TheRedArchive needs help
With 700,000+ posts and 16,000,000+ comments archived, and new Red Pill content being added every week, keeping TheRedArchive alive and discoverable to everyone is starting to become very costly. As a 20-year-old student who just moved out and is living independently for the first time, keeping TheRedArchive alive is beginning to cost me much more than I thought.

Therefore, if you appreciate the website, have gained a lot of knowledge and insight from it, and want to show your appreciation, you can do so by donating any amount that you want via the options below. The money will be used on the expensive monthly host bill and any future maintenance of the website.
Thank you, and I wish you all a successful 2021 and a good luck with achieving your goals and dreams!

Best, /u/dream-hunter

The problem with Feminism. Why Feminisation leads to Third-Worldization. How, and why, Feminism destroys itself. Why Barbarism is the last stage of Feminism, and how it all ends.

Reddit View
July 25, 2016
343 upvotes

Source article here:

http://diversitymachtfrei.blogspot.bg/2016/05/the-problem-with-feminism-why.html

Currently, there is a very high birth rate in Africa and in Muslim countries, the average total fertility rate is 4 in Africa and 3,1 in Muslim countries. Africa is projected to have 4 billion people, and MENA 1 billion people. Nigeria alone is projected to have 400 million people in 2050. In most Latino countries, there is a positive birth rate, with the exception of Brasil. Birth rate is positive in India as well. On the other hand, white female TFR in the US is 1.75, in Europe 1.5, in Canada 1.5. The replacement rate is 2.1, and in the event of race mixing, you will need more than 2.1 in order to simply sustain the white population at one level. Even in western countries with relatively high birth rates, the people who are having kids are usually non-white women, as more than 50 percent of US newborn and more than 37 percent of French newborn (1) are already non-white. White female TFR is negative in all western countries. Therefore white people will disappear if they do not change their behavior.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ClgSJdoN8v8/V5YbK3oDTwI/AAAAAAAAAF0/Dcl3jLhNJKgt6ZIhloNVlh8EOEkMJyl9gCLcB/s1600/girls-welcome-refugees-1-667x521.jpg

In all feminist countries, you have negative birth rates that could lead to the disappearance of the native population if birth rates are not raised. Whites in the US are projected to disappear in 300 years. In all feminist societies you have massive third-worldization, lowering of IQ, race mixing with blacks, conversions to Islam, etc. The most feminist country in the world – Sweden, is dying right now due to third world/Muslim immigration. (2) Muslims are outbreeding Europeans in almost all European countries. (3)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=316_1455411063

Barbarism, to paraphrase Lenin, is the last stage of feminism. In decadent Rome, they were ultimately forced to tax single people in order to get them to marry and have kids. Remember what happened to the late Roman Empire (low birth rates, people did not want to get married, infanticide, extreme promiscuity, repeal of anti-luxury laws, etc.). Those masses of low IQ people swarming the Europeans are merely the symptom, not the cause. They are just like the opportunistic infection that takes advantage of an already weakened organism. The real cause though, is the weak immune system of the organism.

Luxury corrupts. Feminism is decadent behavior that can only occur in rich and powerful countries, who feel that they are not threatened by anything, and can therefore engage in various types of decadent behaviors that are actually weakening them. The British historian Sir John Glubb noticed that proto-feminism emerged in the later stages of various civilizations, before they collapsed (20). These are the stages of civilizations:

  1. The age of outburst (or pioneers).

  2. The age of conquests.

  3. The age of commerce.

  4. The age of affluence.

  5. The age of intellect.

  6. The age of decadence. (We are here. Decline could also be observed, as the western share of the world's economy and population is constantly declining, while at the same time the West has become the most indebted region of the world.)

  7. The age of decline and collapse.

This is how feminism destroys itself:

  1. It destroys itself due to its low, negative birth rates, leading to population decline of the feminised group. (You could clearly observe this in Europe, where there is Islamization going on and European cultures and peoples are dying). In the US, liberal white women are the group with the lowest birth rate and republican states have higher birth rate than liberal states. Coincidentally or not, the white women with the highest birth rate are from countries that banned abortion (Argentine and Ireland). One of the reasons why German women do not want to vote for their anti-immigration party is because they don't want to be mothers or to have more than one kid. (4)

  2. It destroys itself because it is dysgenic (dumb women have more kids, while smart and career women are often childless). For example 40 percent of German college educated women are childless. (5) This leads to an IQ drop. Right now the IQ of western populations is dropping, and east Asian students are now outperforming western students according to PISA surveys.(6)

Reverse evolution: women in leadership positions are more likely to be childless: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jqsHWJn6X0E/V4PghmFlKOI/AAAAAAAAAFk/P19PGiGY3WkWuOxnFT_EJrJ48WDE2T9MQCLcB/s1600/maymerkel-large_trans%252B%252BqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.png

When i saw the Economist’s cover for 2016, http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SmwpzySiiUc/0.jpg

i saw 3 western women on it: Angela Merkel (0 kids), Hillary Clinton (1 kid), and Janet Yellen (1 kid). Do you know what this means? It means that those women are dysgenic. That the future women are not going to look or behave like them. Future women will be probably brown or Muslim, and will be dumber than them. That’s quite ironic. The most successful women today are those with the weakest genes. Therefore they are not successful from evolutionary point of view, and the women of the future are not going to look or behave as they do.

3 It destroys itself because according to various studies, women are less xenophobic, and more foreigner friendly, compared to men. (7) They will welcome everyone. In other words, say hello to Refugee Crisis. Sweden, the most feminised country on the planet, willingly took more refugees per capita (who are mostly young single black and Islamic males) than anyone else in Europe. And many people are calling Germany crazy for taking lots of Muslim refugees. Well, Sweden is even crazier than Germany. 75 percent of western converts to Islam are women (8), as well as the vast majority of whites who mix with blacks. In Sweden, the more feminist the political party, the more it wants to open the borders. (9)

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LmrLDEQFJQU/V0iWrOhM_3I/AAAAAAAAAEI/ujk7Te2wF-IyVcLpxuspP8Mv9bv5gv9HACLcB/s1600/Refugees-Welcome-sign-germany-RuptlyYoutube-618x416.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfx4glTU5JQ

Thus feminised groups will open their borders (and their legs) to everyone and everybody, including to more masculine groups who have more kids, leading to the feminised group becoming a minority in its own country. This could be also observed in the real world. All currently feminised groups, such as western Europeans and white north Americans, have open borders policies and are becoming minorities in their own countries. In contrast, less feminised ethnic groups (Eastern Europeans, Muslims, Israeli Jews, East Asians) have closed borders and are more openly nationalist and xenophobic.

Women, in general, have similar behavior to that of minority non-white groups, so they reinforce each other. This could be also called the “women – minority alliance”. You will see lots of similarities between female behavior and minority/third worlder behavior. Such as:

  1. Both use similar language – (I'm a victim, I'm oppressed by big bad white males, give me, give me, down with the 1950s).

  2. Demand special quotas and affirmative action for their group.

  3. Vote for more taxes/government/welfare, pay a small amount of all taxes, consume the vast majority of welfare, concentrate in big urban centers (where there is stuff to redistribute and infrastructure to exploit), and work mostly in public/government sector jobs.

  4. One complains about white privilege, the other complains about male privilege. Uses magical words like sexist or racist, in order to obtain positions/stuff.

As you can see, the one group empowers the other, and they jointly create an environment that is particularly well suited towards parasitism upon white men.

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/--Rb2kW79uio/V0iYH54yNgI/AAAAAAAAAEU/JZtjNKvLQjUnWVkkhabODmDbWpu-MB1RACLcB/s1600/ref2.jpg

What is interesting to me is that feminisation and third-worldization work together. You often hear the phrase “women and minorities”, “racism and sexism”, "white privilege and male privilege" etc. Those words often come together. Why is that? Because women pay only 30 percent of taxes, (10) but receive the vast majority of welfare, pensions and medical care, and benefit from diversity quotas/affirmative action, so they often support other parasitic groups and often work together with them to expand the welfare state and affirmative action/diversity policies. The more influence women have directly leads to more minority influence, and vice versa. There is a correlation between the level of female influence in first world societies and the third-worldization of those societies. You will see the opening of borders and the spread of low IQ immigrants in the most feminist societies, such as Sweden, Norway, Canada, Britain, the US, Germany, etc.

Why is it that low IQ people spread in feminist societies? I mentioned the low birth rate and the dysgenics, but there are other factors behind this as well.

When a bunch of low IQ people move to a feminised country, they will encounter an already existing parasitic environment that is particularly well suited for people like them.

  1. When they enter a feminized society, they will find a welfare state and a massive redistribution system (created by women) already in place, a system they could use and exploit too. If they try to move to Turkey, Israel or Japan, they won't find that.

  2. They will have greater availability of sex: imagine a group of Sudanese immigrating to more male dominated countries like Israel, Turkey or Japan - local men are not going to allow many of the local women to become the Africans' girlfriends or wives. In contrast, those African migrants will find sex and local women more easily available in feminised countries. Intermarriage will be fully acceptable, there will be plenty of women looking for black lovers (the whole world knows about this sexual fetish of many white western women), and there will be zero reaction from the local men. (26)

  3. They will find lower levels of nationalism and xenophobia in the more feminised countries. They will have easier time getting there and staying there. In contrast, they will be promptly deported from countries such as Israel, Turkey or Japan. Local people will protest against them, will segregate themselves from them, and will create an unpleasant environment for the migrants. If those illegals are religious, they will have a hard time converting the local people to their religion, (these attempts could be met with protests and violence) and easy time in more feminised societies (where for example most of the converts to Islam are local women, who often convert in order to marry a Muslim or due to Muslim boyfriend). And, as mentioned above, there will be greater acceptance for intermarriage with the migrants in more feminised western countries.

  4. When low IQ people move to more feminised countries, they find an already existing parasitic environment (created by women) that is particularly well suited for people like them. Women there already complain that they are victims, that they are oppressed, that men are privileged, that they deserve special quotas and affirmative action, that they should be given stuff via the welfare system, via special (without competitive bidding) government contracts and loans (27), or via alimony and divorce. Obviously that environment will be great for low IQ "Give me, Give me, I'm Victim" people as well and they too will join the party and start behaving that way (until there are too many takers and the whole redistribution system collapses). In contrast, low IQ migrants won't find a parasitic environment like that in Turkey, Israel or Japan. No one there feels guilty, could be made to feel guilty, or is going to give them anything.

Basically, many women and minorities have similar (parasitic) behavior and similar (more government, more affirmative action, more quotas, more taxes, more redistribution, more welfare, more “give me, give me”) goals. They also both fear potential white male violence, both complain about "too many white men" dominating this area or that area, and both shout "down with the 1950s". So basically white men in the West are getting attacked by a coalition of their own women working together with minorities. (25)

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ECs_hGW-hOE/V06TqMva7kI/AAAAAAAAAFU/AfM0VPembfgEZgsQ3TClNEI-PfyNmAEmACLcB/s1600/1.jpg

Female influence in society correlates with the level of nationalism/xenophobia in society.

The more nationalist countries are those with more male influence and no feminism, such as Israel (in many ways Israel is culturally similar to the US of the 60s), Eastern European countries, Muslim countries, Japan, Korea, Russia, China, etc. while, as mentioned above, the more liberal and "tolerant" countries are those with more female influence, such as those from Western Europe and North America.

In more male dominated societies, such as Israel, Japan, Muslim countries, or western countries in the past, marrying out is/was illegal or is very rare. Israeli Jews, for example, are not allowed to marry non-Jews. (13) In the past, when western countries were less feminised and more xenophobic, anti-miscegenation laws were wide spread. As western societies became more feminised, acceptance for "marrying out" and mixed marriages has increased. (24)

Do you think it is a coincidence that western societies became more liberal and opened their borders in the 60s, exactly the decade when contraception became widely available, women were freed from the burden of having multiple kids and entered the work force and politics en masse, and female influence exploded? I don't think so.

This is because:

  1. Studies show that women are more friendly toward foreigners/people who are not in their group, and care less about their own people/ethnicity/group. Men are tribal, women are relational.

Among children and adolescents, female play-groups tend to emphasize close (and often dyadic) interpersonal interactions (with relatives, friends), while male play-groups emphasize coordinated teams and large groups (tribes). Mastering nature and the environment, something traditionally done by men, required emphasis on larger groups and coordinated teams (tribes). Finding (and keeping) a quality man and raising children, something traditionally done by women, required emphasis on close, often dyadic, interpersonal interactions. And now you know why women (who are relational) watch soap operas, while men (who are tribal) watch football.

Women are less likely to put their personal desires aside in order to help their group. Basically, women are loyal to close people who directly benefit them. Men, in comparison, are also loyal to people with common identity (their tribe). In other words, women have Circle of Friends, while men see themselves as Members of a Group. (7)

2 Studies show that women are more willing to donate to foreigners in need (women are more altruistic towards foreigners/refugees in need). It follows that a country with lots of female influence should be more altruistic towards foreigners. (19)

3 They show that women are more egalitarian than men. (Definition of egalitarian: Someone who believes in the equality of all people, especially in political, economic, or social life, and advocates for the removal of inequalities among people). White women have significantly more favorable attitudes toward affirmative action, compared to white men. (28)

4 They show that women are less conservative, less “racist”, and less capitalist than men. Suffrage coincided with immediate increases in state government expenditures and revenue and more liberal voting patterns for federal representatives. (7) (22)

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wHCUyKtoRHE/V0ilKmqgwMI/AAAAAAAAAEk/AhWHk_SHtKYqOWv0yd9sS3HHYuUNUXIGwCLcB/s1600/4.jpg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-clEThj00VAc/V0ilNcP-wXI/AAAAAAAAAEo/RHdF4-9W73I7erQ7NZZ-G8ESJq8YQeOyACLcB/s1600/5.jpg

So in virtually all western feminized countries, you will see those things happening:

  1. Economic decline – as share of world GDP. For example Western Europe accounted for 28% of global economic output in 1950 and in 1970. By 1990, this had fallen to 24% and stands at 19% today. A Citigroup forecast suggests it will shrink to 11% by 2030 and 7% by 2050. (11) Similar economic decline is occurring in the US.

  2. Older and declining native population.

  3. Massive third-worldization and foreign (Jewish) infiltration (that infiltration happens easily because females are significantly less xenophobic than males, hence a feminized society will be less xenophobic and more friendly towards foreigners).

  4. IQ decline.

It is quite interesting that Jews, who are supposed to be smart, are not willing to implement feminism in Israel, and have large and stable families, very high birth rate (more than 3 kids per woman), few single mothers, higher marriage rate, and lower divorce rate compared to the average westerner. (12) A woman without a man in Israel is seen as something to be remedied; a woman without children – an aberration to be pitied. A Jewish woman in Israel is not allowed to marry a Muslim, and there are vigilante groups looking for women dating arabs (13) (while 75 percent of converts to Islam in the US and UK are local women). I wonder why is that? Maybe because feminism is not good for the Jews (but is good for the destruction of white people of European descent)?

There is a very high marriage rate in Israel, and a very low level of cohabitation without marriage. Only 5 percent of Israeli kids are born to mothers who are not married, compared to 40-50 percent in the West. (14) Why is marriage important? Unmarried women tend to vote for the left, married women – for the right. In the US, 70 percent of unmarried women voted for Obama, while the majority of married women voted against Obama.(15) Therefore a society with a high marriage rate (like Israel, or Japan) will tend to be more nationalist and more right wing.

If you want to get rid of white people, then it makes sense to promote feminism among them. First, it will lead to negative birth rates. Second, it will lead to more tolerance for immigration and open borders. And third, women will hardly care about the presence of Jews in the midst of their society, since women are less xenophobic than men. So I don't think that it is a coincidence that the people who are on record saying they want to get rid of white people of European descent are also supporting feminism in western countries (but not in their own country).

Nationalism correlates with the level of female influence in society. More male influence - more nationalism. More female influence - less nationalism. Men are the immune system of society. They react against invaders and parasitism. Women do not. No wonder our Jewish friends do everything possible to attack male influence in society, the way the HIV virus attacks the immune system of the body. After the HIV virus destroys the immune system, then various bacteria and parasites move in, and then the body dies.

A feminized society will be more tolerant and accepting society, while a masculinized society will be a more nationalist society. It is not a coincidence that Sweden, the most feminized country on the planet, took more refugees per capita than anyone else. There is only one anti-immigration party there (Swedish Democrats) and women were only 36 percent of its voters; the same is true for most anti-immigration parties in Europe. Women are 40 percent of UKIP voters and only 37 percent of AFD voters.(16) Recently, the majority of Austrian women voted for a pro-immigration President, against the wishes of their men. (23) And in the US, of course, it is well known that Donald Trump, the only one who said that he will do something about immigration, is rejected by the vast majority of women. (21).

Have a look at pro-immigration demonstration (lots of women)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8c3_1442068850

and an anti-immigration demonstration (few women)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a6b_1442695250

Look at Black Lives Matter events: you will notice more white women, than white men.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-1dXCDy8WQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQi3OeR6p9o

You will also see few women on anti-Islam demonstrations, such as those of PEGIDA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f8JE0Y4zhc

So white women are not going to fix the islamization/third-worldization problems that the West faces, since, in many ways, they caused those problems in the first place, via “child-free” behavior causing negative birth rates (below population replacement rate), political support for “tolerance”, “multiculturalism”, the welfare state, dysgenic behavior (highly educated women are more likely to be childless compared to less educated women), and due to the fact that they often ally with ethnic minorities against their own men.

Men evolved to protect the perimeter against males from other (mainly patriarchal) tribes (chimps do the same). Having women involved in decisions about the perimeter (think of Merkel or Swedish feminists) results in what we see – open borders, multiculture, diversity, “tolerance”, border chaos.

Women, for the most part, care about resources and smoothing conflict over. They evolved to fill that role. Stockholm Syndrome is more pronounced in females (17). Women were frequently taken captive by (or in some cases traded to) other groups, and so they evolved to smooth things over with distant groups (whereas their male kinfolk were simply killed). The survival of their genes, unless they were exceptionally ugly, was more or less guaranteed – whichever tribe they end up being with. That is why they are more accepting of foreigners and foreign rule. (18)

So, women tend to vote for resource redistribution and being nice to everybody (including those who aren’t in their group), and for helping anyone in need, regardless of their group. (19)

Therefore, dear westerners, say hello to the Refugee Crisis. It's not going to end any time soon.

Dutch women greet muslim male refugees with the song "Welcome to my land"

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9d4_1452546338

I don’t think it is a coincidence that Jews are supporting feminism for western countries, but do not support it for their own country.

My theory is that if you want to destroy an ethnic group, simply increase female influence in that group. Increase it a lot. And voila. Since females don’t care about ethnicity that much, and are less xenophobic, the country will open it’s borders, and will welcome everyone. As a bonus, you will also get a negative birth rate for the feminized host group.

All kinds of other ethnic, religious and racial groups will move in, and will start vying for dominance; as for the feminized host group, its fate is to become a minority in its own country, to mix with the foreigners, and then to ultimately disappear.

References:

1

http://diversitymachtfrei.blogspot.bg/2015/09/more-than-37-of-newborns-in-france-are.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-05-17/non-white-u-s-births-become-the-majority-for-first-time

2

http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.1097/the-numbers-are-out-swedes-will-be-a-minority-in-few-years.html

see Sweden's terrible performance in recent PISA student tests, as well as its deterioration throughout the years

compare 2000 vs 2012 performance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment_%282009_and_earlier%29

Why Are Sweden's PISA Test Scores Falling? Immigration helps explain Sweden’s school trouble.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/08/immigration-helps-explain-swedens-school-trouble/

3

https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/pew-fertility-rate-for-muslims-and-non-muslims-in-europe/

4

U.S. Republican states have higher birth rate than liberal states.

http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Republicans-fertile-future-Through-the-past-2488626.php

Currently, the birth rate of native german women is very low and below replacement rate, just 1.3 kids per woman, with 40 percent of college educated women being childless, so this female attitude is extremely selfish and shortsided and it will obviously lead to german suicide.

https://www.researchgate.net/blog/post/afd-rise-of-a-protest-party-in-germany

5

Germany agonises over 30% childless women, with the figure rising among female graduates to 40%.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/jan/27/germany.lukeharding

Women in managerial and professional occupations are more likely to be childless.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/07/more-u-s-women-are-going-childless/

New Zealand children could get dumber in three or four generations unless women with higher education started producing more babies, internationally recognised expert on intelligence warns.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10450313

6

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2730791/Are-STUPID-Britons-people-IQ-decline.html

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/mind/iq-in-decline-across-the-world-as-scientists-say-were-getting-dumber/news-story/f08cbe3b4ab62c500e28d4a4e3b64780

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/4548943/British-teenagers-have-lower-IQs-than-their-counterparts-did-30-years-ago.html

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-03/americans-have-never-been-dumber

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/brookings-now/posts/2015/07/decline-in-average-intelligence-marine-corps-officers

Notice the deterioration of western countries' student performance throughout the years: compare 2000 - 2006 vs 2012 performance, nowadays asian countries dominate the top 5 positions. The best western performer, Finland, has almost zero non-white minorities and is 97 percent white.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment_%282009_and_earlier%29

OECD asks what's wrong with Australia's schools?

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/education-policy-not-adding-up-oecd-asks-whats-wrong-with-australias-schools-20160323-gnpno9.html

Vietnam - a poor developing country - now has higher average scores than the U.S. in math and science.

http://www.npr.org/2013/12/03/248320179/pisa-tests-results-in-u-s-are-sobering

"Negative Flynn effect" observed in Western countries

https://diversitymachtfrei.blogspot.bg/2016/07/negative-flynn-effect-jargon-term.html

Average IQ in France has fallen by 4 points per decade due to "biological causes"

https://diversitymachtfrei.blogspot.bg/2016/07/average-iq-in-france-has-fallen-by-4.html

7

Women less conservative, less “racist”, less capitalist, more egalitarian than men

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1982.tb00546.x/abstract

Men exhibit a stronger tendency to favor the in-group over the out-group than women

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/37574195_Social_exchange_and_solidarity_In-group_love_or_out-group_hate

Women vs Men: Circle of Friends, or Members of a Group?

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2016/05/02/male-vs-female-forms-of-group-cohesion/

Women unwilling to take risks on behalf of their group

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268111001545

Women are more focused on the close relationships that they are part of, whereas men are more focused on the groups to which they belong. Men are more likely to put their personal desires aside to help their group, compared to women.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:doi.apa.org/journals/psp/77/3/642.pdf

8

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/women-islam-the-rise-and-rise-of-the-convert-6258015.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfx4glTU5JQ

9

see Green Party programme

https://welections.wordpress.com/category/sweden/

Feminist party: "Open the borders"

http://feministisktinitiativ.se/eu-valsplattformen/the-tide-is-high-replace-the-racists-with-feminists/

http://feministisktinitiativ.se/sprak/english/election-platform/

More women than men support Open Borders in Sweden

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/stort-stod-for-regeringens-flyktingpolitik

10

https://fullfact.org/economy/are-women-paying-60-less-income-tax-men/

11

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703408604576164483486801182

12

Israeli divorce rate is 28 % US divorce rate is 53 %

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_demography

13% of israeli children live in single parent households compared to more than 40% in the US

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.571398

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/25/fathers-disappear-from-households-across-america/?page=all

Marriage Rates Reported Higher. Divorce Rates Lower for U.S. Jews

http://www.davidbarnahum.com/2010/03/jewish-marriage-lasts-because-its-not.html

TFR for jewish women in Israel is 3,11 - twice as much as that of euro women

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#Total_fertility_rate

Very large gender pay gap reported in Israel

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4633975,00.html

13

With very few exceptions, Israeli civil law does not permit marriages between Jews and non-Jews within the state of Israel.

http://israel.usembassy.gov/consular/acs/marriage.html

Israel Bans Interracial Marriage Book

http://newobserveronline.com/israel-bans-interracial-marriage-book/

In Israel, intermarriage viewed as treason

https://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-intermarriage-viewed-treason/8459

14

Very high marriage rate reported in Israel

https://www.oecd.org/els/family/SF_2_4_Share_births_outside_marriage.pdf

15

http://www.today.com/health/new-voter-bloc-emerges-single-women-1C6904321

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/09/single-women-voted-favour-obama

16

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/jan/26/rightwing-parties-are-on-the-rise-but-they-wont-win-power-without-women

http://www.may2015.com/ideas/does-ukip-have-a-problem-with-women/

17

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141104083742.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

18

Men more xenophobic than women

http://faculty.washington.edu/hechter/KanazawaPaper.pdf

19

Donation Behavior toward In-Groups and Out-Groups: The Role of Gender and Moral Identity

Women are more likely to donate to foreigners, compared to men, who donate to their own people.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1998790

20

http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

21

Majority of US women reject Donald Trump

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190403/seven-women-unfavorable-opinion-trump.aspx

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/post-primary-rally-boosts-trump-albeit-challenges-aplenty/story?id=39265102

22

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~iversen/PDFfiles/LottKenny.pdf

23

http://diversitymachtfrei.blogspot.bg/2016/05/austrian-election-women-swung-it-for.html

24

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/zjvs_n5c6kkeionkwnt3ea.png

25

Just Google "women and minorities" to see how this works

26

Arab Migrants Promised ‘Free Blonde Swedish Girls’

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/09/muslim-migrants-promised-free-housing-and-blonde-women-if-they-make-it-to-sweden/

27

No competitive bidding for women only contracts

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/business/government-meets-goal-set-in-1994-for-womens-business-contracts.html?_r=0

28

White undergraduate women have significantly more favorable attitudes toward affirmative action in general and for an affirmative action college policy for Asians, in particular, than do undergraduate white males.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10665684.2014.933694

Women more supportive of affirmative action efforts to achieve "racial equality"

https://books.google.bg/books?id=zXc0OpoyjyUC&printsec=frontcover&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

(Page 73)


Post Information
Title The problem with Feminism. Why Feminisation leads to Third-Worldization. How, and why, Feminism destroys itself. Why Barbarism is the last stage of Feminism, and how it all ends.
Author ObserverBG
Upvotes 343
Comments 256
Date 25 July 2016 08:50 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/61032
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/4ukuie/the_problem_with_feminism_why_feminisation_leads/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
Stockholm syndromeleadershipsingle motherRoissydominancethe red pillfeministfeminismclose
Comments

[–]forcevacum83 points84 points  (7 children) | Copy

Good article. I think its worth mentioning that the end-game after barbarism is females getting inseminated by the toughest Alpha who will have his way with her, so for females it's win-win. Organised Society is created by the vast multitude of Betas so that they could all have a fair chance at reproduction. Do you think women care about this? No. They'd prefer to have the child of an Alpha that abandons them than a man who would stay to raise their kid properly and provide resources.

[–]okkyle6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

I see what you're saying, but the feminism end-game will not be a win for white women. Remember, there are two parts to the feminine imperative: Secure Alpha seed, and acquire resources and security for her offspring. It's the second part that would be absolutely impossible for white women on the whole to achieve in a post-White Europe or America.

How do you think their half-breed blue-eyed children will be treated in a freshly conquered Islamic Europe? In such a society, white women would relegated to free-use slave whores, and not in the kinky Dom/sub way. I'm talking about an actual slave, as the Quran permits Muslims to enslave non-Muslims. A Muslim man would not marry a white woman because having a half-white son would hurt his status in a militant Islamic society, so white women would just have to be left in the basements, lower status than even the Muslim women, and any half-white children they give birth to would be used as slaves as well.

Yes, white women in this scenario would be fucked by the Alphas and that's a thrill for them, but this can only be viewed as a win-win if you view it from a very short-sighted perspective. Unfortunately, that's exactly the perspective that women have, their immediate interests and feelings in the NOW are all that's important.

[–]forcevacum2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I see what you are saying but you are missing one vital aspect. Women want the most desirable Alpha, it doesn't matter about the race or colour. If the tides turn and white women become the second class citizens the best they can hope for is being impregnated by the Alpha of the new paradigm and start again. It's no different to the female Asian's desire for a white man at the moment. If, for some reason, Asian men because the pinnacle of the human hierarchy we'd see white females migrate to that as a matter of principle.

TL;DR; If a new breed of Alpha is going to happen, females (through pre-selection) will opt for it, irregardless of existing conditions. It's better to have a bastard half beed child that continues the species than a genetic cul de sac created by her stubborn principles.

[–]Toolman8906 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy

The tribe is meant to provide for her and the child. The existence of a father is not important to them except in emergency situations where the tribe has been conquered or an event happens and they are alone in the forest/most of the tribe is gone. In the modern age the equivalent is simply where welfare does not exist.

Tribal society is where the female sexual strategy wins, civilisation is where the female sexual strategy is controlled.

[–]forcevacum5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

civilisation is where the female sexual strategy is controlled.

Since this cannot happen anymore the most logical solution is to make a fuckload of money and go the Ronaldo route of a surrogate child and pay for female minders to balance your male energy.

[–]dai-dai-dai1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Organised Society is created by the vast multitude of Betas so that they could all have a fair chance at reproduction.

Dude I'm sorry but this is just a dumb fucking comment. You really think it's so simple that people just created civilization so they could have a better shot at getting laid.

No, this is just fucking wrong and bad history/anthropology.

Civilization was created because after the end of the last ice age the climate began to change. In some environments, it made it impossible to continue to survive via a hunting and gathering lifestyle, so out of desperation, people began to plant more and more seeds of plants they new provided food. Originally they would just throw some out on the ground, go nomad off for a bit and come back to a decent amount of food. But as things got more and more desperate, they had to start planting more and more seeds, and have to take care of those plants. But this required more people living in close proximity, as it was much more work than a hunting and gathering lifestyle. Eventually, people got good enough at farming to produce more food than they ate. This allowed some people to spend their time specializing in other useful things, like making tools, creating religious sites and practices, and building taller buildings. Continued farming efficiency allowed more and more people to specialize in activities other than direct food production. But hunting gathering is a much more laid back lifestyle, so why wouldn't the people in areas where it was still possible continue? Because once the farmers started farming they needed more land, for more people, who needed more land and so on. The farmers could out produce the hunters, and so the hunters had to adapt to survive. Once you set out on the path of settled civilization, there is no going back.

Civilization was created out of desperation to survive, because without it they would have died after the last ice age.

And organized society exists to preserve agriculture, the fact that more people have more children is merely means, not a goal.

But your hypothesis is "the Betas did it to get laid".

Don't be so small minded, the world isn't about your demons.

[–]Party_Olive38 points39 points  (0 children) | Copy

This is one of the best non-sexual strategy posts I've read this year. Not much that I was not already aware of from my own reading and research, but it's very well written, structured, concise and referenced. I have been concerned about these issues for the past couple of years, ever since I truly became aware of how sick Western culture is.

The scary thing is that, if the sectors of our society that are aware of this problem do not act soon, European society and culture will be damaged beyond repair. I, for one, intend to do everything within my own power and ability to stop it. I know that a large part of this community preaches to 'enjoy the decline', and I am strongly opposed to this.

[–]throwawayyourliberty113 points114 points  (25 children) | Copy

Exceptional work. Especially that you are mentioning the anomaly Israel.

Jews are only favoring multiculturalism in white countries. They push multicultural societies in Europe but refuse to accept arabs as their peers in their own country.

A friend once said to me:

"You know, weak cultures are overtaken by stronger ones."

Our culture in Europe is nearly beyond repair. Hence, "rocket scientists", stuck in the Dark Age, overrun and outbread us.

[–][deleted] 34 points35 points  (8 children) | Copy

What is going to be scary is 20 - 40 years from now all these countries will have elected officials from radical sects. Then they will have all the modern weaponry of the EU including biological and nuclear threats. If the EU goes down the rest of the western world could be headed for a nuclear war.

[–]playdontpay22 points23 points  (7 children) | Copy

The mayor of London is a Muslim.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (5 children) | Copy

The mayor doesn't have access to armies and weapon caches. There are plenty of muslim local leaders over the west. This isn't the concern it's the national leadership races and high ranking military appointments.

[–]2comment24 points25 points  (3 children) | Copy

The US steel makers were apathetic about Japan's entry into the steel market once too, after the war. Afterall, they only were selling rebar, low margin and the US firms reasoned it would free some capacity up for producing higher-end product. Of course, up the product pyramid the Japanese went, by the late 70s/80s selling the high-end stuff and US steel makers fearing they go out of business. (Of course, since then, Japan stagnated, China happened, etc.)

The point is that organizations almost never get eaten from the top in demographic change, but from the bottom.

Europeans think these immigrants are going to basically subsidize their pensions while magically being perfect 1st worlders. HA! Idiots. The immigrants are the one that will cash in the generous european welfare until they retire and then their kids will take over once the numbers reach a tipping point, likely the whole system will collapse in a several decades if trends keep going.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy

I have come to much the same conclusion.

I think the key problem will be that most of these countries are nuclear powers and France in particular has a stock pile of ballistics. Particularly with statements in the recent past regarding France being willing to use nuclear weapon vs terrorism and with standing orders to have 1 to 4 nuclear launch capable submarines off the coast at all time.

This could mean a nuclear war in Europe either by France or another country which ends up with an extremist leadership.

Unlike the Soviet and North Korean Situations these zealots are not afraid of a scorched earth campaign and might even see a trade of atomic blast as an acceptable occurrence to spread the faith to the uninitiated believers and to kill apostates/infedels.

[–]dudet235 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

25% of "French" teens are Muslim.

[–]herbalism1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Obama is pretty much a Muslim.

[–]surfjihad3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Diversity for thee but not for me

[–]TheEagleAndTheSnake3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

I wouldn't say Israeli Jews are the same as the globalist and elitist Jews... The latter have been breaking Jewish values since WWII (and before). They are simply the DT masters.

[–]Mudpielol5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

Russians still hold strong. For now.

[–]DumsterFire0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I think that's just anti-semitism. Israel is surrounded by enemies, hence greater nationalism, etc. Jews in the US are a minority and the targets of discrimination, hence the tendency to leftist politics, etc.

[–]stemgang-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy

[–]2comment1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

Not quite that simple: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel#Legal_and_political_status

Although I understand Israel's motivations in this regard.

[–]stemgang0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Arab citizens have been exempted from compulsory service in the Israel Defense Forces.

From your link, it sounds like Arab citizens get an even better deal than Jewish citizens. Is this the point you were trying to make?

[–]Ifuckinglovepron1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Just like blacks in America "get a better deal" with welfare and affirmative action. Except it is just fine in Israel to openly consider Arabs second class and lesser humans.

[–]getRedPill-5 points-4 points  (5 children) | Copy

Why is this on Jews? If so they have been trying to warn us. How is it Israel responsibility and not our leaders or ourselves as voters?

Oh the hamster, not only women.

[–]bassline86 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy

Show me one Jewish organisation that is against open borders for Europe.

[–]getRedPill1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

should they? They are against Israel's open borders and that's enough. YOU and I and OUR leaders should be worried about this in our countries. Not some guy far in Israel.

[–]bassline81 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Then this far guy in Israel should fuck off and stop trying to flood our continent with millions of third world savages by influencing the political processes with his billions of dollars.

[–]getRedPill3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Do you really think an Israeli would give the priviledge to millions of guys (the muslims) that have declared hundreds of times they hate Israel of living in Europe --even with more rights and less responsibilities than europeans themselves-- getting richer, more influencing pollitically then come back stronger to blow Israel? Dude...

[–]MrMAGAMAN 14 points14 points [recovered] | Copy

[–]dudet2363 points64 points  (5 children) | Copy

White people are destroying their nations (that were built by their ancestors) because of indoctrination and mental castration.

Multiculturalism for white countries. Monoculturalism for everyone else. Something is wrong with this. When will people wake up. Its not about preserving a purely european nation, its about preserving ANY european nation AT ALL. Our kids will grow up minorities fighting with other ethnic blocks over resources (and white women.... always fighting over white women, cause everyone wants them) their ancestors DEVELOPED for them ALONE. This alone is a betrayal of our ancestors.

Is there some reason that whites need to be minorities in their own nations? Is there some moral imperative? Can someone explain this to me? How does this benefit us white people AT ALL to become minorities in our own countries founded by our ancestors.

[–]1PantsonFire123410 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy

This could explain why white women are such insufferable cunts nowadays. They know everyone wants to fuck them. God help us.

[–]Gardrothard1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Kosovo is current Europe situation in micro scale. Look how that turned out.

[–]getRedPill-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

White people are destroying their nations

Ehm, cultural marxism and postmodernism negation of reality, which both were made by whites in Europe, so, yes you are right but need to be more precise

[–]UnpluggedMan27 points28 points  (6 children) | Copy

Feminism is but one symptom of a society going soft from too much comfort. It's the underlying hubris that eventually leads to collapse. Not the feminism itself.

[–]tallwheel19 points20 points  (4 children) | Copy

Feminism is both a symptom and a contributor to the society's undoing.

[–]Heathcliff-- 16 points16 points [recovered] | Copy

It is the pneumonia that settles in after HIV weakens your immune system. Symptom and contributor.

[–]UnpluggedMan1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

True. Once it manifests it plays into the greater negative feedback loop of escalating weakness that leads to eventual failure.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

[–]bowie7478 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

When our weakest individuals stopped dying, and began outbreeding the strong. Was when we started this mess.

[–]Azzmo30 points31 points  (0 children) | Copy

Hall of fame material.

It took me many years to come around on these things. It's so fringe from what we're brainwashed into believing in a modern Western education that it's going to hit a lot of people as extreme. 2008 me would be furious at you.

The quality of people is a concept that has been abandoned and vilified.

This is another Red Pill and I think we're going to see these notions spread in the next 20 years as people are forced to swallow it.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

Thw US will continue to thrive because its education and entrepreneurial system attracts the best talent from across the world. This offsets the damae caused by mass immigration and feminism. A great Silicon Valley company (many of which are rounded by immigrants) can generate fruitful employment for thousands of people

Europe has got it all wrong though. It doesnt have a culture of entrepreneurship. While great, its education system doesnt really attract the best from the world

I dont see Europe surviving in the 22nd century

[–]1Jax777894 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

Yep but the future is not set in stone but in choice. Either you are defeatist and let all these self-fulfilling prophecies happen or you get off the chair and start doing something about it.

Europe will have a war muslim hardcore leftists vs everyone else. I give it 2 years maximum at this rate. This is the occasion to show them who rules. A major conflict is the golden opportunity to start massive deportation programs and de-islamize infected countries. So sure feminism is a meta shit test but I highly doubt the game is over for us.

You know, Europeans are nice until they are not nice. Islam is at war is everyone and everything non muslim. Europe has fought Islam for most of its history. We kicked these fuckers out more than a dozen times, we can do it again. And there are outnumbered, undergunned and dumb AF. All they can do is kill defenseless people in an apathetic environment. Against professional armies and men with higher IQ : not a chance. When we win European women will start churning out babies again ( war bride effect ).

So fight and cheer mate life is good.

[–]aDrunkenWhaler0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I admire you optimism, but if a war will happen, the west will not only fight the radicals and a few tens of thousand goat fuckers from Syria like today. They will also fight many muslims within their own countries, 2nd and 3rd generations, they will fight iranian/turkish armies, they will fight russians, they will fight north-african armies. Basically, half the world. Other countries will get involved and boom, ww3.

[–]bhaknu18 points19 points  (12 children) | Copy

As a white guy who likes Vietnamese girls... yea. If I ever have kids they wont be white. That's what happens when all the women in your race are "modern".

[–]1neveragoodtime14 points15 points  (8 children) | Copy

I think this is the most important take away. When you take race out of the argument, I don't care what color the pussy is as long as it submits. I don't care about sustaining a white society, but I would like to see a masculine society. I think TRP would agree with that side of the argument. Our country is living in the feminist frame right now. We need to understand our own frame before we can even begin correcting the societal ills the OP describes within a self destructive feminist society. We shouldn't reject the argument because it sounds racist, we should learn what truth we can from it. TRP isn't just about slaying pussy, it's about men controlling their lives. And when we control our lives we can control society.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's all good, dude. As a Viet guy, those "modern" women love me. Our Viet kids will get along well.

[–]Red_SL41 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Your genes may be safer in a Vietnamese womb.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It's fine. I have a lot of genes to pass out.

[–]getRedPill8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

A text wall bigger than Trump 's on Mexico for a thing can be explained so easy:

It's simple. Feminism is a means to an end: give power to socialism. Socialist societies ALWAYS fail -- economically, morally, ethically, military, pride goes down, cuckness goes up.

Try this and you'll see feminists always leans left: What's biggest thing a feminist voter wants in politics ? A female president, of course. Now ask her/him what's her opinion on Margaret Thatcher vs any other left leaning female leader and if she wants someone like Thatcher as president. Wouldn't matter much, after all she wants a female president no matter what. Well, she will course you and Miss Thatcher just for considering the idea of Thatcher as president.

• Test #2 ask her/him if she prefers a MALE socialist president or a center or capitalist FEMALE president. Same choice, the male socialist always.

• Test #3 ask her/him of valuable women that made real contributions to mankind, like Marie Curie a scientific. They won't mention Marie Curie ever. They will mention rioters, famous 'victims™' of the system. If so, if they ever mention a figure made somewhat important contributions is some politized female figure with bias towards leftist status quo.

[–]Rufferto_n_Groo10 points11 points  (6 children) | Copy

Good.

One critique:

High republican state birthrates do not equate to falling IQ in those states.

Immigration has a far greater effect on IQ due to hispanics being aggregated with whites for those statistical purposes, hence the need for the "White, non-hispanic" category.

Otherwise, bravo.

[–]getRedPill-5 points-4 points  (5 children) | Copy

Aren't just all those labels a dumb thing? Only US obsesses about such labels.

That's why they call you racist in first place, even if you aren't because those labels are a spark for where initially there wasn't racism

[–]redfallhammer4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy

"Racist" is so overused today by the SJW's and left that it's losing a LOT of the power that it once had. Personally, I no longer give a fuck if one or more of these brainless idiots calls me racist.

Labels, as long as they are generally correct, are a convenient way for humans to categorize ideas and how they relate. Humans are damn good at categorizing and finding patterns that help explain the world. It's just common sense. The problem is too many people getting butthurt about labels being assigned to them by other people even if the label is true.

When I was growing up, I had friends that were Mexican, Filipino, Greek, black, and white. We were always making fun of each others race/nationality. We were damn good friends and would always stand up for one another if it was needed. But these days, if people herd the way we spoke to one another, they would be appalled at the language and think that we were bitter enemies. Thanks to rampant femangitis and SJW's, people are over sensitive pussies now.

[–]getRedPill-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy

I'm not SJW myself and I agree those terms are overused. But why always being obsessed about labeling people according to their race (therefore, racist) and not as individuals and what they have done or not as persons, not as race.

[–]redfallhammer1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

It's easy to not label when dealing with small numbers. When dealing with large numbers of people where 80% or more of them behave the same way it's easy. For example, no matter the race, when an American goes to a foreign country, the natives know where the American is from without even asking. Labels. And the natives expect the American to behave and act a certain way because that's how ~80% of Americans behave and act. Labels. Of course we know that individuals can stray from the label and be different but those are the exceptions to the rule. I suspect ~20% of black people support Trump and don't believe he's racist. However, ~80% of blacks do think he's racist and wants to make America white again. It's easy to then generalize that blacks think Trump is a racist. Nobody has time to interview every black person in America to understand every individuals stance on Trump. Label until proven otherwise. Humans excel at that shit.

[–]getRedPill0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Are you aware only US do this, at least among? are you aware US isn't the only country with millions of people? In case you didnt know, there are lots of countries with mixed races. Near you there's whole latin america. Yes, we have blacks, indians, blonde with hair as golden as swedens, we have asians. Yes, lots of asians. In case you didn't know there's a latin country had a japanesse president.

For example, no matter the race, when an American goes to a foreign country, the natives know where the American is from without even asking

Absolutely not the same as putting you are "White-50%Irish-25%Dutch-25%English" in your ID.

[–]redfallhammer0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Of course I'm aware of those facts. In the US, we have integration (somewhat recently), in that different races and cultures can live and work together. However, the different cultures/races of the US rarely crossbreed with other cultures/races. Blacks typically breed only with other blacks. Mexicans typically breed only with other Mexicans/Latins. Whites, regardless of origins, will typically breed with other whites. Asians typically breed only with other Asians. This is slowly starting to change but I suspect that it will remain this way for several more generations. Ultimately, the women decide what race/culture they are willing to fuck and breed with. Let that sink in.

Keep in mind that the US is still a VERY young country, it's VERY large, and very geographically segregated from other races/cultures compared to Asia/Europe/Afirca. Only in the last 100-150 years has it been easy for other races/cultures to get here. Cultural and socioeconomic changes take a long time to happen here. I suspect Australia is similar to the US due to the same reasons but I've never lived there so it's not my place to comment.

[–]102117991072 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

You have any book recommendations about the evolution of societies and also their fall due to feminism? I'm interested to read more about what happened in Rome and all that.

[–]gruttewierd4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Sadly TRP and MGTOW are symptoms of everything described here. When a culture/society stops breeding it is pretty much done for. There are some very anti evolutionary memes to be found in both MGTOW and TRP.

[–]LOST_TALE11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy

women are less xenophobic, and more foreigner friendly, compared to men.

No shit, they want that conqueror dick

[–]Man_from_Poland2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

YEA!! What the fuckin post! Best wishes man :)

[–]ajomojo8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Right on the money. Great job!

[–]ModeratorPaperStreetVilla5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

You give too much credit to femenism. It's a symptom, not a cause.

Age of abundance. Enjoy the decline

[–]NeoreactionSafe16 points17 points  (12 children) | Copy

 

The Globalist Tyranny does not want opposition.

 

So they give us the Blue Pill to dumb us down.

Most of us already know all this stuff (not even in doubt) but if there were any betas who are in need of facts that this is happening you have provided "plenty" in this post.

 

When you want to conquer a people you use "Pacification" techniques that make that people more feminine.

Males fight the tyranny.

Females want to get fucked by the tyranny.

The tyranny prefers all females and no males.

...same story as always but this time the tyranny seeks the "big goal" of world conquest.

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" so expect it to get weirder as we near the climax.

 

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp11 points12 points  (8 children) | Copy

When you want to conquer a people you use "Pacification" techniques that make that people more feminine.

Most of history shows that conquering was done by sword.

Males fight the tyranny.

That is just plain stupid. Men fight tyranny, sure, but who created all of the tyrranical states in history? Jeusu, I get bluepill is bad, but what you just wrote is plain fucking LIE.

facts that this is happening you have provided "plenty" in this post

You should learn from him, instead of manipulating people with words, obfuscating, deliberate vagueness, and, as some dude pointed out "deliberate formatting to make your post seems profound" when in fact thay are, in most cases, contentless.

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp6 points7 points  (21 children) | Copy

It is not a coincidence that Sweden, the most feminized country on the planet, took more refugees per capita than anyone else

You draw a wrong conclusion here. Sweden is feminized, but this is not the reason it took most refugees (immigrants actually).

The reason it took most refugees is b/c once a person gets into EU it can, by law travel to any other country in the EU. So, they got into EU and chose, firstly, the countly with the higest social benefits possible aka. free money.

It took Sweden (and rest of EU countries) months to react to the problems created by the immigrants (after you couldn't handle them, and couldn't handle the opposition to free entry). Part of it was by, most likely, design, part of it was b/c of the law EU and the countries have. You couln't just deny entry in EU, now you can, b/c the law cought up with the need to stop the influx.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 15 points16 points  (19 children) | Copy

Did you read the article carefully? :) Ask yourself why is it that the refugees decided to go to Sweden, and not somewhere else.

First, Sweden was deliberately taking refugees long, long before the crisis started. Second, feminisation creates a society that is great for low IQ migrants, because:

1 Female influence leads to less intolerance and less nationalism in society. Nationalism is like an immune system against immigration.

2 Female influence leads to the creation of a welfare state and the endorsment of parasitic behavior, so it becomes a magnet for refugees and low IQ people who depend on the welfare state and behave like victims (just like women).

3 More female influence leads to easy sex for the migrants.

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp2 points3 points  (18 children) | Copy

Ask yourself why is it that the refugees decided to go to Sweden, and not somewhere else.

High social benefits. Sweden basically gave money for free, you just had to show up.

Female influence leads to the creation of a welfare state and the endorsment of parasitic behavior

Welfare state didn't appear b/c of women. It appared as a result of Indusrial Revolution and high concentration of workers in cities. Than came the strikes for workers rights, then came the labour parties, socialism (economic, not the CCCP one). These were the times when a woman couldn't even vote without beating ( :P), much less influence any politician.

More female influence leads to easy sex for the migrants.

Highly doubtful. Most of them are low(est) status you can get in any county in Europe, they have no real logistical capability to pull (no real house, no real money). This might happen much later tho.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 16 points17 points  (8 children) | Copy

High social benefits. Sweden basically gave money for free, you just had to show up.

Yes, and all feminised countries have welfare states. :)

Welfare state didn't appear b/c of women. It appared as a result of Indusrial Revolution and high concentration of workers in cities.

This study says otherwise: Suffrage coincided with immediate increases in state government expenditures and revenue and more liberal voting patterns for federal representatives. http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/%7Eiversen/PDFfiles/LottKenny.pdf

Plus you do not have a welfare state ala Northern Europe in Israel or Japan. What i argue is that you have welfare states in rich feminised countries, but you do not have welfare states in rich masculinized countries.

The welfare state simply replaces the family, and male influence. You redistribute money from men to women via 2 ways: Either via the family (a patriarchal system). Or the via welfare state: a highly feminised system. In all feminised countries, you have destruction of the family and its replacement with the welfare state.

Highly doubtful. Most of them are low(est) status you can get in any county in Europe, they have no real logistical capability to pull (no real house, no real money). This might happen much later tho.

I do not think this is doubtful. Intermarriage is not accepted in many of the more masculinized countries, and there are vigilante groups looking for women dating non-natives in many of them (such as Israel or Muslim countries). Plus everyone knows that white women have a sexual fetish about black men.

Feminism leads to resentful white women sleeping with non-white men simply to make white men/fathers angry, the so called daddy issues. Eastern european women, who live in more masculine countries for example, do not care about non-white men.

Look at this clip. You will not see anything like this made in Turkey, Poland, Israel, or Japan.

https://vimeo.com/150271055

Have you heard about Rotherham, Britain, where muslim men had sex with hundreds of native young girls and children? If this happened in Turkey, Israel, or Japan, they would be killed.

[–]dudet2311 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy

Japanese marched by the thousands because ONE American solider raped/killed some japanese girl. What do the brits do when THOUSANDS of white girls get raped and abused by fucking pakistanis? Nothing. They sit on their ass and talk about how liberal they are (puke).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

lol that vid is unbelievable, and you're right-you woudlnt find that in Asia, Eastern Europe, Turkey, etc.

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp-5 points-4 points  (5 children) | Copy

simply to make white men/fathers angry

This is the reason for white chicks sleeping with blacks? Not b/c he's more alpha, not b/c the popular opinion of "having a big dick", but to spite her daddy? Be resonable...

Eastern european women, who live in more masculine countries for example

Eastern Europe doesn't have any significant non-white population, therefore it's impossible to say whay they want race-wise untill that happens. However, it's almost 100% certain it won't be any different than any other country that has mixed (or non mixed) population: looks, status, game and so on. The usual stuff women respond to.

What i argue is that you have welfare states in rich feminised countries, but you do not have welfare states in rich masculinized countries.

Google "welfare state in japan" and "welfare state in israel". When you do, google "welfare state in saudi arabia".

What I am arguing is this: welfare didn't appear b/c of women but as a socio-economical consequence of Industrial Revolution. I agree that feminism is somewhat connected to CURRENT welfare programs, but the connection is not "ideological" ("i'm a feminist so welfare is great" or vice versa). Rather - the conncetion is based on pure money distribution and statistically (and steoretypicaly) the random "single mom" is more likely to be a feminist than a redpillwoman. I would also argue that a current "single mom" had NOTHING to do with feminism and welfare from the moment she had first sex ever, to the moment that she became pregnant whan nearing the Wall and daddy would not commit.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

In Eastern Europe it will be different due to the greater nationalism there, non-white migrants will simply have a harder time getting native women without resistance.

In Sweden, for example, this is what muslim migrants are saying: " “It is not as wrong raping a Swedish girl as raping an Arab girl,” says Hamid. “The Swedish girl gets a lot of help afterwards, and she had probably fucked before, anyway. But the Arab girl will get problems with her family. For her, being raped is a source of shame. It is important that she retains her virginity until she marries.” It was no coincidence that it was a Swedish girl that was gang raped in Rissne – this becomes obvious from the discussion with Ali, Hamid, Abdallah and Richard. All four have disparaging views on Swedish girls, and think this attitude is common among young men with immigrant background. “It is far too easy to get a Swedish whore…… girl, I mean;” says Hamid, and laughs over his own choice of words. “Many immigrant boys have Swedish girlfriends when they are teenagers. But when they get married, they get a proper woman from their own culture who has never been with a boy. That’s what I am going to do. I don’t have too much respect for Swedish girls. I guess you can say they get fucked to pieces.”

http://fjordman.blogspot.bg/2005/12/immigrant-rape-wave-in-sweden.html

Feminisation leads to less nationalism. Lack of nationalism is why migrant sex gangs are rampant in Western countries. Less nationalism leads to easier availability of sex for migrants. For example jewish women are not allowed to marry non-jews in Israel and muslim women are not allowed to marry non-muslim men in most muslim countries.

The welfare state in Saudi is specifically caused by the great oil income this country has. If you look at a muslim country which is industialized, but does not have oil, such as Turkey, you wont find any major welfare state, and you will see lots of income inequality.

The welfare state in Israel and Japan is smaller than that in Northern Europe, and income inequality is greater there. Income inequality is a good indicator for the lack of real, effective welfare state in Israel and Japan. I also never heard about alimony in those countries.

Why feminism leads to more welfare state: 1 A study shows that suffrage immideately led to more government taxes, spending, and more liberal voting patterns.

2 Women consistently vote for more left-wing parties, for parties who want to raise taxes, for parties who want to increase welfare, etc.

3 Women pay 30 percent of taxes, while consuming the majority of welfare. So it is quite logical that women will be one of the biggest advocates for the welfare state.

The single mom thing is mostly caused by feminism, because in 100 percent of feminist countries you have implosion of marriage, but you do not have implosion of marriage in Israel, Turkey, South Korea, Japan, and the vast majority of non-feminist countries.

If you look at feminist countries you will notice two things: in all of them you have major welfare state, and in all of them you have implosion of marriage. Things like no-fault divorse, and the welfare state contribute to the implosion of marriage.

Efforts to put more women in the labor force in feminist countries also have negative effect on marriage, since women are hypergamous and are more likely to reject men who earn less than them, which then causes a lack of "good enough" men.

When you remove marriage from the picture, then the welfare state tries to replace it. Single women for example vote for the left and for more welfare, married women vote for the right and less welfare. Therefore a society where feminism broke the family unit and constantly attacks marriage should become more left wing, and with more demands for a welfare state, while countries with more male influence should be (generally) more nationalist, and with less welfare state.

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp-3 points-2 points  (3 children) | Copy

In Sweden, for example, this is what muslim migrants are saying:

AFTER they got there. Not before. Hamid didn't go to Sweden b/c it's feminized or b/c he wanted to rape him some white bitches.

Lack of nationalism is why migrant sex gangs are rampant in Western countries

The rapes are not caused by feminisation, lack of nationalism or welfare. Rapes are caused b/c we let the, generally, uneducated and religiously indoctrinated muslim population in. They are raping b/c it's in their culture (non muslims are fair game, not-your-kind-of-muslims too BTW) not b/c we have welfare and feminism.

Had we let in the migrants if most of the countries, to follow your thinking, were nationalistic? No, we wouldn't. But it's like saying "i hit my finger it hurts, let me cut it away so it wont hurt". Nationalism is not the solution to welfare and feminisation.

The welfare state in Saudi is specifically caused by the great oil income this country has. If you look at a muslim country which is industialized, but does not have oil, such as Turkey, you wont find any major welfare state, and you will see lots of income inequality.

What you just said here: a country that can afford welfare has it, a country that cannot afford it doesn't have it. Turkey is non-feminized, Turkey is (I think, not 100% sure) somewhat nationalistic country, but it's nationalism and non-feminisaztion are not the reason they don't have a lot welfare. Lack of money is the reason.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

There is info in arab media that swedish females are easily available. Arab Migrants Promised ‘Free Blonde Swedish Girls’

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/09/muslim-migrants-promised-free-housing-and-blonde-women-if-they-make-it-to-sweden/

So one of the reasons they go there is because they know there is better availability of sex. Sweden's lack of nationalism allowed Hamid to enter there and to live there and to rape there, otherwise he will be deported or not allowed to enter in the first place.

Had we let in the migrants if most of the countries, to follow your thinking, were nationalistic? No, we wouldn't. But it's like saying "i hit my finger it hurts, let me cut it away so it wont hurt". Nationalism is not the solution to welfare and feminisation.

Nationalism will stop the importation of people like muslims, so it is the solutuion to the current immigration problems. The article up there did not said: "more nationalism should lead to less female influence", it is the other way around: less female influence should lead to more nationalism.

So. If you decrease female influnce, you will get:

1 More nationalism. Nationalism stops the importation of low IQ migrants, and migrant voters are a major voting block supporting the welfare state. Many of the migrants are not working and are on welfare, most of the unemployed in Sweden for example are migrants.

2 Females reembrace the family, which in turn decreases the need for a welfare state due to the lack of single mothers. Plus married women vote for the right and less taxation, while single women vote for the left and more taxation/gov spending.

So decreasing female influence should definitely lead to more nationalism, and less demands for welfare state.

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

So one of the reasons they go there is because they know there is better availability of sex

Not for someone who is an almost homeless and jobless immigrant without the language. It's not a substantial number enough to be considered a reason why majority of migrants went Sweden/Germany/EU.

Nationalism will stop the importation of people like muslims, so it is the solutuion to the current immigration problems.

How about a simpler one: we simply don't let them in. No nationalism needed at all. Really, we don't need nationalism, we simply don't let immigrants from Middle East in. That simple. Do you agree?

Females reembrace the family.

That sounds like a cross between "I want them to", "they should do it" and "look! a unicorn". Women didn't rejected the family. They just have more options to overtly (less judgement) and covertly (internet and mobiles mostly) "practice the hypergamy", so to speak. They always did, they always will, it's their sexual strategy, it's their biological imperative.

You're trying to force women to live in marriage, stay faithful and raise children for her husband (at lest that's how I perceive your comment). You're trying to use economical and political beliefs/systems when clearly w woman doesn't give a flying fuck if you're a nationalist or liberal. She only cares for 2 things: alpha and status.

So decreasing female influence should definitely lead to more nationalism, and less demands for welfare state

Than why not simplify again: let's cut the welfare first?

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Well, i consider the availability of sex to be a reason because there are plenty of migrant rape gangs, plenty of child sex with migrants going on (like in Rotherham), and so on. The majority of assault rapes in many Scandinavian countries are done by migrants. Plus there are plenty of films showing to the whole world that there is lots of mudsharking in the west, arab media is advertising the "easy" swedish girls, and so on. In comparison, in Muslim countries and in Israel, a woman is not allowed to marry a non jew or a non-muslim, and in a more nationalist country, all the rapists will be deported or even killed.

How about a simpler one: we simply don't let them in. No nationalism needed at all. Really, we don't need nationalism, we simply don't let immigrants from Middle East in. That simple. Do you agree?

Supporting your people over other peoples is called nationalism. So you just described it. Nationalism is needed for any ethnic group, it means caring for your people, otherwise if no one cares the non-nationalist group will disappear.

You're trying to force women to live in marriage

Certain things in this world are forced. For example people will either have enough kids, or their group will disappear. Therefore only groups that are somehow making their members (lets say with peer pressure) to have kids, will survive.

I have priorities, and for me the primary priority is the well-being of my people. What women want is a secondary priority to me as the well-being of men+women+children is more important than the well-being of only women. This means that women (if they do not like it), just like kids, will have to be forced to behave in ways that are beneficial to their own people, and to the whole society. This means that they will have to have more kids.

The family is important too, because it decreases the need for a welfare state, increases internal ethnic group cohesion, and leads to the productuion of quality kids. All available stats show that the kids of single mothers are (generally, or as a whole) with lower quality than the kids raised by two parents. Therefore the family is highly beneficial for kids. Another benefit of the family is that married women are more patriotic, and vote to the right. And another benefit of the family is that according to various studies it raises the birth rate - the women who are not married have greater insecurity and this lowers their birth rate. So i believe that the family is beneficial for humans. Not only that, but the smartest people in the world - the jews, believe that too. And i like to learn from smart people.

Than why not simplify again: let's cut the welfare first?

I would like to, but you will have a hard time doing that with lots of female influence in society, plus having lots of low IQ migrants who depend on welfare and vote for it. The biggest voting block for more welfare is women + minorities. Therefore, the influence of those two groups, who are a major supporters of the welfare state, will have to be decreased.

[–]HAMMURABl6 points7 points  (8 children) | Copy

Welfare state didn't appear b/c of women

Yes IT DId You fucking monkey

[–]Mianro9-2 points-1 points  (6 children) | Copy

Oh, so well thought out. You struck down each of his carefully considered points like a lightning bolt. Certainly changed my mind, you non-primate you!

**Better to be a monkey than not even a primate in the first place **

[–]Solistx 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy

You just took the guy's comment above, and then reworded it.

Profit?

[–]Mianro91 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

The profit is watching him turn into a raging fool over his own comment. See?

Cheers :)

*Maybe he will learn to be kinder, no?

[–]HAMMURABl1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

Youre obviously a clueless retard talking about shit he doesnt understand, yet talking with an arrogance thats pathetic. Not even worth a discussion.

[–]Mianro91 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

A discussion like "yes it did you fucking monkey"?

Whoa guys! We have an expert conversationalist here! Better take it easy!

[–]HAMMURABl0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Theres no need to make a discussion since you are a dumb fucking monkey. Dont you get it you moronic pos?

[–]Mianro91 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Well, no, of course not! I am either a monkey or a turd (you cannot seem to decide) but either way, how could I get it, you friendly sense-making darling you!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Wrong answer. Please share this god damned video. I must post this twice a week and it has no views. The answer is people like Barbara Lerner Spectre. This video is about as explicit a smoking gun as has ever been produced and Reddit continues to say "Meh..."

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

So because of contraception -> women have more presence in important roles in society -> they make country more open to outsiders because they're not as xenophobic as men -> men from outside take over local women -> old society is dead, long live new one.

Did I get this right?

[–]Azzmo8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Women also have less investment in their society if they don't currently have kids. Increased influence in decision making + less investment in maintaining the current society + bleeding heart + instinctual desire to welcome in barbarian alphas = Decline.

[–]UnberZed22 points23 points  (77 children) | Copy

The mods should add "TRP is for WHITE MEN ONLY!" to the sidebar. Taking the Red Pill seems to involve adopting a racial ideology as well. If you're not white, how could you ever read posts like this and still want to swallow TRP? Am I missing something or is that the message?

[–]redzorp9 points10 points  (8 children) | Copy

I'm not white and I heartily approve of the OP.

Truth is Truth whether you like it or not.

Also, there is nothing in the OP that suggests that Western Europe and the USA should be turned into all-white Nazi superstates (although maybe some on this sub would like that). Rather, it merely points out how whites are being made minorities in their own countries and the factors that are contributing to this.

Personally, I would be fine going back the immigration laws of 1965, before Ted Kennedy and his Jewish backers changed them. Non-whites were still allowed to immigrate to the US but only the educated, cream of the crop and only in numbers small enough to ensure a white super majority.

Btw, if this demographic suicide was happening in any other country (Japan, China, Russia, India) I would likewise be in favor of those countries restricting immigration to maintain their ethno-heritage.

[–]UnberZed-2 points-1 points  (7 children) | Copy

And now anti-Semitism rears its ugly head. Japan doesn't have enough young people to take care of its old people and Russia's population is declining.

[–]redzorp3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy

Sorry dude. Not anti-semitism. Just the facts.

Look up the history of the 1965 immigration act. And while you're at it, look at the history of feminism and see how many Jews were involved with its founding, financing and evolution. Just stick to the facts, no matter where they lead you to.

[–]UnberZed-2 points-1 points  (5 children) | Copy

Yeah along with all those non-Jewish people...

[–]redzorp4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy

Non-Jewish people = puppets

Jewish people* = puppet masters

So yes, it's not only Jews who are guilty. Upper-level gentiles are guilty too. The former group exploits the rest of humanity to prop up its own group. The latter group sells out its own group for money and props up the out group.

Both are scum.

(* And even at that, we are mainly talking about the 1% of upper echelon Jews, the so-called Globalist-Zionists.)

[–]UnberZed0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Scratch the surface of TRP and the bile oozes out.

[–]redzorp2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Whatever.

Go back to sleep in blue-pill world.

Pleasant dreams.

[–]UnberZed1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Carry on with your Hitlerian ego-boosting.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Not all us minorities who came from the 1965 act have become goy cattle (most are though). As an Asian, it took me years to finally break through their indoctrination, and I don't even know another Asian, much less white person who knows how much power they have, and what their intentions are and have been, not just in terms of races but also wars, currency instability, and societal chaos.

[–]beginner_17 points18 points  (2 children) | Copy

What you are missing is facts.

Men are different from women and it's not inequality that makes women avoid tech jobs, it's because the prefer other jobs like nursing. Same thing goes for race. Whites on average have higher IQ than blacks and Asians higher than whites. That is just a fact. And hence if you country is invaded by low IQ migrants the average IQ will go down.

IQ by country

Many African countries have an average IQ of below 70. Meaning most of migrants from these countries will have trouble with the most basic jobs and with daily life complexities (taxes, insurance, paying bills,....). Of course the environment has an impact as well. if you grew up in US as a black your IQ will be higher than the average IQ from your region of origin. But genetic component is estimated between 60-80%.

This is the data. Why should we take up so many people that are basically useless for our society? It's not racist, it's the truth. Do your own research of course and then either accept it or deny it.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Be careful, you might start advocating eugenics... By large, the biggest factors for somebody's IQ is socioeconomic status. Lots of black soldiers from both world wars left children back in Europe. For the most part, the kids turned out fine.

You're just gonna be dumber if you grow up in a place with no good male role models (single parent homes and crime rates are shocking), live in a place where everybody is scheming against others, stealing, no economic prospects, and you see others skipping school and selling drugs, why do school, why work hard when your parents are on welfare and you could have it "just as good as them" without working?

Correlation does not equal causation. Just because things are related, does not mean one stems from another, or that one influences the other.

[–]beginner_0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I won't. Still facts are facts. And you can google for sources and the consensus from real hard scientist (not gender studies and similar crap) is genes are 60-80% of IQ.

How is this determined? By twins growing up in different socioeconomic backgrounds and by adoption studies. In the later the kids tend towards the IQ of their real parents and not the adoptive parents.

[–]makeshift9813 points14 points  (3 children) | Copy

Why would it make you uncomfortable? I'm half-black and I see no problem with white nationalism or white pride. White people make cool shit, and there are plenty of minorities that desperately want to live in a white dominated society. You don't see a lot of people fleeing to South America or Africa.

[–]Relevantex 13 points13 points [recovered] | Copy

Sounds like we various-shades-of-brown dudes need to be making vacation plans to Sweden ASAP

[–]UnberZed3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

So you can do your part to lower the IQ of the Swedish people. [sarcasm]

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 16 points17 points  (52 children) | Copy

Well, this is a somewhat valid viewpoint. But i'm just a single user, that has no influence in TRP circles. I just made my study and decided to post it in several places, thats it. I have nothing to do with the people who run this place, and so on. Actually one of the moderators refused to accept my post, until i made it better.

So i think that this has nothing to do with the TRPs "official position", with the mods position, and so on. This is just a single post made by a single individual, thats it. So i think that if you do not like the position of the article, you should just talk to me, and you shouldn't blame everybody else or the whole community.

I believe that this is a "politically incorrect place", that is why i decided to post this here. But i don't want the TRP to "officially endorse" this, or anything like that. I think that this post contributes to the diversity of opinions, thats it.

I don't have negative feelings towards you just because you are non-white. I just care about my people and what will happen to them. And rest assured, that you can learn new things from this post too. One of the lessons from it is that you should not allow too much female influence in your country, or this could have fatal consequences for your people. There are other lessons too, but they are more subtle.

[–]untitled_redditor18 points19 points  (2 children) | Copy

I am also a white male who sees white males as "my people" Because they are.

[–]flat6turbo-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

WW1 and WW2 must be pretty confusing to you then.

[–]untitled_redditor0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Dude... That's one of the reasons I'm proud of my people. We help other people out. Just because I don't consider non-whites "my people" doesn't mean I don't consider them family. We're all family in my mind, whites are just more like my immediate family.

[–]Blackbeard34514 points15 points  (1 child) | Copy

Really protect your people. That's the main reason I hate all this race shit everyone is a victim. Should we stand with ppl because of their race or because of their values. I mean look at all those white ppl trying to stop free speech. Do you stand with them? Are they still your ppl? And if they are not who are your ppl? How do you choose them?

Race is fucking meaningless at least to me. Look at how ppl use race it's always to control ppl how they think, how they act and what's the right position to have.

I'm against black/white/asian/hispanic pride. What's the use for that kind of pride? All I see is division. The latino man wants me to stand with him for no other reason that I'm latino too. They want me to stand up for every latino out there it doesn't matter how bad they are or how they act. You don't find that fucking dumb?

I really wanna know if there is some kind of benefit I'm not seeing from having this kind of pride?

[–]ashyperson230 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Its dumb, that why race is stupid, the values and what you produce is important. She should aim high as a society. Just like the 80s we were talking about conquering the space, now we are fucked over by welfare for refugees. And we are told whites are so intolerant, so we must let everyone in(even savages)

[–]Endorsed Contributorbalalasaurus1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy

For future reference, more racially based posts will be better received on dark enlightenment.

Signed, a black man that likes to fuck blonde girls.

[–]okkyle5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

Signed, a black man that likes to fuck blonde girls

This contributes to OP's point. Lots of studies have shown that pretty much everyone prefers to fuck white girls. If white men don't regain control of our civilization like men in other cultures, then our civilization will fall.

Once you've swallowed the redpill on sexual dynamics, race realism is the natural next step. If you acknowledge that men and women are biologically different, logically you must admit that the races are different as well.

[–]Endorsed Contributorbalalasaurus1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Lots of studies have shown that pretty everyone prefers to fuck white girls.

Would love to read those if you could give me some sources. Seriously.

If white men don’t regain control of our civilization like men in other cultures, then our civilization will fall.

You give too much credit to men in other societies. Cucks are growing everywhere. Feminism unchecked is the enemy. Twisting the argument into reclaiming white identity risks you being unable to see the forest from the trees. Don't get me wrong, white identity is at risk. But you're wrong to assume that it's the first casualty of feminism. A post by dr.warlock actually speaks about this. Check it out.

[–]AntiWhite4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

There is no faster way for a White girl to lose SMV than to fuck a Black man. 40% of all African Americans have herpes. Not good.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

Howd you not get banned from there? I'm middle of the road brown and got one rather quick.

Though it could have been my military service. Was definitely one of the two.

[–]Endorsed Contributorbalalasaurus0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I don't really participate there much. I use DE as a resource to learn mostly.

The funny thing is that people always complain about TRP being full of angry and hateful content lacking in any real basis when that applies more so for DE.

I guess my lack of participation and ability to ignore a lot of it keeps me subbed. Though I expect a mod to see this and ban me shortly.

[–]Gumpool-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy

Idiot you think blacks and muslims will galavant around without a care in soviety after the last white person is gone (im looking at you western white men not the slavs since they will always exist since they got balls) you guys will be put in either comcentration camps ore will go back in being slsves for your masters

[–]UnberZed3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Slavs as in Slaves. The Vikings bitch fucked these people and named them. Slavs of Mother Russia have a negative birth rate do to migration and declining health. They're dying off.

[–]Gumpool4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

I never understood why western society never liked slavs but will put muslims and blacks on pedestals

Western europe have fucked with slavs for a long time but they are still standing and will never fall

[–]Gardrothard1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Fucking Slavs protected Europe from Muslims throughout history. Slavs fought and eventually kicked them out of Europe.

[–]AntiWhite1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

So TRP should be about fucking white chicks only? That is what this sub is about, how to use emotional manipulation to bang hot white chicks? Sexual strategy isn't even needed to bang minority chicks, just a credit score higher than your age.

[–]UnberZed2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Said white men, not white chicks.

[–]beginner_1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Economic decline – as share of world GDP.

Doesn't this have to include per capita GDP? Eg. population growth? Europes population grew far, far less (or not at all) than rest of the world and especially Asia and Africas population. Hence far less potential of GDP to grow.

Looking at per capita GDP still shows a clear decline in Europe but the Growth in rest of the world is corrected for the population increase and it looks much less dramatic.

EDIT:

Here a different view of GDP per capita showing that population increase does matter. You can't assume that a steady population keeps the same percentage of total GDP compared to an exponentially growing population.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

GDP also has a good correlation with the IQ of the country's population. As IQ of western countries, according to various studies, is dropping due to dysgenic behavior and immigration policies (but it is not dropping in developed countries like Japan, South Korea, or Taiwan), as the scores of western students are dropping, but are increasing for most of the rest of the world, there should be serious negative consequences for the future economic well being of western countries.

[–]Gigandeth1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I would also like to add a few points.

1 - Because of the points listed. Boys, no matter of what race, struggle and often do not grow into men. Thus making the man born in a western country behind men and women elsewhere in the world. Men's sense of belonging is also being eradicated as many men influenced by women and circumstances only think about personal gain and are ready to backstab family and friends of more than 20 years.

2 - Because of the lowering of IQs in western countries (which is extremely evident) men, especially white men are sacrificed and pusnished as scapegoats through silly excuses "racism and sexism". A clear example was today at work. A guy said he got a job as a driver in a company for £7.50 an hour whilst his friend got the same position in a different company and is paid £8.50. His reason for the friend being paid more is that the friend is white. They work in two different companies though, which run differently.

3 - If such continues, white people will be extigueshed in a matter of centuries. What is interesting also is that races as we know them will be rewritting and such could lead to further mixing of races which could lead to a raceless world. My hypothesis.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

It destroys itself because it is dysgenic (dumb women have more kids, while smart and career women are often childless).

I disagree. if they don't breed, they are stupid by definition. their stupid career and friday night club whoring won't save them.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Here's the problem with white nationalism: The rules are unrealistic.

You take a half-black/Hispanic/Asian/etc. person and those respective communities will still embrace them as their own to some extent. The rules of white supremacy are biologically unrealistic when whiteness, a recessive trait, is the minority phenotype in a majority non-white world.

In that sense, Adler is right: "if we inquire into a superiority complex and study its continuity, we can always find a more or less hidden inferiority [feeling] complex."

This is why the supposedly "superior" race has always been afraid of the day they no longer have claims to their entitled resources. Read: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rising_Tide_of_Color_Against_White_World-Supremacy

As Jack White said, "You can't be a pimp and a prostitute, too."

[–]Pastelitomaracucho1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Fertility rates go down when you give women access to education. As simple as that. Less education, more kids. This is not about race, ethnicity or feminism. This is about giving women access to education.

Get second or third generation immigrants through the education system and fertility will go down. People from other races or ethnicities overtaking Europe will not be a problem as long as their women of the next generation are subject to education. Yes, they will not be blonde and tall, but they will not reproduce like rabbits.

Israel is a fantastic case: their sense of cultural attachment, patriotism and religious heritage is so strong, that it tends to go above any personal desires: it is your responsibility as an Israeli to breed. And to breed enough so your not outbred by the foreigners living there. Regardless of whether you are religious or not (and many Jews are not practicing their religion), you still have a debt with your country. And they fulfill it!. And not because they are machos: even Judaism asks their men to keep their women happy and sexually satisfied. Jews are not pushing a feminist agenda to get us fucked. Fucking hell, go to Tel Aviv and see how progressive that city is. If there is a haven for social justice warriors, Tel Aviv is a candidate.

Third-worldization as you see it, its just a combination of brain drain and loss of economic power. America is highly developed, has the best universities in the world, massive industries, highly educated people and yet its economy is plunging down. It this because feminism and immigration? Or is it because erroneous economic policy that has failed to keep up over the decades? The brains are there, but the corruption and the bad policing is also there.

And the cultural shift in Europe is not new. Europe has been importing people from other countries since WWII and it is going to continue like this. If there was any islamization, it would have happened by now. guess what happens? All these second and third generations turks, arabs, and asians speak the local language and are as German/Dutch/Belgian as anyone else, just with a different skin colour and a different heritage and these people are as infertile as the local whites as long as they take on the opportunity to get an education and to rise out of poverty.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

My main argument is that more feminism leads to less nationalism. But it also affects birth rates, as feminists tend to prefer career and not to be religious.

Fertility also has some correlation with religiosity, not only with development.

Even if you have an industrialized society, you can still have high birth rates, because:

In rich developed countries/areas, such as Utah state (USA), or Israel, you still have high birth rates, as long as their population is religious.

My argument is this: it is not only development that afftects birth rates, but also religiosity. For example you will notice that the white women with the highest birth rates are those from countries that banned abortion on religious grounds, such as Ireland and Argentine.

You can also have a look how religiosity affects the birth rates of Israeli women:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EyUgSBP6eNA/UiD8FrTX4SI/AAAAAAAAAyA/EIv7zc9SxBU/s1600/Screen+Shot+2013-08-30+at+1.07.09+PM.png

Get second or third generation immigrants through the education system and fertility will go down. People from other races or ethnicities overtaking Europe will not be a problem as long as their women of the next generation are subject to education. Yes, they will not be blonde and tall, but they will not reproduce like rabbits.

I think that this has something to do with IQ. No matter how you educate some migrants, they will still have lower IQ, and there is a good correlation between low IQ and fertility. Education does not fix group differences in intelligence.

Also i do not believe that muslim immigrants could be integrated or reeducated, not unless one somehow could get rid of Islam. Statistics show that even third gen migrants have higher birth rate than native europeans. I know not a single country that managed to integrate muslims, in all of them muslims are a state within the state, terrorism is present, etc. Neither Israel, nor Russia, China, India, Thailand, Nigeria, the Philipines, Jugoslavia, USSR, France, etc. managed to really integrate muslims and make them one of them.

Israel is a fantastic case: their sense of cultural attachment, patriotism and religious heritage is so strong, that it tends to go above any personal desires: it is your responsibility as an Israeli to breed.

Yes, i would like westerners to copy Israel, both its partiotism and its high birth rates. But i do believe that many jews push feminism in the West in order do divide and weaken the local populations, in order to feel safe from the majority. Since women are less xenophobic than men, it makes sense for jews to support feminisation of society in the places, where they are a minority.

And not because they are machos: even Judaism asks their men to keep their women happy and sexually satisfied.

I'm not saying that israeli men are machos, but they do not embrace feminism either. Not only high fertility shows that Israel is not a feminist country, but also the control over women (they are not allowed to marry non-jews and there are vigilante groups looking for women dating arabs). Plus israeli men are more nationalist, and more religious, compared to western men.

There is no alimony in Israel, and a woman can not divorce without receiving get (permission) from her husband. So in Israel there are lower divorce rates, higher marriage rates, and fewer single mothers, compared to western countries. A woman in Israel is also not allowed to marry her lover with whom she cheated to her former husband, and if she had a kid from her lover, the kid can not become a jew. A man, on the other hand, can marry his female lover after he divorced. The Chief Rabbinate and the rabbinical courts that manage family matters are all male. Then there is the issue of the very large gender pay gap in Israel, far larger than that in western countries. So Israel is definitely not a feminist country.

The West's economic problems have a lot to do with negative birth rates, which lead to older and declining native population, plus dysgenics, where the IQ of the population is dropping due to internal reasons (internal dysgenic fertility), and external reasons, such as immigration (external dysgenics).

As the scores of western students are dropping, but are increasing for most of the rest of the world, including in developed countries such as Israel, South Korea, or Taiwan, there should be serious negative consequences for the future economic well being of western countries.

[–]Red_SL43 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

That EXACTLY what I was talking about with my red pill grand mother yesterday. I went from wanting to be childfree (incel hamstering) to wanting at least 3 kids (though later in life, with a young woman). There's a demographic war in the West. We need soldiers.

[–]lIlIIIlll0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This post made me realize how much or a nihilist I've turned in to.

We are pandas that couldn't fuck to save our own species.

Also a lot of this reads like mein kampf.

[–]aanarchist1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

serious question, should i avoid the idea of having a family with a woman of spanish descent because she's not white? a lot of trp points towards the necessity of preserving white heritage. for me it's like good fucking luck finding a white woman who isn't a degenerate in this society. it's the same with other nations, russian women have been polluted by feminism, the uk, sweden. i figure if i find a "unicorn" it shouldn't matter what nationality she is, as long as she has her head on straight and i can pass on my legacy uncorrupted by all this bullshit.

[–]dudet238 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy

TRP doesn't point to that. It is a separate discussion being held in a thread every once in a while on TRP.

The thing all these hedonists on TRP get wrong is that kids are actually worth it if you put yourself in the right frame of mind and think of them as extensions of yourself. Children can be VERY fulfilling.

Maybe you are right. But in reality there are plenty of good white women. I mean its not as though hispanic women are less whorish than white women. I do not believe this.

[–]aanarchist0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

it's not that they're less whorish, just that women raised in non feminized society's would be less likely to fuck with your head. i've yet to meet a white woman that didn't have some sort of toxic psychosis. maybe i should go to israel, i do have some jewish roots heh.

[–]Azzmo4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

If you find a good person you should enjoy your life and take the opportunity to be with that person.

[–]disposable_pants0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

TRP is about:

Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

Wide-ranging conversations about race and demographics are off-topic. This thread is off-topic. What's so hard about sticking to sexual strategy here? There are plenty of other subs for this content.

[–]poolords0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

What does preserving the white race have to do with TRP? This post reads like a /pol/ copypasta.

[–]cloudstryfe-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

"disappearance of native population... Whites in the US..." come on bro this is some race baiting shit. Please do better

[–]OpenBumChakra1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy

Whites are not indigenous to North America.

And look at what happened when the Indigenous people of North America welcomed whites.

What goes around comes around.

[–]okkyle1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

The oldest skeletons found in North America are of European Origin. Look up the Solutreans.

Europeans from Southern France and Spain sailed to North American 13,000 years ago during the Ice Age when the Asians were still blocked off by the ice covering modern-day Canada and Alaska. Once the ice melted, Asians from Siberia began to migrate over the land bridge in Alaska and Eastern Russia and the Europeans settlers died off.

[–]dudet230 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

This is what all non-whites will say to whites when our ethnicity collapses.

[–]OpenBumChakra2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy

I'm Indigenous to North America. There are no pure-blood Indigenous people left. Except for deep Central/South America, everyone's half or part something or other.

My entire race was essentially wiped out.

Guess what? Life goes on. Lol

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You sure? Research the Solutrean hypothesis. It's faced much politicial backlash and been "debunked" by a few, but the evidence is something everyone should see.

[–]dudet23-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy

Your race is wiped out. Correct. Forgive me if I want to stand up for my own. Also Fuck off with your karma bullshit. Karma is not real.

[–]OpenBumChakra2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Karma is not real

We're talking about the decline of whites in the Western World after whites took part in the genocide of an entire continent. Lol

[–]dudet23-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

lol totally bro lol. tee hee white hate

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

"Karma is not real"

Study more about karma.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Do you really think the world's population can sustain itself much longer with its current growth rate? If we go on like we do now we'll have over 2000 billion people on earth in 500 years. The only species that will not devolve into barbarism are the ones that stop their increase in numbers beyond what is sustainable.

[–]dudet233 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

It is not whites that are overgrowing. Its Africans and arabs and South east asians and Indians.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Then lock the borders and let them deal with the consequences of overpopulation.

[–]dudet232 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

If I would if I could. It saddens me that I cannot. I will do my part in voting Trump.

[–]AceofRains0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Quality post, at this point I come to TRP for posts like this, and no longer the sexual strategy. One thing I have a hard time wrapping my head around, is why wouldn't we encourage interracial offspring? Correct me if I'm mistaken, but genetic diversity makes humanity overall stronger, no? Purist nationalism would generate a higher count of inbreds. I understand the plight of white Europeans being completely invaded here. Even though considerably white traits are recessive, they wouldn't die all the way out when carried by mixed offspring. I guess it's all downhill at this point anyways. A Trump presidency is not going to save white America, but it will buy some time while the pot stirs. Where does a mixed guy such as my self fit into this entire equation? Despite being 50% German It's hard for me empathize with white not being a thing anymore. One the other hand, the entitled nature of American blacks in junction with feminism makes me want to vomit. I cannot identify my self with either group- which often times makes me fit in with everyone, but not really have a group to belong to. To me, freedom is just another word for nothing else to lose, and I have exactly that. If anything the most disturbing factor would be a surging Muslim population, but on the other hand- this post brought it all into focus for me, on why they aren't somehow un-relatable. My largest qualm is in being homosexual, Islam is a direct threat to my life. However, I feel at it's an imperative that I pass down my genetics- simply because I see my self as far more of a quality man (by personality and genetic traits) than the majority of people I meet. I once had a discussion with a friend who mentioned that if Japan doesn't change its nationalist ways, on top of many of their men going to virtual girlfriends, on top of a gigantic Fukushima leak- that they will die out sooner than later. Is there a point where the nationalism that men are more likely to perpetuate becomes hubris?

[–]DownInBlue-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

Insane ramblings. OP's grasp on genetics, geopolitics and sociology is shaky at best. When you read things like this:

In all feminist societies you have massive third-worldization, lowering of IQ, race mixing with blacks, conversions to Islam, etc.

WTF? This is complete and utter bullshit. Making haphazard links to a heap of semi-related articles does little to hide the complete lack of sound logic this "opinion piece" has. It does NOT deserve the Science tag.

[–]IKickHorses1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

and in the event of race mixing, you will need more than 2.1 in order to simply sustain the white population at one level.

Your credibility didn't even make it past the first paragraph.

[–]gebrial-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Most of the facts in this article are just plain wrong. For one thing, the average IQ of an immigrant is higher than that of a non-immigrant. Also, the refugee crisis isn't concerned with the large number of incoming refugees, it has to do with the large number of outgoing refugees (many of which are still in refugee camps).

Far too much credit is given to feminism being the decline of the west. Third wave feminism is only another symptom of lack of real education (critical thinking, physical education, reasoning, logic). This is why people like Trump and Clinton have any power and why neither of them would do anything to fix it either.

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]UnberZed1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I'm guessing Mein Kampf is one of your favorite books.

[–]ashyperson230 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You just described europe, that has open border for every sand nigger

[–]CommentsAndCriticism0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Feminism the state of society where responsibility and privilege are out of kilter. Women get the privilege of men, without any of the responsibility, and this creates huge problems. You can see it very easily at face value with people like trigglypuff but also on a much deeper level, permeating everything, if you look well enough.

[–]Goontang420-4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy

This is fucking retarded people like you give TRP a bad name

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 5 points6 points  (14 children) | Copy

Well, sir, this is not entirely correct, as birth rates also appear to correlate with religiosity. For example you can have rich areas/countries, such as Utah state, USA, (Mormons), Israel, or Qatar, that have quite high birth rate.

I also believe that there are differences in the possiblity for feminism emergence in different groups, for example my view is that feminism is unlikely to emerge in non-white groups.

[–]xx69bootyhunter69xx2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

feminism is unlikely to emerge in non-white groups.

You're forgetting Japan and India. I don't know how old your views are, but a combination feminism and MGTOW has already started causing negative birth rates in Japan, and it's only a matter of time before the same happens in India.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I think it will be harder to happen there, because feminism is also caused by weak men who allow it to happen. My view is that the world wars broke white men, and made them start apologizing for everything, including for being sexist, racist, etc. This created a void in the West, that was filled by women.

The other thing that i will mention is that East Asian/South Asian women are physically weaker and smaller than white women, so this feeling of weakness will cause less feminism among them compared to white women, plus those weaker women will not be able to compete in the police and the army the way white women do.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 3 points4 points  (10 children) | Copy

Don't worry, i'm not a troll. I do not know who wrote the Behavioral Sciences book, but he is wrong, and i will be happy to debate him, because:

Even if you have an industrialized society, you can still have high birth rates, because:

In rich developed countries/areas, such as Utah state (USA), Qatar, or Israel, you still have high birth rates, as long as their population is religious. In Europe and the US for example, the muslim minority is one of the groups with the highest birth rate.

My argument is this: it is not only development that afftects birth rates, but also religiosity. For example you will notice that the white women with the highest birth rates are those from countries that banned abortion on religious grounds, such as Ireland and Argentine.

Have a look how religiosity affects the birth rates of Israeli women:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EyUgSBP6eNA/UiD8FrTX4SI/AAAAAAAAAyA/EIv7zc9SxBU/s1600/Screen+Shot+2013-08-30+at+1.07.09+PM.png

[–]Gogyoo0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy

Which is precisely why level of education and irreligiosity are better markers of civilised nations than skin colour. Plus, what mgtowmirror quotes is really Sociology 101, and you are shoring up your argument with data points (Israel) vs the general trend of death and birth rates with respect to medical advances and education (dataset: the history of the whole world).

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

All of these are factors - education, irreligiosity, skin colour, factors that affect fertility. For example it is known that low IQ correlates with high fertility, and high IQ correlates with low fertility. This was not always the case and it isn't good, as it leads to dysgenics.

Also trying to educate low IQ groups does not work very well - there are genetic factors contributuing to IQ differences.

The high fertility of Israel, or Utah state, or of religious people in general, shows that it is possible to have both developed country and high birth rates. And this is very important.

Why? Because negative birth rates are not the path to the feature. I do not care about "development" that leads to the disappearance of the people. Something in the current developement model must be changed. For me, Israel is a good place to look and learn how things work in a high fertility developed country, and what should be changed in the rest of the world, so that people could have a future.

[–]Gogyoo0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

All of these are factors - education, irreligiosity, skin colour, factors that affect fertility.

Source for skin colour being an undisputable factor in affecting fertility?

This was not always the case and it isn't good, as it leads to dysgenics.

Would you rather maintain a white majority, with predominantly a high in your country, or many people of a different ethnicity that possess other attractive qualities (morals, for instance)? IQ is hardly a measure of level of civilisation, it won't land you a job, won't make you a likeable person. Plus it's a bell curve, whose median is constantly reevaluated to mean just that, a median on a whole population (and the reevaluation is usually upwards). If everyone scored 120, 120 would be the new 100. Just like if there would be only alphas, well it moves the goal posts, and women would get to be more choosy. A bit pointless...

Also trying to educate low IQ groups does not work very well - there are genetic factors contributuing to IQ differences.

It doesn't follow we should not try to. Basic education (along with e.g. electrification and micro-credit) is working wonders in Africa, and has for many years.

Why? Because negative birth rates are not the path to the feature. I do not care about "development" that leads to the disappearance of the people.

There we will have to agree to disagree. We both agree that living in a first world country is preferable as to live in worn-torn third world place. Your vision is based on high fertility of certain people, mine is based on mankind freeing itself of the shackles of religion, seeing an increase in morals, and for religious people (Muslims in particular), to do away with faith and keep the culture (just like it happened for Christians in the 18th and 19th century, and for Jews in the 20th). As for population, all projections show a world peak in 2035 to 2050, and a decrease afterwards. Once again because of education levels. Also, not to sound like a blind neo-Luddite, but advances in technology will keep reducing the number of jobs available human beings, who would still have the right to live decent lives on a universal wage but maybe choose to reproduce less. If the general AI singularity happens, that trend would accelerate sharply.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy

Source for skin colour being an undisputable factor in affecting fertility?

Race is connected with IQ and IQ is connected with fertility. Low IQ people have higher birth rate than high IQ people, this is the case right now in the developed parts of the world and it is not normal. In the past, only the best reproduced, while the poor did not reproduce very well, but this is no longer the case in developed countries. This type of reverse evolution is called dysgenics, and many internationally recognised experts on intelligence warned about this.

Would you rather maintain a white majority, with predominantly a high in your country.

I do not agree with the ethnic cleansing of any group. I do not believe that whites should be replaced by other people, or that blacks in Africa should be replaced, or that jews should be somehow removed, or that jews shouldn't have a country on their own.

The world is already a diverse place, so it makes no sense to try to get rid of the various ethnic groups and replace them with other groups. The jews, who are the smartest people in the world, certainly believe in ethnocentrism and having a country on their own. And i like to learn from smart people like them.

IQ is hardly a measure of level of civilisation

IQ is an important measure for quality of life. The continent with the lowest IQ - Africa, has the lowest quality of life.

It doesn't follow we should not try to. Basic education (along with e.g. electrification and micro-credit) is working wonders in Africa, and has for many years.

Africans are living in great misery. No one says that they shouldn't be helped, but i don't think that the whole world should be turned into another Africa either. Having open Borders with high fertility, low IQ group is suicide.

It is quite possible that the warm, comfortable climate is having a hand in the low IQ of southern people, so they could forever stay with lower IQ compared to northerners. So they should stay in their countries and not bring misery to others, and learn how to fix their problems, with the help of others, of course.

The fertility problem is quite clear and there is no getting away from it. Currently, people in many developed countries do not reproduce themselves in sufficient numbers, their birth rate is negative, and they will disappear if they do not change their behavior.

Therefore, birth rates will have to be increased, or certain peoples (europeans, japanese) will disappear. Its as simple as that.

My vision is that all peoples and ethnicities have place under the sun, that they should all have their countries, and they should all live well. Thats it.

[–]silentao0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Hey friend, I'm a bit late to the thread but you have a few misconceptions about Israel due to the fact you look at averages without taking into account the huge variance inside the Israeli population.

  1. Israeli high birth rate:
    It's true that the average Israeli birthrate is high compared to the western world but the average is skewed due to two specific populations in israel:
    A. Orthodox jews: 6.5 kids per woman (!) B. Religious non orthodox: 4.3 per woman C. Arabs: 3.2 per woman

Secular jews: 2.1 per woman (Very close to western world ratios)

The entire Israeli economy is based on The secular jews, if you take out secular jews and see statistics only for orthdox jews and arabs the GDP per capita will be dropped to a level of a typical middle eastern country.

54% of 1st graders today in Israel are either muslims or Orthodox jews. In 20 years the next generation will mostly dumb and poor. Despite the fact that religous jews have high IQ the don't study english or math in highschool and contribute very little to the economy because they lack any skills that are useful in the modren world.

  1. Israel doesn't accept foreigners: A. Israel has the highest % of muslims compared to any other western country and by a long shot (Israel has 20% muslims while the second ranked western country has only 7.5%), And they have practically equal rights, there are Muslim parliament members, judges and policemen. B. In tel aviv there are currently 40 thousand african illegal immigrants, which are around 8% of the population of tel aviv. Imagine new york having 8% of illegal immigrants. That would be around 800,000 from sudan and other 3rd world African countries.

  2. Israel is not a feminist society: True for the religious people, completely untrue for the non religous. The divorce rules are terrible for men, Tel Aviv is the one the gay community capitals in the world and home to the one of the largest and most popular gay parades, There are a lot of active feminist groups. The secular elite is as feminist and liberal as in everywhere else.

P.S I was a bit lazy in providing links, but if you want i can backup any of the claims I made with hard data.

[–]1ObserverBG[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I do not see misconceptions in my views about Israel. Also i do not know you, so how can we be friends? We can be friends only after we know each other, don't you think so?

Are you Hasbara, working to improve the image of Israel? If that is your job, then i'm ok with that, everybody needs to earn some money, but i suggest you go try to "work" on someone else. You will probably waste your time here.

1 Skewed or not skewed, the fact remains that many jewish women in Israel are turned into baby making machines. You will not see anything like this in a feminist country. Not only the ultra orthodox jewish women, but also the religious, traditional religious, and traditional non-religious jewish women, have higher birth rate, than euro women. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EyUgSBP6eNA/UiD8FrTX4SI/AAAAAAAAAyA/EIv7zc9SxBU/s1600/Screen+Shot+2013-08-30+at+1.07.09+PM.png

2 Even the birth rate of secular jewish women (2.1) is higher that that of western white women. TFR for white women in Europe is 1.5, in Canada 1.5, in the US 1.75. Secular jewish israeli women have higher birth rate that all other white women.

3 Israel accepts mostly jewish immigration, and the aim of the immigration policies is to preserve the ethnic jewish character of the state.

"Israeli, despite being a liberal democratic country, is not an immigration country. Therefore, Israel does not have laws and regulations enabling foreigners who wish to come and settle Israel the opportunity to do so. Immigration to Israel is mainly possible per Aliyah process, a process available to Zakaey Shvut , persons eligible under The Law of Return with Jewish roots."

http://www.visa-law.co.il/immigration-to-israel/

4 The vast majority of muslims in Israel are not immigrants, they lived there from a long time. Israel does not allow muslim immigration, with rare exceptions. The aim of israeli immigration policy is to preserve ethnic jewish character of the state.

Israeli law of return allows only ethnic jews to return to the country, in some cases DNA testing for jewishness is required.

5 Jews are not allowed to marry jon-jews in Israel.

6 There are vigilante groups looking for jewish women dating arabs.

7 Israel banned a book about jewish woman having an affair with arab man.

8 Same sex couples and intefaith couples do not have the right of marriage.

In the State of Israel, the law concerning matters of marriage, divorce, and personal status, is partially under the jurisdiction of all male religious courts. The Jewish religious regulations are thus also the national laws imposed on Jews living in Israel, including secular Jews.

There is no alimony in Israel, and a woman can not divorce without receiving get (permission) from her husband. So in Israel there are lower divorce rates, far higher marriage rates, and fewer single mothers, compared to western countries.

A woman in Israel is also not allowed to marry her lover with whom she cheated to her former husband, and if she had a kid from her lover, the kid can not become a jew, and is called a bastard. A man, on the other hand, can marry his female lover after he divorced. A man could also have a kid from another woman while cheating on his wife. The Chief Rabbinate and the rabbinical courts that manage family matters and divorce are all male, which creates bias towards males. Then there is the reality of the very large gender pay gap in Israel, far larger than that in feminist countries.

According to Avigail Moor, a psychologist who treats victims of sexual violence and a researcher at the Tel Hai college in northern Israel, more than 60 percent of Israeli men and 40 percent of women do not believe that forcing sex on an acquaintance constitutes rape. As for sex without consent in a relationship, only 18.5 percent of israeli women and only 17.3 percent of men thought that was rape.

Not only the high fertility shows that Israel is not a feminist country, but also the control over women (they are not allowed to marry non-jews and there are vigilante groups looking for women dating arabs). Plus israeli men as a whole are more nationalist, and more religious, compared to western men.

So Israel is definitely not a feminist country, and it is also a nationalist country. As Peter Beinart wrote in his celebrated New York Review of Books essay: “For several decades, the Jewish establishment has asked American Jews to check their liberalism at Zionism’s door.”

This does not mean that i'm against Israel, though, i believe that the West could learn from Israel and should copy some things from it.

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]cottoncandyjunkie-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

I don't understand what makes a poison less or more anything because of where they were born

[–]WillyWonka321-4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Your assumption that immigrants are "dumb" amuses me.

[–]unicornh_1-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

thats like wikipedia article..

[–]TheRedThrowAwayPill-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Copy Pasta strikes again

I'm going to say this as simply as possible:

If you think Islam is feminist you're smoking crack

Islam is just like judiasm in multiplying the tribe. Plain and simple. That's a patriarch growing his progeny. That's the opposite of modern feminism's decadence.

[–]TheRealNevaziah-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

I smell fear in this one. Ask yourself: Why?

[–]dudet231 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Cause we have eyes and can see ?

[–]LOST_TALE-3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I laughed my ass off reading it as an analogy: populations of X as individuals. Feminists want to open borders. to let the alpha do the cuckolding.

!!!

[–]blackchadthundercock -1 points-1 points [recovered] | Copy

Europe can burn. So can white women who's "careers" are more important.

Bitches brought it on themselves. I hope I'm alive to see it when whites are declared a minority in America.

[–]okkyle2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy

Sometimes I imagine how American blacks would react once they realize what a post-White West would mean for them. What is this golden age for black people that you think will arrive once whitey is removed?

How do you think black folks will be treated when the country is run by non-whites? Do you think the Arabs will be nicer to you brotha's? Did you know that the jihadi's put black Libyans in cages when Gaddafi fell? You might want to read up on the Arab slave trade. The Ottomans called their slaves "Eunuchs", which were young African boys who were castrated early on in life.

Do you think the Jews, who sterilized black Israelis in Israel and have since banned African migration, will be a better friend to the black man?

How about the Asians? Haha, just look up the online dating success rates of black males messaging Asian girls and you'll have your answer on what Asians think of black folks.

Here's the hard truth, my friend: Africans aren't too well-thought of anywhere in the world. Frankly, most people don't want too many Africans around them. Most nations limit African migration, and in white countries, people move when too many Africans come into their neighborhoods.

The only nations in the world in which blacks can live a happy and prosperous life are nations run and created by White Men, yet all I see from blacks in American is irrational tribal hatred. You just want to overthrow the king and watch whitey burn, even if it means your own standing in the world suffers greatly.

[–]blackchadthundercock 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

How do you think black folks will be treated when the country is run by non-whites?

A hell of a lot better that what whites have done. It sure as shit couldn't be any worse. And watch out by the way, cause it just might be us running your asses for once.

[–]okkyle0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Haha. Good luck. There's only about 35 million blacks in America, half of the black men age 18-35 are in jail, not exactly a battle-ready population.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

See the arab slave trade, and see how black people live in Eastern non-african countries (Saudi, Morocco, Tunisia, Sudan).

You have a lot to catch up on.

[–]Azzmo1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

If you're alive in 30 years you'll enjoy festivities.

Not sure why you'd be happy about native populations being exterminated though.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

As an Asian man, I'm laughing my ass off at this white fragility.

This piece reeks of white supremacy which has always had the fear of being outbred by darker people. And biologically speaking, that's an antiquated position that's unsustainable in a globalized world.

Either find a better belief system or get swept by a reality that gives zero shits about what you'd like to think about it.

[–]Horus_Krishna_2-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

(dumb women have more kids, while smart and career women are often childless).

biggest takeaway

[–]peruvianlurker-4 points-3 points  (4 children) | Copy

I'm fucked? What to do, can you have a positive outlook in life? I lost my job, I live in one of the shittiest places in a thirdworld country, culture is toxic as fuck, I have education, no money and less than a year without having to worry about rent, what are the safest places to move? Is going off the grid posible?

[–]LordThunderbolt1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

Move to the US and don't look back.

[–]peruvianlurker1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

U sure? I thought if Hillary wins, US is doomed as the next europe, and if Trump wins, who the fuck knows whats going to happend.

[–]LordThunderbolt2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

It would still be better than where you are now.

[–]uniquevoid-2 points-1 points  (2 children) | Copy

Want it or not, as it is said in the Quran, Islam will always end up winning (this was written 1500 years ago)

At this point there are two choices: Be part of Islam/traditional societies or be a part of a doomed feminised society. I think my decision is clear

What i do not understand is why there is so much hate towards muslims. They are simply winning the battle through superior strategy and as a man you have to acknowledge that, not cry on a forum

We lost the game, there is no coming back



You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter