17
There's probably some truth to this although I would replace money with credit. In my youthful days I remember finding parents transporting their three children in the back of a secondhand Vauxhall Cavalier or Ford Escort. They paid upfront for everything bar their home, and if they couldn't afford it then they would either save up or go without. Nowadays I find parents transporting their only child in the back of a SUV or people carrier less than one year old and there's also an equally new BMW or Mercedes in their driveway. They have bought them on credit along with most of the other stuff in their house. Perhaps if credit apart from mortgages was next to impossible to obtain then parents would start taking more interest in children and families.
What makes nationalist males think that swathing bands of whites naturally equals a peaceful, secure existence for them?
Do you honestly believe that Victorians and other such generations who didn't have access to reasonably effective modern family planning methods were happy bearing very large families?
We don't even need millions of us for national security/cannon fodder anymore with the advent of nuclear weapons etc.
Overpopulation on the other hand creates problems of its own. In fact, we couldn't even feed ourselves without foreign imports until fertilisation science (around the time of WW1) enabled us to grow more food in a shorter space of time. I might add; the poorest nations such as Africa and India are overpopulated too and its difficult to control and educate large nations. They become a liability when you try as with the empire which is why we tried to wave bye bye to it but it then moved in instead for more goodies from us!
Without the third worlders eating us out of house and home would life really be so bad here if we were a nice tidy little self contained unit?
No one is arguing for huge Victorian families. But very small ones or none when immigrants are here outbreeding us is a quite different position from what we might sensibly do as a self-contained unit.
Further, a lack of children creates a mindset indifferent to the future - focusing on empty entertainments and bogus celebrity. Worse, you hear people saying that it's not fair to reproduce in a world as it is.
It's the mindset of a suicide cult not rational planning.
Post a Comment