7 Progressive Laws That Are Causing Demographic Collapse

It’s no secret that much of the world is in demographic decline, with developed nations breeding below their replacement rate. To solve this problem, developed countries have spent decades buttressing their shrinking populations with hordes of culturally dissimilar, lower-IQ immigrants. What could possibly go wrong?

In the United States, millions of immigrants have been making California more and more like the shitty countries they were so eager to leave, and recently Los Angeles proudly declared itself “the northern capital of Latin America.” Meanwhile, Europeans have taken in millions of Muslims who, as it turns out, want to conquer and convert them.

Fortunately, people are finally starting to realize the devastating effects of lax immigration policies, and they’re beginning to pay attention to the underlying problem of demographic decline. Much has been written about how the progressive culture of death needs to be dismantled. However, if developed nations are to secure their future, they must also repeal the progressive laws, policies, and programs contributing to low birth rates.

1. Non-discrimination laws

Anti-discrimination laws (03)

Men work more. They work more overtime, they don’t take maternity leave, and they almost never take mid-career breaks to raise their children. Hiring a man makes more economic sense than hiring a woman, but anti-discrimination laws force companies to hire more women instead.

Firstly, this leads to more women being employed in higher-paying jobs. As a consequence, women have a greater incentive to delay marriage, to delay having children, and to have fewer children in the pursuit of their allegedly fulfilling careers.

Secondly, hiring more women in higher-paying jobs displaces the men who otherwise would have worked those jobs. These men now have a reduced earning capacity, making it harder for them to have more children.

2. Permissive divorce laws and welfare for single moms

Single Mom

When people think of unmarried mothers, they often imagine a ghetto woman with a litter of kids, demanding that the government needs to pay for them. In contrast, when people think of married women, they often imagine a middle-class woman with only one or two kids. From these stereotypes, it seems that modern marriage is a cause of demographic decline.

However, the truth is that these stereotypes are outliers, and that marriage actually leads to more children. The majority of children are born to married parents, and a married woman is likely to have more children than an unmarried woman.

This makes sense because most women want to have children with a husband for romantic and financial reasons. Welfare removes some of the immediate financial incentives for women to get married, and permissive divorce laws remove the legal barriers that keep them married. This creates a long-term disadvantage for women later on because most men don’t want to marry a woman with a kid. Even if these women do manage to find a man to marry them, they will have wasted several of their fertile years on the carousel, leaving them with less time to have more children.

3. Alimony and child support laws

Alimony (02)

Firstly, these laws remove many of the immediate financial incentives for women to get or stay married. As noted earlier, unmarried women have fewer children. They also have a harder time getting married and having more children if they already have kids when they re-enter the marriage market.

Secondly, these laws sap resources from divorced men, making them less capable providers for new children with new wives. Because of these laws, having one kid with your ex-wife, plus one kid with your current wife, is much more expensive than having two kids with your only wife.

4. Abortion


Firstly, abortion kills nascent members of society.

Secondly, it removes one of the reasons for young people getting married. Historically, young lovers who made an accidental fetus would be pressured (possibly at shotgun-point) to get married. With abortion, that same young couple can continue putting off starting a family. If they split up, the woman will burn through more of her fertile years looking for another man with whom she can finally start a family.

Lastly, abortion facilitates women pursuing their careers. For a woman, having a career leads to delaying motherhood and having only a couple of kids because she’s too busy to have more.

5. Government-backed student loans

Government Loans

Leftists want every last person to get a university education, regardless of what people study, and regardless of the burdens to society and the students themselves. However, unlike leftists’ utopian fantasy, not all education is created equal. STEM degrees and vocational certifications provide a clear benefit to both society and the individuals who earn them. Other degrees (those in arts, humanities, and many of the social sciences) do not. Government-backed student loans encourage and subsidize young people making poor educational choices.

For a man, getting a worthless degree means that he wasted several years of his life, only to end up with a reduced earning potential and massive debt. This greatly reduces his ability to provide for a family, making it harder for him to have more children.

For a woman, the situation is even worse. Just like a man, getting a worthless degree means that she’s destined for a low-paying job and massive debt. More importantly, she wastes the prime of her life by spending four or five years in school, and another two or three years trying out her career before hopefully figuring out that she screwed up and needs to start a family.

By this time, she has financial burdens which make it harder to pay for children, and she has fewer years left in which she can produce those children. Worse yet, some women never see the light, instead doubling down on the feminist dream by going to grad school or putting even more time into their careers. These poor souls will be lucky to pop out one or two kids before their ovaries close up shop for good.

6. Social security and medicare

Social Security (02)

These programs are welfare for the old. Although people like to complain about government borrowing from the Social Security trust fund, this is just a case of the government making a bad problem worse. The simple math is that the average retiree will collect more from Social Security and Medicare than what he or she put in.

These programs subsidize low birth rates because parents no longer need to rely on their children to take care of them in their old age. Historically, having a lot of children provided an economic benefit because they would work on the family farm and eventually take care of mom and dad. With socialism, parents no longer need to rely on their children to support them later in life, and so they have less incentive to have those children, all while racking up more government debt.

7. Welfare for the infirm


This includes government funding of nursing homes, adult foster homes, and special education. Traditionally, families took care of their own, including the physically and mentally infirm. This meant that someone (the wife) would have to stay at home to do the care-taking.

Even if a woman has to stay home to take care of a demented grandpa or a retarded sister, she would still have much more time to raise children than if she left home every day to work a full-time job.

The Big Picture

A free market with some common-sense regulations is so beneficial to society because it encourages the most efficient production of goods and services. However, in order for a society to sustain itself, it also needs to produce children. By interfering with the free market and destroying common-sense regulations on marriage and family, progressives have created a dangerously inefficient system of producing children.

For developed societies to regain their strength and vitality, progressive laws must be repealed and replaced with policies that encourage large, healthy families.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Read More: Demographic Ruin Is Upon Us

199 thoughts on “7 Progressive Laws That Are Causing Demographic Collapse”

  1. Repealing these laws – might be too late. We gotta have a collapse followed by a civil war whichcould very well lead to the dissolving of the USA into 4 separate nations.

  2. People need a safety net, but that net should not be a hammock.
    As far as permissive welfare for single moms, I have what I think is an easy fix.
    A single mom has an unplanned pregnancy. The father is unable or refuses to help. The state then offers assistance, but it does not INCREASE is she has more kids. To explain further, she gets an amount of $, but if she has another kid she gets the same amount. She will have to budget her assistance.

    1. I agree. Things wont get better if we remove all safety nets, but we need to lessen the ones we already have.

      1. I would vociferously disagree. It is absolutely essential that ALL government funded safety nets be removed. To be frank, it is not the governments job to financially care for it’s citizens; bare in mind that all of that money going to support the dumb bitch who spread her legs in the first place came from the taxes stolen from somebody else who had the good sense NOT to go whoring around. It there is even one iota of government funded support left in the system, then it is guaranteed to fail. There is no other way of looking at it.

    2. The state basically awards single moms for having more kids by giving them more money.

      1. The state also WANTS more single moms to have more kids SO THAT the state can take more money from productive members of society and transfer them via welfare programs. Remember, the State always wants to grow in size and scope.
        The more money politicians have to play with, the more important and powerful they feel. The bureaucracy always tries to grow, and society suffers.

        1. #11 Multiculturalism
          #12 Emotional-based Policy


        3. I’m of Scottish roots, so I just wear a kilt everywhere. Feeling your womb-raider breathe is an indescribable freedom.

        4. I believe the term is Cultural Marxism.

        5. I used to despise multiculturalism but after careful analysis, I reconsidered my position. Hint: Other cultures will support returning to the patriarchy because their cultures are predominantly patriarchal.

        6. Haha, funny, I just returned from the store, dismayed at the poor selection of low quality undergarments from Jockey and Fruit of the Loom. What do you recommend?

        7. Not seeing how this reduces the birthrate except to prevent frustrated closeted dads from fondling sons.

        8. The only falling sperm count suffered by western men is the size of their pay checks.

        9. Of course it reduce birthrates, fagots don`t reproduce and more of them lower the birthrates. Fagot rights/promotion is faggotry propaganda.

        10. Faggots can reproduce through artificial insemination by making surrogacy agreements. It causes no reduction in voluntary reproduction which is the only kind I’m interested in promoting. Obviously it reduces accidental pregnancy and unwilling parents, but I’m utterly okay with this. I only wish we could achieve faggot-level statistics in this for heterosexual fucking.

        11. Upvoted based on recent experience…ran out of underwear in Thailand. (Don’t ask its a schlong story) And have you used the condoms out there?! Needless to say I’m walking like a man with a groin injury.

    1. A rational society would make it a lot harder for gay men to get together and engage in their alienating, medically hazardous and dehumanizing “sex acts.”

        1. “There will always be homosexuals regardless.”
          Of course, but that’s like saying that there will always be criminals, so don’t take any steps to minimize crime and children growing up to become criminals.

          “One never knows when the homosexual is about, he may appear normal, and it may be too late when you discover he is mentally ill” – Boys Beware.
          “Public restrooms can often be a hang out for the homosexual. Bobby and his friends hadn’t noticed the man who had been in the restroom when they changed…” – Boys Beware.
          Of course, the video is labeled by “Creepy Anti-Gay Propaganda from the 1960s” by whoever posted it. Still common sense, basic awareness, and sound advice.

          Detective John Sorenson of the Dade County (FL) Morals & Juvenile Squad warns an auditorium full of children about the consequences they will face if they become homosexuals. “They can be anywhere. They can be judges, lawyers, we ought to know, we’ve arrested all of them…. And you will be caught. Don’t think you won’t be caught. This is one thing you can’t get away with, if you aren’t caught by us, you’ll be caught by yourself, and the rest of your life will be a living Hell”
          Today, government in the USA would make children watch videos with narratives such as, “Cindy and her friends noticed a naked person with a penis in the locker room while they changed, being ignorant of the wonderful diversity of human sexuality, they ran out screaming. Unfortunately for them, the alleged ‘man’ self-identified as a woman, so Cindy and her friends were guilty of a hate crime. Remember ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law. Intolerance will not be tolerated and the rest of your life will be a living Hell”

        2. Because part if it is inborn. Even these ‘Ex-Gay’ therapies don’t work. They just are bi at the most if they ever ended up having straight relationships afterwards. Some of it is environmental, of course.

    2. Honestly, I don’t see why gay marriage is such a problem for some people.
      Problem is that heterosexual families are broken, that children don’t have a stable family neither a father model, that there’s no core values and everybody is thinking that the world owes him/her something. Problem is the ubiquitous sjw bullshit.
      If a modern heterosexual family is a washout, blaming the gay couple that lives in the 5th because they married or didn’t marry is just a poor excuse to avoid responsibility.

      1. Read Allison Bechdel’s “Fun home” for how homosexual predilections can affect a child’s sexual development.
        But if the homosexuals adopt binary masculine/feminine gender roles there won’t be many problems.

        1. I’ll do. I just read in the wiki that the book is about one person discovering she’s lesbian… so what? 90% (or more) are heterosexual, we’re far enough. The problem is not about gay couples, let them live their live. The problem lies in heterosexual couples not having children or not committing into a family.

        2. Her father was a closet homosexual, taking his frustration out on his children, mainly Alison, as she was the oldest.
          A well-adjusted homosexual is no problem, just as a well adjusted heterosexual is no problem. Its the screaming zealots you have to worry about.

        1. Milo wrote for the catholic herald? Thats like a muslim writing for the bacon tribune

        2. For a gay Greek Jew Brit he’s okay. I wasn’t aware he was Catholic tho.

        3. I like him too- charming and eloquent. still doesnt explain how he landed that gig

      2. “Honestly, I don’t see why gay marriage is such a problem for some people”
        Roosh already wrote an article addressing exactly what you stated, in fact your words (very similar) can be found in the first few sentences of the first paragraph:

        Why Homosexual Marriage Matters For Straight Men

        The concerns are examined in that piece.

      3. “If a modern heterosexual family is a washout, blaming the gay couple
        that lives in the 5th because they married or didn’t marry is just a
        poor excuse to avoid responsibility.”
        That’s true to an extent. But since the 60s many feminists and progressives (read Marxists) seem to have supported gay rights (if not necessarily gay marriage) mainly (or at least partly) as a battering ram against the old patriarchal order. “Gay/Equal marriage” came onto the agenda quite late in the day, and many gays don’even seem to have even cared about it that much until the activists told them they should. Back in the 90s the conservative gay Andrew Sullivan was pretty much a lone voice and marriage was considered bourgeois by the left

        1. That describes the situation in US, but in Europe it’s turning upside down. Left has chosen to support multiculturalism and Islam and has turnt it back to gay people, and now it’s the new right who is siding and supporting them.

        2. The left is now confronting it’s internal contradictions – i.e. destroying hetero-patriarcho-capitalism was supposed to liberate women, gays and brown people (including muslims). It was always bollocks from the very beginning. The only thing the left were clear about was what the target was. This was the same on both sides of the atlantic

      4. It equates a very small minority with the majority
        I agree it’s not a huge problem, but it’s not an optimal position either

      5. The normalization and even pedestalizing gay culture can have some pretty poor consequences for red-blooded males.
        If you are good looking or buff in a coastal city you can now expect to be hit on by a gay male at some point. When gay males hit on you, it’s not like a woman hitting on you, or you hitting on a woman. It’s “I want to slurp the cum out of your cock” as the first words. Then you just sit there like a deer in headlights, as you don’t know whether you’ll be charged with a hate crime for punching this obnoxious cocksucker in the face.

  3. I am disabled and I need social security, also remember in the past temples would do all that stuff.

    1. That’s another consequence of atheism/secularism. Not faulting you personally, but the move away from the church has been harmful on multiple levels. The Bible actually says to forgive all debts after seven years, not to mention be charitable and helpful to those in need.

        1. It was explained that they meant the widows “in deed”. A widow in deed was an elderly woman that had raised children into responsible adults and had her husband die before her. She would be respectful, industrious, and in all ways a good example for younger women. The young widow was advised to remarry and get her ass to work for her new family.

    2. I am disabled and on social security, but I am also working a part-time job and going to school to get a better-paying, full-time job and eventually get off social security. Nowadays everything is so digitized, automated and information-based that it doesn’t take much physical ability to earn a living. I’m not down on anyone who gets social security (remember I’m still on it myself) but I think if you can work it’s better to be able to support yourself, even if it takes some extra effort to get there.

  4. The most important factor is URBANIZATION. People need to feel there is enough space for them to reproduce. They say it takes a village to raise a child but the extended family typical of rural settings is much less common in urban areas.
    Urbanization changes the role of the family, demographic structures, the nature of work, and the way we choose to live and with whom. Children are clearly less useful in urban settlements, as units of labor and producers, than in rural settings, and are more expensive to house and feed.
    All other factors listed in the article stem from the massive increase of urbanization in the last 10-15 years.
    Urbanization is also a major factor for the rise of homosexuality and homosexual behaviors (sex for pleasure).

    1. Some creatures need larger habitats than others and don’t do well in small cages. Maybe that includes humans.

  5. As these points show, the ultimate goal of progressivism is to destroy the family unit, the cornerstone of a strong, moral, free society. Cohesive families = strong societies = resistance to the globalist agenda. The government has replaced the father as the head of the household and molded itself as the Big Daddy of society.

    1. Very very well put. I’m not sure what other conclusion people can draw. Call it social engineering or a conspiracy or whatever – the West is being destroyed by design.

    2. They even say that fathers are unneccessary in the lives of their children, and even when they don’t, they wants father to take the role of the woman, it’s sick.

    3. Anything that enables single women is destructive to civilized society
      That’s half the things on this list

      1. Are you seriously saying that because they are a minority, they should have less rights? I completely disagree with all the positive discrimination bullshit and the multiculturalism permanent victimism, but what you’re actually saying is “let’s give them less rights because they’re a minority”
        Then, I suppose you should support the same standard with asian people in western world, since they’re a minority too, shouldn’t you?

  6. “millions of immigrants have been making California more and more like the shitty countries they were so eager to leave”
    Haha, nicely done. Always enjoy the writing on this site.

    1. Depends. While some Latin American immigrants tend to be quite tidy, the ones from Central America are a nasty bunch. And don’t get me started on the Indians and the Pakis.

  7. FINA-Fucking-LY ! ROK is finally pointing fingers and identifying the negatives to help us adapt and distinguish! True improvement !
    God is smiling down at us here while we’re trying to figure shit out !
    Thank you for this article !!!!

  8. I think we need to look more closely at how hormonal contraceptives have damaged women’s willingness to start families. Women on the Pill will marry men who look good to them at the time while these artificial hormones sabotage their fertility cycle and impair their judgment. Then when these women go off hormonal contraceptives with the goal of becoming pregnant, these same men mysteriously turn sexually yucky to them. This has to affect women’s willingness to accept insemination from such men.
    By contrast, naturally cycling women will probably make more authentic choices in husbands as they heed the call of nature.

    1. I believe this was covered a few months back, perhaps in the comments section. Basically, there were studies that showed women smell men differently on/off the pill. A man they might think smells nice while on the pill could smell terribly off of it. There’s probably some other subtle changes in preferences that go along with this phenomenon.

      1. Hmm, I’m not on the Pill and there is a guy in my Sunday school class who gets an A+ on my sniff tingle test, and looks-wise he is about an 8 on my personal scale (I have odd taste in men though, so I think most people would probably put him closer to a 5) now I’m considering going on the Pill and seeing if he suddenly looks and smells like a dump on a summer afternoon. For Science.

        1. I actually was on the Pill for a couple years in my teens, not for birth control but to regulate heavy periods. Didn’t really notice any differences in how I felt on it, except I do remember it seemed like my sex drive went way up after I came off it, but that could have just been the age/stage of development I was at at that point.

    2. Sort of like if a guy was drunk the whole time he was dating a girl and then sobered up after the wedding and found out a 10 minus beer-goggles equals a 2. I think women marry guys they aren’t really physically attracted to enough as it is, between marrying for money or social status and marrying a guy because he’s a “nice guy” who treats her well/makes her laugh/whatever, but artificial hormones messing with a woman’s tastes and making her think a guy is hot who she would never be attracted to off the Pill has to have an effect too.
      Men hardly ever do this, whatever other qualities a girl may have, if she flunks the boner test, she can forget about even a first date, never mind a ring. I’ve often wondered how different the world would be if women applied the tingle test just as rigorously, relying on their gut (read: genital) instincts to select a mate instead of the complicated mental/emotional/(and yes) financial calculus most women use now.
      That being said, if given the choice I would choose an ugly rich guy over a hot poor guy. This seems to be the smart, logical choice that would be better in the long-run, but who knows, maybe my vagina is smarter than my brain, at least when it comes to choosing a husband.

      1. That’s because the poor hot guy wouldn’t even notice you. You have to pass his boner test regardless if he’s hot or not.

        1. True, same with the ugly rich guy. Now an ugly poor guy MIGHT possibly be thirsty enough to scarf up the scraps of womankind.

        2. And that is why I advise guys to take their dates out in a bomb of a car. That way she is going out with him and not the car.

        3. In that case men need to be taught how to spot make up so as to recognise when chicks are doled up. I’ve often told my daughter that women wearing makeup have issues regarding their own appearance.

      2. Of course you’d marry the ugly rich man, because you know you can always divorce him and get a house and support payments, and then ride the cock carousel with more attractive poor men. That inner whore is always right under the surface, there’s no complicated calculus about it.

        1. True, in the back of my mind I always know that “Alpha fucks, beta bucks” option is available. As a Christian that wouldn’t be something I would actually do though. I would rather give up sexual satisfaction in exchange for financial security than the other way around.

        2. makes me sick to think that when this is happening, – every single female on the premises knows whats happening. disgusting.

        3. I’m not a Christian, yet we share common ground on this matter. After all, money lives forever. Plus, it’s usually women who tell you money comes money goes, since it’s not their money. Wrong. You buy a woman jewelry and she keeps it when you break up, you lose that money and never get it back.

        4. That’s why you make sure if you get jewellery for her, put it on a payment plan and make sure that she is the one who’s name is on it. While the relationship is on the go you pay. If the relationship goes belly up you stop paying and she is stuck with the rest of the bill.
          Of course you tell her that the reason you’re putting the payment plan in her name is because it will be hers and make it sound all romantic. Never tell them the real reason.

      3. It’s the Tale as old as time, women always go for the Green$ over looks, always…That being said Alpha Fucks/Beta Bucks isn’t totally accurate, as the third element Alpha Fucks and Bucks can exist as well. But yeah, it’s pretty simple really, women always want the guys who offer the most security, and those guys are always the most wealthy, the best thing a Man can do is buckle down get serious about life, and make something of himself, not just for women, but self fulfillment.

        1. “the third element Alpha Fucks and Bucks can exist as well”
          Ah yes, this is the ultimate Dream Man for every woman, the hot guy with money. Though as I’ve mentioned, my taste in men is a bit unusual, most of the guys I think are bangable would probably be considered betas

        2. I think a Man who is beta can still be a good Man, I think Men and women view the Alpha/beta concept differently, but let me ask, if you had to choose between Alpha poor and beta poor, who would you choose? Also what about Alpha Rich and beta rich, who would you choose? Alpha Middle class and beta Middle Class? BTW Alpha doesn’t necessarily mean a Man is good looking, and beta doesn’t necessarily mean a Man is ugly, Alpha Men are primarily made up of Men who have lots of confidence, where as a beta won’t have any confidence, so looks don’t really determine a Man’s category placement as Alpha or beta, Alpha or beta is more about how a Man acts.

      4. “Men hardly ever do this, whatever other qualities a girl may have, if she flunks the boner test, she can forget about even a first date, never mind a ring.”
        Starve a man of kunt long enough and watch his boner test standards plummet to anything with a pulse.. Its a biological curse women take well advantage of.
        This can also occur when the standard of women men have access to drops significantly. It could explain why women are so supportive of each other becoming overweight and degenerate.
        I have noticed a problem in the sexual marketplace when a low value woman starts expecting a 9/10 man that pumped them a few times as future husband material.
        Women not caring about looks or being way down the list is probably the biggest myth men have swallowed I believe. Even pick up tries to kid itself with its dress better and lift weights (which are correct) ideals but looks aren’t important guys.

    3. Excellent point. Also important to note that birth control is not filtered out of municipal water supply so all women and men are exposed. Changes endocrine chemistry and causes bizarre mating choices in women and overall faggotry in men. Filter your water gentlemen!

      1. Chinook Salmon fished in the Puget Sound has opioids, birth control pills, tranquilizers, in em…rather disturbing article on this over at naturalnews…

        1. Interesting and depressing article. I only buy certain species of fish to minimize heavy metals but seems I also have to worry about a cocktail of other contaminants. Need to go for deep sea fish. Livestock have hormones and growth promoters added to their feed or with implants and moldy grain feed, so fish ‘used’ to be a good alternative. It would not surprise me in the least that the contaminants in fish along with chemicals in the food chain contribute to things like the higher levels of allergies, learning difficulties, and the declining testosterone levels in men for instance. The author of this article is worried about decline in population but polluted natural resources & production line meat are not going to go the other way with an ever growing population (not without a change in lifestyle).

    4. Don’t forget the plastics and other ‘legal’ drugs that are testostrone-suppressive (eg alcohol).

    5. And when you ask them if they’re on birth control, they get all angry and hormonal. It’s best to just assume that all women are on it.

    6. Sucks for the men in such cases especially if he is going to come out worse in divorce or get cucked but also for the woman making an invalid choice of mate too and realizing it too late in many cases, I remember reading something about this sometime ago, but can’t remember if it meant women had bias for a certain type of male as a result of BC, I’d be curious to know. I know women are more attracted to the cad type at a certain time in their cycle and more attracted to the dad type at another time, so I wonder how BC distorts that in favor of the cad or dad.
      It certainly has consequences for society if its a big factor in the rise of single moms & divorce.
      I was surprised to see the author attack abortion but not birth control. BC basically achieves the same outcomes, but I bet a lot more women rely on BC than having multiple abortions each year while focusing on career and living it up. I didn’t think there would be that many people nostalgic for the good ol days of shotgun weddings. With the current sexual climate I don’t think many guys would would be in favor of having no fallback option if some of their ‘wanna smash’ tinder dates from the month before show up again to announce they are pregnant and they suspect the baby is theirs. Who wants to be tied to some girl that you had no intention of seeing for more than a night or a couple of months of nsa sex at most.
      I would rather live in a society with lower birth rate but all the babies were planned for and seen as a blessing by the parents and properly nurtured to be a good productive member of society than one where abortion was illegal and there where more babies being born to the trailer trash types or the unwanted children were not raised well and grew up to became delinquents or bitter dysfunctionals. Also given the option, better legal abortion than many years of govt support payments to a struggling mother (from societies perspective).

  9. These are symptoms of the disease. Your real problem is the fourteenth amendment, which is the well-spring from which much of this nonsense flows.
    The amendment says:
    All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
    It is a restriction on the “state,” yet our tortured judicial history has contorted it to require private christian citizens to bake gay wedding cakes. Notice how the mandate to guarantee people “equal protection,” while well-intentioned, can be used to justify basically any kind of mischief that the state wishes.
    Note how the language in this amendment courses through all of the issues cited here. It is here that you find the birth right citizenship that is so problematic in our immigration debates. It is here that you find a compulsion to guarantee life and liberty that animates so much of the discussion about gays, trannys and health care. And it is here that you find a warped concept of due process such that receipt of social welfare from the state creates a “right” that you cannot be deprived of without due process.
    If you repeal all of these laws, they will just come back, unless you treat the disease itself. Yes it was well-intentioned when enacted, but it has metastasized, through the legislatures and their useful idiots in the courts, into something malignant.

    1. That whole amendment needs to go. There is a clause in the 14th which protects the national debt from litigation. It’s a protection for the bankers.

  10. This article doesn’t even mention dysgenics within the white race by higher IQ individuals having less children. Abortion is more help than anything in our society.

    1. Agree. Don’t know why so many people here want more unwanted children in our society

  11. I wonder if any countries enacted legislation to encourage production of sufficient healthy citizens ? Oh, funnily enough, I can name a couple. ‘Socialist hellhole’ the Kingdom of Sweden and ‘dystopic’ post WWII Labour led United Kingdom. One up on the American mobocracy. #TheTriggeringGotYouBack.

  12. Agree with most of the article but I’m a firm believer that the elderly and genuine disable should get support from the government in the form of pensions, medicines etc – the elderly after a lifetime of working deserve their pensions. I don’t know how Medicare works in America but in Australia its a very good system the only downside has been all the “newly imported Australians” heading straight to the hospital and getting all their trivial complaints billed to Medicare instead of heading to the local GP and splitting the bill.

    1. I agree, in Europe we pay a huge about every week in our taxes for this privilege in our later years, besides, as an older person I might have absolutely no desire to live with my offspring and their brood of smelly little know all brats.

      1. Agree with that. But also what man wants to be a burden to his children? Let them be free. It’s worth the taxes

      2. All is good and cool until you do the math and those schemes are unsustainable. Unless you adopt the Singapore model, any retirement scheme for the elders will drive the country to Bankruptcy (with current birthrates).

    2. The Australian system is terribly unsustainable and has created a significant lack of responsibility amongst individuals..
      Pensions were designed to provide supplementary income for an individual over the few years between retirement and death. The net results of these pensions? You have an entire generation of baby boomers who hit retirement age, spent all their savings as quick as possible so that they would be eligible for a full pension and now live rather comfortably on the tax payers dime until they eventually die. They don’t die until decades after retirement, because thanks to Medicare, they can have unlimited medical procedures and medication at any cost in order to prolong their lives. You the tax payer are footing this bill, and it is a system that simply can’t exist by the time you reach that age.. You are being screwed..
      Interestingly enough the pension also led to one of the biggest government scams that i’ve ever seen, compulsory superannuation.. With the concept of a secure pension, the individual simply stops saving for their retirement, because they know the government exists to bail them out at the other end. This become such a profound problem that it birthed compulsory superannuation.. A forced, government controlled investment scheme, where 9% of your income is confiscated for later in life. The government has full control over when and how you will draw on that, as well as significant control over where and how it is invested.
      Who would have thought, something as simple as a pension would lead to the nanny state controlling how and where you invest.. The kicker is that the government could legislate tomorrow that those funds must buy junk government bonds. It will eventually be used to bailout the Australian government and its debt..
      These programs bankrupt themselves very quickly, it’s already happening in Australia with the welfare / pension and medicare costs alone accounting for more than 60% of the budget and rising annually. There simply are no more taxes to raise, people are very quickly voting with their feet when it comes to high taxes. I moved my residency to Hong Kong, because 45% at the top marginal bracket was absolutely fucking ridiculous. Now Australia gets 0%..

  13. US Social Security and Medicare sum to 15.3% on earned income up to $118,500. Taxes are brutal overall on the labouring class so not sure if a SS final solution would help kickstart family formation or not.

  14. .3: I knew a guy whose wife had an affair with another man, and the guy forgave her and took her back, the woman had an affair a second time and left the guy I knew, she and her new boyfriend won’t get married because that would sever Alimony she is receiving from the guy I knew. In the modern age if Men and women are equal, then women are equally capable of supporting themselves after a divorce and Alimony is no longer necessary.
    .5. I know a Man who went to college, and has huge Debt, he works in construction now and is not using his degree. Students in highschool are taught if you don’t go to college your not educated, and by going to college you automatically get great jobs.The Man in construction is one example of many who now have incredible debt and work jobs their degrees aren’t meant for, college isn’t for everyone, those who choose college should study hard and take it seriously, college is an expensive mistake if a man is not dedicated and willing to compete in the Real World after Cozy campus life ends.
    .6. Social security may end . Get an IRA.

    1. i love that you capitalised Man, but not woman. im gonna start doing that.
      in fact do they even deserve the respect that goes along with the title “woman”? they should all be “girls” until proven otherwise

      1. The sad thing is, most of us are so obsessed with staying “forever young” that we would take being called “girls” rather than “women” as a compliment when you actually mean it as the opposite here.

  15. Non-discrimination laws. Outside of State organisations these laws are never applied. If you run a small or medium sized business that’s just about breaking even each year, the last person you’ll employ if you really need the specialist IT or financial analyst is an attractive woman between the ages of 20 and 40 as she’ll be out popping babies on your earnings. In Europe, most companies have to pay her full time salary for 6 months while she’s recovering from her pregnancy, if you run a small business you don’t this luxury. As am employer you won’t hire her over a man, no way, even if he’s no as experienced and officially you’ll say the reason you didn’t hire her is because she wasn’t experienced enough.

  16. I get it, third world countries are indeed shitty. But in all fairness, The average American does not live that clean either. I’ve been in white people’s houses, and boy oh boy. They live in a manner worthy of Mad Max. And I’ve driven through Mississippi and Louisiana and some of those trailer parks are a sight to behold. And it’s the same morons going around flying the Stars and Stripes claiming they love Murica.

      1. Meh. Believe it or not, I’ve been considering it for a while now. And judging by how many Americans want to go abroad and even giving up their citizenship, I’m not the only one willing to defect. There was even an article about it on ROK. Plus, I’m not that attached to this country.I’ve never really adjusted to American mannerisms like country music, the NFL, the rampant obesity, the crazy feminists, and the race hysteria on both sides. If anything, I don’t lose much.

        Record High Number Of Americans Renounce Their Citizenship

        1. The Mexicans who earn money in USA, then use it to build up a baller lifestyle in Mexico are the smart ones. cost of living in USA is becoming ridiculous you’d have to be a fool to pay the taxes here.

        2. In fact, one of the reasons I’m still sticking around is to get a degree. In Mexico, those still count if they come from American universities. The number of Mexican presidents that have gotten degrees from big universities (Salinas de Gortari and Fox went to Harvard, Zedillo to Yale, etc.) attest to that. Of course, me getting into an Ivy is a tough shot, but my point stands.

    1. Except those white people aren’t robbing, raping and killing people.
      Lesson: Even poor Whites who live in the dirt are still good people

  17. You should have mentioned the income tax as well. This was legalized via the progressive amendments. The income tax has given government an endless supply of money. And speaking of endless supplies of funding, the law that created the Federal Reserve is another law that falls under the the category of progressive legislation.

    1. Didn’t they create this as a way to help pass Prohibition? Up to that point, the alcohol industry provided much needed income to the entities. Also, I believe it was an unholy alliance between progressive feminists and evangelical Christians.

      1. Prohibition is tied up with the amendment that resulted in the taxation of income. These amendments also seem to have a connection with women’s suffrage on both the state and national level. However, I am prone to believe that the issue is not women’s suffrage but the design of the Constitution. It creates too many pathways for government expansion. While I understand the arguments against women’s suffrage, I also hold a belief that the architects of the Constitution share a great deal of blame for the problems we are enduring in today’s times. We should have stuck with the Articles of Confederation.

  18. There is not one progressive policy that benefits a white male.
    Liberalism was specifically created to marginalize us.

  19. This article shows us why western civilisation is definitely going to go down the gurgler. We know what the solutions are but there are just too many of the mob invested in the status quo for the necessary change to happen.
    I’m hoping Trump will surprise me but the best he can possibly do is delay the inevitable by a few years.

    1. Demography a game where the last man standing wins. Currently all regions (except for some parts of Western Africa) are reporting noticeable drops in their birthrates. Latinamerica in 25 years or less will have 0 population growth. Feminism is seeing to that. Poison in our foods will do the rest.

  20. The trick here, of course, is convincing the 51% of females in society and their castrated brethren to vote for leaders who will implement these laws.

  21. Don’t worry kids. Once Cloward-Piven kicks in, all 7 of those will come to a screeching halt. Well…so will American society, but yknow, Whatevs.

  22. This is my story – “Historically, young lovers who made an accidental fetus would be pressured (possibly at shotgun-point) to get married.”
    Best thing that ever happened to me. Got married at age 17, got a draft deferral so avoided going to Vietnam. Had twins afterwards.
    My three sons are all headed to becoming millionaires. All smart as whips, all handsome, all have given me smart grandchildren.
    Started a second family after the boys left home with a new wife after a few years as a single dad. The two girls from the second batch are off to college and grad school (biophysics). Now’s time to start a third batch.
    I’ll probably ending up with 7 children, maybe 9 if the GF gets her wish.
    I could have been much wealthier by now but I invested in offspring and it has paid off.

    1. Congrats. That must have taken a combination of a cool calm demeanor and balls of adamantium. To be fair, as much as we want to blame feminists and liberals wholesale, it is also the parents not imposing some sort of discipline. And of course, the boys themselves for thinking with the wrong head constantly and not being ready for responsibility.

  23. Social Security is designed to keep old people out of the workforce, thereby opening up more jobs for young people. it only looks like charity. it isn’t

  24. Two things:
    1. Forget social security. Even if pensions were completely privately funded, people would have a huge incentive to save money instead of have children.
    No system where everyone counts on someone else’s children to pay for their care in their old age is sustainable, whether it’s organized by the government or the banks. (The governments and banks know this, and don’t plan on paying more than a small fraction of their obligations.)
    2. Non-discrimination laws are overrated as an incentive for firms to pass over top male candidates in favour of female mediocrities.
    If it’s a worker bee and not an entrepreneur you want, women make much better employees than men do.
    Women are conscientious, they’re docile, and they’re far too stupid and lacking in imagination to ever become the competition. If you hire a woman, the chance that you’ll be working for her one day is small. They only get the top jobs in organizations heading for bankruptcy, usually because no man wants them at that point.

  25. The thing about abortion is that in modern societies, they usually affect stupid people. People with 90+ IQs know how to use contraceptives. Ban abortion and you’d just end up having a lot of extra stupid babies. And besides, resourceful people would know how to have abortions anyway.
    How would you enforce that in a modern society? Babies are aborted spontaneously all the time, you’d have to have trials for every non-completed pregnancy, forbid travel for pregnant women etc.
    Besides being unenforcable, it would give feminists something real to whine about, so that more smart, feminine women would become feminists.

    1. Any time a welfare hood rat or trailer park trash gets an abortion is fine with me. Mandatory sterilization for chronic male and female welfare leeches.

      1. So, the wealthier and better educated have stopped having babies and causing major problems, and your attitude in this climate is to slash your country’s only remaining lifeline to a native future?! Some great mind you are…

        1. The 1% breed like flies. It’s the labouring classes that have put the brakes to reproduction. Not sure if this is wholly down to income/marital status, or if raising future income units so the state can tap 45% of their labor holds small appeal. People may swear alligence to the state and not demur that workers have a social responsibility to support non-workers and the state apparatus that supports them, yet their actions speak truth.

        2. Oh yeah, just what we need! More low functioning , future criminals being squirted out.

        3. You have a good point, a lot of top 1% income men have 2-3-4 wives and kids with each of them, but some have no kids or 1-2 too. The thing that drags it down is women. I have no reason to believe they’re any better off than all the highly educated, high IQ women with disasterous birth rates. So if you add it up, maybe 2.5-3 kids per woman?

        4. Most 1% men leave it up to their wives whether she wants to continue full time participation in the paid workforce after having children. Their wives oft choose to become SAHMs and should they choose otherwise, his income pays the nanny(ies) if hers is insufficient to do so. By contrast, wives for which paid employ is a must, not a choice, have fewer children.

        5. Yeah, that’s a good point. Highly educated, high IQ women have few children because they work all the time. Women who can often just choose to stay home (with kids).

    2. The first paragraph is a blatant lie. Dumb teenage sluts get pregnant and follow through with childbirth all the time (gods, forgive me for calling them what they are, though! The blessed hos are becoming quite precious nowadays). It’s girls who’ve been exposed to the higher education of gender studies (either directly or through elder sisters/relatives) who’re having abortions – I.e. the “smarter” ones.
      One thing you miss, though, is the intelligence of the father is more important to determining the intelligence of the children than that of the mother. Natural selection has never selected in favor of female intelligence and has plainly learnt to cope. After all, since when did alphas give a damn whether she was a genius or a vegetable before marrying her? All that matters is her looks. It’s women who prefer smarter men to increase the fitness of their offspring, but there’s no reason to believe that poorer stupid women would be coupling with stupid men – so long as she’s hot, she’ll be smart enough to know whether she could do better, and men’s lack of caring for how smart she is will see she gets better if she’s looking for it.
      Natural selection has got it all sorted

      1. “One thing you miss, though, is the intelligence of the father is more important to determining the intelligence of the children than that of the mother.”
        That interesting, I’ve wondered if there’s any good science on that. Got any links to show me?
        “After all, since when did alphas give a damn whether she was a genius or a vegetable before marrying her? All that matters is her looks.”
        Smart, cultured women from good families for marriage, family and legitimate children, good looking young horny sluts for fucking on the side (and some times OOW kids). That’s been the gold standard throughout history for men with power. But yeah, generally men care a lot more for looks and women care more for intelligence.
        And don’t upvote your own posts, mkay. >:-|

        1. Can’t quote sociobiology, man – it’s either something you’ve learnt and can spot the truth in at a glance, or not.
          If you want to become more learned on the subject, Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Sexual Psychology and Behavior is a great tome, but A Natural History of Rape is probably a funner place to start.
          I know things I’m saying are true based on simple observations of obvious desires and sexual preferences.
          What you say about marrying “smart cultured girls from good families…” what makes you think there was ever an intelligence requirement?! Men may have a preference for cultured girls, but never intelligence. Even men with every option never cared much for it, so long as she wasn’t a slob
          Men are primarily attracted to youth, fertility, robust genes, so on, all gagued by looks – face prettiness, lack of breast sag, tight hips, so on. Men’s high sex drive makes holding preferences outside of these basics unrealistic.

        2. Any research that relates to inherited IQ faces a lot of headwind when it comes to funding. Working in this type of research can be considered career ending if your conclusions don’t fit the accepted narrative. So finding links outside of say the Minnesota twins study is going to be limited in scope.
          However, I can offer an observation from my own extended family. There are genius level IQ heritable traits that runs from my Dad’s side of the gene pool. My uncle was gifted, managing to do things such as build his own wind generators out of a spare induction motor and a surplus airplane propeller. The man had no formal schooling beyond the grade school level, yet self taught himself to an advanced engineering level. From what I understand, the genius gift goes back several generation before my uncle (only men though).
          The gift passed over my brother and I, but landed on one of my brother’s kids. This kid has a 165 IQ and sleep walks through advanced math courses (he just turned 13). There are no instances of high intelligence found past or present on my brother’s wife’s side of the family.

        3. “There is no instances of high intelligence”
          Obviously the genius gene skipped you, lol. Sorry, I know typos happen to the best of us, I just couldn’t let that pass.

        4. Very funny. It’s true because you can spot it. You’re making it clear what you learned from “gender studies”. Please keep posting.

        5. You’re obviously a fairly stupid person, so I’ll be patient…
          Try actually reading the books I mentioned. A Natural History of Rape has entire chapters devoted to debunking the lies spread by gender studies. Sociobiology/Evolutionary Psychology is the most anti feminist science there is, because it’s devoted to telling unbiased truths.
          The precise reason I cannot tell you why I’m correct in what I say is because, believe it or not, science can be a complex thing. Unless you’ve done some serious reading in the field, you’ll not be able to understand basic points I make that are known to be true nowadays but only learned people really get why…
          Like, detractors are always coming up with the stupidest comebacks. I might say, for example, that all our behavior stems from evolved mechanism alone, but some fucktard will always bring up a point like, “well, we’ve evolved to eat meat, but modern humans can make a CHOICE to be vegetarians.” Do you know what an epic face-palm those sorts of statements are? It’s, like, we’ve EVOLVED to make that choice, too, you dumb fucken ho!
          Every conversation involving sociobiology with a person who hasn’t studied the subject goes down this road – I’m forced to sit there explaining basic fucken shit that people ought to already know before an intelligent conversation can take place. I don’t even bother anymore – smart people can recognize the truth in my words at a glance, dumb people are beyond my help.

        6. Yes, but the first error is in calling any form of psychology a science. Psychologists and psychiatrists have been attempting this ploy for ages.

        7. Bullshit. The brain is a physical thing. It’s measurable and predictable with hard science. You obviously don’t know the first thing about sociobiology and have no motivation to learn. Whatever you do, just stop offering your opinion on something you know nothing about

        8. And thus far, you’re a one trick pony troll. But when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail…

    3. “Babies are aborted spontaneously all the time,” Only 10%. And anyways, most abortions happen after that period anyways.

  26. Abortion(of a healthy fetus) is definitely morally iffy, but I just can’t get behind the idea of forcing someone to incubate a child they don’t want. I wonder if the solution is some sort of government sponsored academy/orphanedge for parentless children. You could have a system where a pregnant young woman with good DNA(European, East Asian, Persian, North Indian, et al) could receive 80K to birth and surrender the child.
    You’re spot on about Social Security. I’ve been dutifully socking away money in a 401K and living within my means. Why am I forced to pay into a state-sponsored tontine?

    1. Well, here’s the thing – if a woman doesn’t want a child then she shouldn’t have sex. Abortion is about women’s right not to be responsible for their behavior. Why should we allow such an absurd right at the cost of a human life?!
      If she was raped, fair enough. Abort if she so desires. Otherwise, take responsibility for the way you behave.

      1. “If she was raped, fair enough. Abort if she so desires.”
        Yeah, right, as if the numbers of false rape claims weren’t bad enough. A woman who was violently raped can seek criminal prosecution of the alleged rapist and give the child up to the state for adoption. She’s damaged goods (one way or another), whereas the baby is an innocent blank slate with unlimited potential, and a mother has far less right to murder the baby inside her (for a mere nine months) than a co-joined twin has to murder the other twin “because it’s my body and I’ll do what I want!”
        I don’t think there’s a single human being alive who doesn’t have many ancestors conceived by genuine rape, not even counting the vast majority of mankind’s existence where women didn’t get a lot of say in who they married (and thus mated with). Once you’re safely born, then one risks nothing by supporting the legal murder of babies that were supposedly produced by “rape,” since that won’t retroactively erase themselves from existence.

        1. “Yeah, right, as if the numbers of false rape claims weren’t bad enough.”
          Rape is not the problem. A court system that increasingly ignores the presumption of innocence is the problem. That and the fact that false rape accusers have no incentive to be truthful.

      2. I would not have an abortion even if I were raped. I have to admit part of me would want to, but the bottom line is, as much as having to carry and birth a child I didn’t want conceived through an act I didn’t want would suck for me, how much more would getting murdered by its own mother before it even had a chance to draw a breath suck for the kid (who after all is completely innocent)?

        1. I actually agree with you dummies. What I was pointing out was, women have always had a “right to choose” except in rape – they can choose not to have sex. Abortion is about “a right to second guess your first choice.”
          If my women were raped, I’d probably kill the raper, but most certainly push to keep any baby unless there was reason to believe it’d be somehow disabled or such and thus a burden on my family instead of a boon.
          Call me a murderer for that. I don’t care. I’m quite anti abortion, but also brutally pragmatic.

    2. Women don’t know what they want half the time. When pregnant, their bodies are preparing them for motherhood, hormones are flowing. Once they have the child they will love it and care for it.
      Most abortions are coerced by parents, friends etc putting stupid ideas in their heads, saying petty studies or career are more important than a child, not to mention boyfriends not wanting that responsability.
      Abortion causes a huge increase in the risk of suicide and mental problems, look it up. It’s way better for the woman to have the kid even if she doesn’t know the father.

      1. “It’s way better for the woman to have the kid even if she doesn’t know the father.”
        This is what the black community does pretty much wholesale. Not working out so well for them, is it?
        I’m sorry, I can’t agree with this. Even “wanted” children spend a lot of time today asking the question “why did my parents do this to me, this place is a fucking hell hole”. Sure, if you’re rich as fuck and your kids will never have to enter the bullshit that is modern society except to “play”, by all means, go for it; they may really enjoy it. But, the reality for children born today is fucking bleak; jobs will continue to disappear, more income will wind up with the super intelligent and the rest will live in a perpetual state of hand->mouth.
        I applaud those with very high IQ’s who do go on to procreate, they are making the children that we need in the future. Problem is that IQ and childbearing are inversely related, the smarter you are, the less likely you are to have children. I can see this at play in my own family, the more intelligent have no/1 child, the less intelligent have 3-4 (all of my generation). Good fucking luck with those kinds of numbers working against you.

        1. Are you black?
          Firstly, before whites implemented welfare for them, blacks had two parent families and did much better than today.
          The black single mum will at least have someone in her life as she grows old.
          Secondly, the world is bleak precisely because the wrong people are breeding. You are thinking existential questions ‘why bring kids into the world’ because you aren’t thinking ‘I need to have more kids so my tribe will be stronger.’ You are instinctively repulsed by the r/selected modern world and haven’t found something to be part of.
          Thirdly, the inverse relationship between fertility and IQ is wholely artificial. It is a product of the welfare state. Remove the welfare state and hard working intelligent people will be having large families. There are genealogical studies in England showing that the lines of people involved in petty crime die out while the lines of well to do farmers went on to become the vast majority of today’s english people.

        2. Thirdly, the inverse relationship between fertility and IQ is wholely artificial. It is a product of the welfare state.
          I have to disagree. Currently the highest birth rates are in countries with the lowest intelligence levels (i.e. sub-Saharan Africa). States with a very high IQ population and little in the way of a social safety net (i.e. Singapore) are experiencing a baby bust.
          I would argue that lack of welfare is not a check on fertility but it is a check on morbidity. Countries like Kenya have seen their population double in the past decades. Their ability to feed the population has not had similar grwoth. If it wasn’t for foreign aid, many of these high fertility countries would have one hell of a population crash in a very short period of time. Probably on the order of something like the Plague of Justinian.

        3. You’re right about Africa vs Europe. I meant that within European populations, this inverse relationship is unnatural.
          Social systems in sub-saharan Africa are extremely different from ours.
          It is possible to find High IQ populations that are multiplying rapidly: Mormons and Orthodox Jews are two examples. They are changing the makeup of entire regions. Singapore and Korea are both affected by overly high population density. Japan is a leader in social welfare.

        4. Okay, I see your point. The Euro cradle to grave welfare did usher in a collapse in birth rates. The young and productive are taxed to heavily to want to have kids and they serve no purpose late in life.
          Children become a liability.

        5. I think rather than completely rid of the welfare state, we need to use it to promote population growth. Give money to married people, people with Children, give at least some maternity leave, etc.

        6. it’s counter intuative but according to r/k selection theory, a lack of ressources encourages pair bonding for life, selective reproduction, competition and group loyalty. An abundance of ressources encourages promiscuity, unwilliness to compete, early sexual maturity and lack of group loyalty.
          France gives loads of money for every extra child but the natives are still below the threashold for maintaining a stable population. Arabs are taking the state up on its offer since they still think in terms of group interests.

        7. “An abundance of ressources encourages promiscuity, unwilliness to compete, early sexual maturity and lack of group loyalty.” 2 problems with that though. First, people are actually starting sexual maturity later. Second, the number of sexual partners has gone down in the past 40 years.
          “France gives loads of money for every extra child but the natives are still below the threashold for maintaining a stable population. Arabs are taking the state up on its offer since they still think in terms of group interests.” Yeah but that is because France has been over run with a rampant STD that can keep you from reproducing called S.J.W.-s.

        8. ‘First, people are actually starting sexual maturity later.” not true.
          “. Second, the number of sexual partners has gone down in the past 40 years.” not true
          Leftism rises in periods of prosperity and people become more right wing in times of hardship. SJWs are the effect, not the cause.

        9. “‘First, people are actually starting sexual maturity later.’ not true.” Actually yes. At one point the age of concent/marriage was as low as 12 in some places , but feminism put an end to that (ironically) in the early 20th century and raised it to 16/18. Currently the average age someone looses their virginity is well, 18.
          “‘. Second, the number of sexual partners has gone down in the past 40 years.’ not true” Yes, it is true. For baby boomers, the average number of sexual partners in their teens/twenties is 12. For millennials, it’s 7. “Leftism rises in periods of prosperity and people become more right wing in times of hardship.” Then why is Switzerland conservative and why is South Africa so far left?

        10. Incel guys are skewing the numbers.
          I’m talking about trends within a country, not comparing two completely different countries at opposite sides of the world.
          I see you like arguing.

        11. “I’m talking about trends within a country, not comparing two completely different countries at opposite sides of the world.” Those statistics about sexual maturity and number of sexual partners are from the US. And if you don’t like the fact that I compared Switzerland to South Africa, well here is a US example: Why is Texas conservative and the Rust belt liberal?

    3. Interesting idea. I have the same thoughts.
      Perhaps it’s either murder or not; rather than “my body/his wallet”
      I’ve been informed by my parents that 3 different female relatives had 40 year old kids contact them that were given up for adoption.
      Apparently back in the day the pregnant kid was sent to “boarding school”, had the child, which was given up for adoption, then they returned to regular school – all kept secret.

  27. You can’t fix it. Just let it all burn and rebuild when the leftists have gone extinct by their own doing.

  28. Why people in this page it´s so obsessed with birth rates???? There no real correlation between birth rates and economic groth, also with some honorable mentions, low populated countries usually have much better living standards than high populated one i.e. Holland, Denmark, Norway, Swiss, etc.

    1. Roosh has written a lot about Nordic countries. Not sure they’re good examples. We all know Europe is suffering mightily due to Arab and Muslim invasion (Even the Pope called it “invasion”). Living standards in those countries may be high due to them not having to spend on national defense, instead relying on the U.S.

        1. Yes. The US Spent about 4% of GDP on defense between 2011-2014, whereas 3 he mentioned spent about 1.3% (Switzerland 0.7%). All but Switzerland are NATO members, and there’s no doubt their security is guaranteed by the world’s policeman, US of A.

        2. Mate. All the violence currently being directed our way is as a direct result of US military “spending”. The sooner we stop propping up your petrodollar wars the sooner we’ll drop off the terrorist radar.

    2. We aren’t obsessed with money that’s why. In the long run, unless Swedish culture changes, they will die and be over run by Islam, and then they wont have the good benefits. Birth rates aren’t a matter of prosperity, it’s a matter of survival. P.S. Holland, Denmark, and Switzerland are some of the densest populated countries in the world, you know how they got that way? HIGH BIRTH RATES! Yet even with that density, they are still rich.

  29. I think Ben Carson would approve of all of the above.
    Let`s hope he`s put in charge of education like Trump eluded to.

  30. Sometimes i wonder if leftists call themselves progressive because they know their policies are actually regressive
    it’s like a pre-emptive projection to shield themselves from criticism

    1. Doublespeak, like “Ministry of Truth” (Minitrue), actually does the opposite.

  31. Have to disagree on abortion. My opinion changed after a number of years (through my work) being exposed to ghetto culture. It is this low IQ, low executive function, and limited future time orientation equipped people that have been using abortion as a form of birth control. I had the “pleasure” of listening to a woman in the next cube over scheduling an abortion with the nonchalance of making an appointment to have her teeth cleaned.
    I am convinced if it wasn’t for abortion, we would be further along into turning the USA into ‘Brazil with colder weather’. We would be overwhelmed by people with a 70 to 85 IQ range and little in the way of self control.
    There is also the issue with the deformed (i.e. Down’s Syndrome). Back when I was a kid, it used to be common to come across retarded kids at various levels of functionality. Today it is VERY rare as pregnancies are terminated should the fetus carry a genetic disorder. In the case of IVF the latest genetic screening (PGD-NGS) decreases the chances of genetically inferior / deformed fetus drastically. I actually came across as retarded kid for the first time in many years. This kid was in a shopping cart (too old for the kid seat) being carted around by his parents. He was howling and babbling to himself, almost oblivious to the world around him. Physically I think this is was 7 or 8 years of age. Mentally, I think he was less than a year old (if that). I think it is a good thing that we don’t bring severely impaired children like this kid into the world.
    If abortion was banned: For every high IQ woman who can’t have an abortion there would be legions of low IQ women popping out spawn complements of your local thug sperm donor. Frankly, I am not convinced that a high number of intelligent women are getting unintentionally pregnant in the first place. In fact, what I see is a lot of women using IUI, IVF in a desperate attempt to get pregnant in their later 30s to mid 40s.
    If you were to go ‘full Catholic’ on an abortion ban (life begins at conception) IVF would become illegal due to the number of embryos that get destroyed during the process (i.e. genetic screening). Demographic wise, this would be a disaster for the human race as a whole. Without a subset of people with 120+ IQ technological advances would cease and society would degrade. Think of Rhodesia when it became Zimbabwe as a real world example of such a degradation.

    1. Smart comment, but you have to consider the societal decay that allows abortion. In a healthy society, commitment-less sex with unlimited female agency is nonexistent. There was no need for abortion before premarital sex and female agency.

      1. There was actually a fair amount of premarital sex going on (prostitution was legal in many areas of the United States until the late 19th century). It was not uncommon for young women to get pregnant in colonial times as well. However, she would be pressured to reveal who the father was, who in turn would be obligated to marry the woman in question.
        IMHO, it is not abortion that leads to a societal decay as a healthy society would have little use for terminating a healthy pregnancy. What has been a major factor (which has been covered many times in ROK) is the horrific family court system and maternity laws.

  32. Article is spot on WRT education, how the push for free-education-for-all drives up tuition costs (supply/demand), and supplies way too many useless programs for millennial artistes. If every idiot has a bachelors degree, it doesn’t carry as much weight as it used to.
    On social security, yeah it’s a net benefit to older generations (may not be for future ones), but I think of it as one way to cash out and take advantage of a decaying society, one that worships Obama and the welfare state.

  33. “Leftists want every last person to get a university education, regardless of what people study, and regardless of the burdens to society and the students themselves.” Funny how even European countries don’t have free education for everyone. The only people who go “free” to university it Europe are smart people, and on average Europeans have less than HALF the number of years in University as Americans.

    1. “Free” is fine so long as the definition of “college” includes trade and vocational schools.

        1. Not at all. We need more tradesman and fewer [fill in the blank studies] majors. And just because something is big doesn’t mean it’s impractical.

        2. Well certainly yes the US doesn’t need more people in University (the US has the highest number of years per person of university, tied with Russia). What the US really needs are factory jobs back from Mexico, China, Bangladesh, etc.

  34. If one were starting a country from scratch, it would be wise to not include these laws in the new nation. But there is literally no way we are going to eliminate most of these, especially Social Security and Medicare. I don’t even advocate this. The people of this nation are so irresponsible and helpless, that without the guarantee of monthly pensions once they reach age 66, I truly believe the majority of them would die in the streets. This will never be repealed.

  35. A great article, Jon. Between what you’ve covered above, and the extra points offered up by our fellow Kings, I really can’t think of much more to add. Well written (and contributed).

  36. The bigget welfare recipient is corporate America and politicians. They get all kinds of freebies, subsidies, tax breaks, etc. etc. And it’s supported by both conservatives and progressives.

    1. I would have to see the numbers compared to what the tens of millions of women receive in welfare. I think women are #1.

Comments are closed.