Print this post Print this post

White Extinction

GirlDoves2,612 words

Translations: FrenchGreekRussianSlovak, Spanish

Author’s Note:

This essay is based on a talk that I gave in Seattle on January 26, 2014 at Charles Krafft’s Douglas L. Reed Oyster Feed. I want to thank Charles Krafft and everyone present for their warm welcome and stimulating discussion.

White Nationalists frequently claim that the current social and political system has put our race on the road to biological extinction. If present trends are not reversed, whites will disappear as a distinct race.

To many whites, this sounds like an absurd and alarmist claim, given that there are anywhere from 700 million to one billion of us on the planet today. Part of that skepticism is, I believe, simply psychological denial in the face of an unpleasant prospect. Non-whites seldom show skepticism about white extinction. Indeed, our enemies take our eventual disappearance for granted and openly gloat about our decline.

I wish to argue, however, that white extinction is not an alarmist fantasy, but an alarming fact, the inevitable conclusion of sober, informed analysis. Since my eyes glaze over when anyone resorts to mathematical models, charts, graphs, and technical jargon, I will construct my argument in the simplest possible terms. First, I will merely argue that white extinction is a plausible idea, not a far-fetched and fanciful one. Then I will argue that, given present trends, white extinction is not just possible, but inevitable.

Biologists claim that up to 99.9% of species that have existed on this planet are now extinct. Furthermore, many extinct species enjoyed dramatic advantages over whites. For instance, most extinct species existed far longer than our race before facing extinction. The average lifespan of a species is 10 million years, whereas whites have been around for only about 40,000 years. Some extinct species also existed in far greater numbers than whites today. For instance, in 1866, a single flock of passenger pigeons was observed in southern Ontario. The flock was one mile wide, 300 miles long, and took 14 hours to pass. It is estimated to have contained 3.5 billion birds, which is 3-and-a-half to 4 times the entire white population of the world today. Less than 50 years later, however, the entire species was extinct due to hunting and habitat loss. In 1914, Martha, the world’s last passenger pigeon, died in the Cincinnati Zoo.

Some living species have existed for a very long time. The horseshoe crab has been around 450 million years. The coelacanth fish has existed for 400 million years. The lamprey has been around for 350 million years. The New Zealand Tuatara lizard has been around for 200 million years. But based on natural history, we can say that simply by virtue of existing, there is a 99.9% chance that our race will become extinct. If we want to be among the long-term survivors, we certainly can’t just depend upon luck.

Human beings—whites especially—do have an advantage over other species: our intelligence and creativity can allow us to discover and defeat the causes of extinction. Unfortunately, that same intelligence is now being used to create artificial conditions that promote white extinction. Extinctions are divided into natural (like the dinosaurs) and man-made (like the dodo and the passenger pigeon). White extinction is not natural but man-made. Thus, if our race is to survive, the first thing we must do is not defeat nature, but other men.

Extinction is not merely the death of all members of a race. After all, every living thing dies. But if all the members of a race die without replacing themselves, then the race becomes extinct. Thus extinction is not merely death—which comes to us all—but failure to reproduce. Extinction is inevitable if a race fails to reproduce itself. Extinction just is failure to reproduce.

For the existing white population to reproduce itself, each couple must average 2.1 children—2 children to replace themselves, and .1 to replace the race by taking up the slack of those who fail to reproduce at all. The image of a “normal” family—father, mother, and two children—is actually the happy, smiling face of racial annihilation, for if sub-replacement fertility persists long enough—if more people die than are born—our race will eventually cease to exist. If you subtract units from a finite set long enough, you will reach zero. If you take more money out of your account than you put in, you will reach zero. It is simple, mathematical necessity, first-order arithmetic.

Having a third child is the difference between contributing to the death or the growth of our race. Thus White Nationalists need to do everything in our power to create a new “normal” image of the three child white family, as opposed to the one or two child family. Unfortunately, white birth rates as a whole and in every white country are below replacement. This means that white extinction is inevitable if current trends are not reversed.

What are the causes of reproductive failure, i.e., extinction? Biologists give four basic causes:

 

  1. Loss of habitat, meaning the environment necessary for sustaining and reproducing the species. Loss of habitat can take place through sudden or slow geological or climate change, the loss of food sources, etc.
  2. Invasive species, meaning competition for resources by another species in the same ecological niche.
  3. Hybridization, meaning reproduction, but not reproduction of one’s distinct biological type. Hybridization is only possible if a sufficiently similar species invades one’s ecological niche.
  4. Excessive predation, meaning that a species is killed by predators faster than it can reproduce itself. Predation includes epidemics. Excessive predation is, in effect, genocide: the killing off of an entire group. Genocide can, however, be divided into hot and cold varieties. Hot genocide is the quick and violent extermination of a group. Cold genocide is the slow destruction of a group simply by establishing conditions that make its long-term survival impossible. Cold genocide could, therefore, also include the other causes of extinction: habitat loss, invasive species, and hybridization.

 

All of these causes of extinction can be natural or man-made.

Now let’s examine our ongoing extinction in terms of these four biological causes.

Habitat loss: the ongoing conquest of nature through white science and technology would seem to be expanding white habitats. Man can live at the north and south poles, the bottom of the oceans, and even in space. It is conceivable that someday we will be able to transform other planets into human habitats. But there is a sense in which white reproduction is suffering due to habitat loss: whites do not reproduce in unsafe environments, and one of the greatest causes of unsafe breeding environments is the presence of non-whites.

Now, in the past, whites had high birth-rates while surrounded by non-whites. But these non-whites were enslaved or otherwise subordinate and forced to emulate white standards of behavior. So whites specifically feel unsafe around free and feral non-white populations. The search for safe white breeding spaces is one of the driving forces behind suburbanization and exurbanization since the collapse of white supremacy, the emancipation of indigenous non-white populations, and the flooding of white lands by non-white immigrants.

One could argue that the mere presence of non-whites in white breeding spaces is not sufficient to suppress white fertility, since non-whites are feared specifically as potential sources of resource competition, hybridization, and predation, which brings us to the other causes of white extinction.

Invasive species: whites in virtually every white nation are now facing demographic competition from non-white immigrants. Even if non-white immigration is cut off, whites will still face demographic competition from existing non-white populations which are usually more fertile than whites.

Hybridization: race-mixing or miscegenation is a form of reproduction, in the sense that both parties pass their genes on to the next generation. But it is simultaneously a cause of racial extinction, since it fails to reproduce the racial type. Miscegenation is inevitable if different human races are allowed to associate freely in the same environment. Thus in the past, when racial integrity was valued, there were social and legal barriers to miscegenation in multiracial societies. Those barriers have been swept away.

But people are not merely “free” to miscegenate. Miscegenation is actively encouraged by the media and educational system.

Miscegenation is also being forced upon whites by inter-racial rape, which is almost always perpetrated by non-white men on white women. This form of rape is also being actively promoted by cultural phenomena such as pornography and non-white resentment mongering, and by social policies that encourage non-white immigration, the integration of white and non-white populations, and failure to adequately police and punish non-white criminals. Fortunately, most white rape victims have access to abortion.

Predation: whites are not currently being subjected to fast, hot, across-the-board genocide, but the presence of large, hostile, violent, unsegregated, and poorly-policed non-white populations contributes to white extinction by causing the murder of white children and fertile adults and causing other whites to restrict their fertility because of unsafe reproductive environments.

In the case of white extinction, all of these causes are man-made. Whites suffer habitat loss, invasion, hybridization, and predation from non-whites because of social policies that have dismantled white supremacy and segregation in multiracial societies, promoted non-white immigration into formerly white societies, dismantled barriers to miscegenation and actively promoted it, and promoted non-white predation by importing and/or emancipating and integrating non-white populations and failing to adequately police and punish them.

In addition to purely biological causes of white extinction, we are also facing distinctly cultural causes. These fall into two basic categories: ideological and technological. Ideological causes of white extinction include individualism, celibacy, feminism and other forms of sex-role confusion, misplaced environmentalism, and white demonization and guilt, all of which promote reproductive failure. Such ideologies were, of course, little threat to white survival until the invention of cheap and reliable birth control technologies.

In a way, it is fortunate that the causes of white extinction are man-made, because all of them are within our power to correct. There are two things that we must do.

In the short run, we need to raise white birthrates. This is not a long-run solution, because the problem is not that there are too few whites but too many non-whites. From an ecological point of view, a stable population of a billion or even half-a-billion whites is not necessarily a good thing. We cannot define victory as a population race with fast-breeding non-whites until the globe is laid waste.

But in the short term, we need to halt the decline of our race until we can put long term solutions into place. When my ancestors first arrived in Virginia in the second decade of the 17th century, we belonged to a tiny minority on this continent. But we conquered it, in part because behind us was the demographic momentum of burgeoning populations in the homeland. It would be an enormous help if whites had that kind of demographic wind in our sails again.

In the long run, however, White Nationalism is the only real solution for the problem of white extinction.

The biological causes of white extinction can be addressed by the creation of homogeneously white homelands, either through racial partition and secession schemes or the removal of non-white populations. Homogeneously white homelands would secure white habitats and simply eliminate competition, hybridization, and predation from other races.

The cultural causes of white extinction can be addressed through education and social incentives: individualism can be replaced with an ethic of racial responsibility; sex-role confusion can be eliminated by the reassertion of traditional and biological sex roles: women as mothers and nurturers, men as protectors and providers; white guilt and self-reproach can be replaced by white pride and self-assertion; affordable family formation can be a cornerstone of social policy, with special incentives for greater reproduction from highly genetically valuable individuals; the option of celibacy, as well as non-reproductive sex, could also be preserved and promoted for some as part of an overall eugenic policy, to discourage breeding by individuals with genetic problems.

Some people regard the creation of homogeneously white homelands as unnecessary. I will consider four such arguments.

First, some might argue that it is possible for whites to survive without homelands or political power as small relict populations within larger non-white populations. Unfortunately, historical evidence does not support this. Andrew Hamilton’s review of Riccardo Orizio’s Lost White Tribes indicates that such populations are eventually lost to hybridization.

Second, one might argue that white relict populations can resist hybridization by adopting highly ethnocentric attitudes and marrying only among one’s group, like Jews and Hindus. The problem with this suggestion is that such policies have not worked for Jews or Hindus. Jews are a highly miscegenated population. But Jewish identity can survive miscegenation, since one is a Jew not through pure Jewish descent but merely through a taint of the blood of Abraham. In the case of the Hindus, the caste system was adopted only after a great deal of mixing had already taken place.

Of course, as a White Nationalist, I think it is a good thing for whites to adopt ethnocentric attitudes and eschew all race-mixing. But those attitudes will not save us if we are reduced to small, politically powerless relict populations in a sea of non-whites. But if we adopted such ideas today, the best way of implementing them would be through the creation of homogeneously white homelands.

Third, one might argue that white extinction will not occur because our very decline might include self-correcting mechanisms which will eventually cause our population to stabilize or rise again. Now that family formation is difficult and unnecessary, divorce is easy, and birth control and abortion are widely available, individuals who are inclined by genes and culture not to reproduce—or not to reproduce with their own kind—simply aren’t. That means that the next few generations of whites will be smaller, but they will be increasingly composed of people who are predisposed to reproduce with their own kind. If that is true, then after a while, white birthrates will rise again. Thus whites are not going extinct. We are merely going through an evolutionary bottleneck that will ultimately render us immune to the forces that are arrayed against us.

I believe that this argument is quite plausible, but it is not a case against pursuing White Nationalist policies. First, it may never happen, thus we would be fools to abandon the struggle to white homelands on the chance that evolution will do our work for us. Second, the selection pressures it posits will not make us immune to outright genocide, so it is not an alternative to creating sovereign, homogeneously white homelands. Finally, if these selection pressures do exist, it means that people will become increasingly receptive to White Nationalist policies, and once implemented, such policies will support such selection pressures. In short, White Nationalism and the population bottleneck theory are complementary and mutually-reinforcing.

Fourth, one might argue that cutting off immigration and returning to white supremacy, segregation, and legal and cultural barriers to miscegenation would be sufficient. I grant that such policies would be improvements, but not long-term solutions. First, if nothing is done to address below replacement white fertility and higher non-white fertility, whites will eventually be reduced to tiny relict populations, as in scenario one. Then we will become extinct. Second, these policies were tried and failed. The conservative fixation on doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is a definition of lunacy. If these policies are tried and fail again, our race may never recover.

The hour is too late for such foolishness. When our existence as a people is at stake, we can no longer afford conservative half-measures and wishful thinking. Only White Nationalism can prevent white extinction.

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

51 Comments

  1. dirk de jager
    Posted November 12, 2015 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    I live in South Africa where this question has been asked and debated for more than a 100 years. And before you go and say you are from SA and therefore are a racist, I beg you to do some research first into separate development or apartheid as you know it.

    Keep in mind who controls the media and told you what it is and how it works, but most importantly what the objectives where.

    Having faced this problem for so long and being the minority for so long we have tried different types of solutions and by studying the outcomes of our efforts you might not have to go through trail and error unnecessary.

    Firstly saying that SA belongs to the black people is outright wrong, looking at the borders of SA today and knowing the full history you will realise that this country actually belongs to the Koi San or bushmen tribe, which was hunted down and driven to near extinction by the British and Dutch settlers.

    Dutch settlers arrived in SA in 1662, lived and developed the cape, only in 1836 did a few Europeans of dutch, german, Belgium and french decent, now calling themselves the boer, move north of the cape province when Britain took control of the cape province. This was the groot trek. Moving north into the unknown the boers walked right into a huge war between the tribes, the Zulu is ethnically cleansing the Southern part of Africa, chasing down all smaller tribes from what is known today as Zimbabwe, Mozambique and botswana into what is now the borders of SA more than 150 years after the European settled within the borders of SA. It is estimated that they killed more than 2 million other black people.

    I’m trying to keep it short but want you to understand and identify! The majority of blacks in SA is not from SA, so we also had an influx of non white refugees and immigrants. That the land the boer settled and developed into a thriving country was bought from the zulu king Dingan and that the contract is still in existence today for all to see doesn’t mean anything since the borders were changed by the British after the anglo boer war of 1901.

    When the natiolists took over in the 1940’s the question of black influx from the north was finally address.
    The borders were closed, black people in SA was registered and the areas where they settled was given to them and recognised as independent states. What you won’t hear is how the evil apartheid government helped them form their own governments with their own constitutions that is in line with their way of life and beliefs. Creating and training their own police forces and militaries for them. Building of factories, roads, hospitals and dams for them and teaching them how to govern all of these. Prime examples of how much was done for them is the fact that by the end of apartheid there was 21 universities in the homelands. The biggest hospital in the world at that time, Baragwanath, was built in Soweto for them. The largest platinum mine at the time fell in the borders of Bophuthatswana and although settlement of the blacks occurred because of the mine, it was still given to that government.

    The homelands was beautiful, fertile, rich land which they chose and developed by the white man. But it wasn’t enough. It will never be enough. They wanted it all and got it. So I’m of opinion that even if you create a white state for yourself, they will just come and take it after you have developed it.

    Never has any colonial power done so much for a people that doesn’t even have real claim on the land. There was ten homelands created within the borders of SA, all was recognised as independent states by the apartheid government but only two was recognised by the UN and international community, Swaziland and Lesotho. These to are now independent countries and that was the aim of apartheid, giving self rule to each of the ten homelands so each tribe can govern themselves as they see fit within the protection of the bigger South Africa. Strangely enough this model was used for creating the European union.

    And today we white South Africans are known as the biggest racists who oppressed the poor black man in his own country.

    Point is, the powers that be will twist the facts, control minds through the media and even bomb the crap out of you if you try to preserve your white self.

    So do whatever you need to do to stop this white extinction in your area no matter what anyone says, because it is the jews aim to be the only pure race on earth, you will be portrayed as the aggressor and racist no matter how you face up to the question of white genocide.

    Because we as whites in SA are not buying into the mixing of races through interbreeding we are now being physically attacked and killed of. Thousands of white farmers are being killed under the mask of crime. Brutally murdered and hacked to pieces while our president sings songs like kill the boer and bring my machine gun on national television. And when you come to the odds we are facing, 700 000 whites to 42 000 000 blacks that now control the army, police and government and no help from the international community because we have already been branded and judged you will realise like us, that you had to act sooner. If you want to know your future and how to change it, take a good look at the white man in South Africa.

  2. Concerned White
    Posted November 11, 2015 at 5:18 am | Permalink

    Thanks for letting people know about Coudenhove-Kalergi plan. I looked it up and I was literally shocked with what I’ve read. It kinda makes sense that a crossbreed with inferiority complex would do it. I agree with completely with your analysis. Plan is in grave danger (luckily for us) exactly because of the technological advancements that dismantled regime media monopoly after the genocidal maniac died. Beside internet and social media I wanna expose smartphones with cameras too. Ordinary people are able to record whats going on and make it visible to whole world. Things that shouldn’t be seen according to plan.
    Regime media is trying to cover it up but they are making fools of themselves when independent media and social media can provide so much evidence.

    Additional problem is that Islam has extremely radicalized. Over 30% of Muslims in west countries support IS, over 50% support the 9/11 attack, over 70% support revenge for any act against Islam and 99% of them want Sharia. While I agree that #WhiteGenocide has gone viral the average European fears Islam and Sharia far more than White Genocide. Radical Islam is radicalizing Europeans in return. Here in Austria nationalists party support is growing insanely. Its almost 50% here too. Weapon sales went through the roof. People bought more weapons in 9 months of 2015 than 2000-2014 combined. Its similar in Germany.

    I can see the Genocide looming in Europe. Muslim Genocide.

  3. Anja from Poland
    Posted November 10, 2015 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

    Miha M unfortunately this is not EU desired outcome. White extinction is no natural process but a deliberate white genocide. Its also known as Coudenhove-Kalergi plan. The plan started in 1922. It was shortly paused in 1931-1945 by rise of Nacizm in Germany but it restarted in 1950. And Angela Merkel received Coudenhove-Kalergi prize in 2010 for her contribution to the plan. She is most definitely out there to get you.

    The plan was perfect in its time. They destroyed lives of people who wanted to make public aware of the plan. It was working. But in 1990’s with appearance of internet the plan fell apart. Perpetrators behind the plan know how important it is to have complete control of mass media. In response they increased the speed of immigration and hope to get it done before they are exposed. That was their mistake 1. Instead of slow miscegenation it started to alert people who were completely unaware and it led to creations of parallel societies which did very little miscegenation. In 2010’s begun the rise of social media. Needless to say they are completely overtaking the role of mass media. Now the perpetrators got into real panic. They made plans for sensless wars in middle east and start flooding the EU. Similar plan was made for US to flood them with hispanics.

    In the meanwhile the whole Coudenhove-Kalergi project and white genocide is now fully exposed. Eastern Europe, Baltics have gone full racial. We had elections not long ago and extreme nationalist party got 45% seats. At the moment we are pretending its islam (most non whites are muslim) but we know what is really about. We have very few non whites in our country and trust me Poles are making their lives into hell. I can see alot of Germans and Sweedes have been brainwashed so bad that they are unwilling to fight. But people who truly understand Coudenhove-Kalergi plan and White Genocide are above average intelligent and extremely motivated to stop it. So there is hope for them too.

    Google and check Coudenhove-Kalergi plan. Then you will understand this is no natural process but a very well planned genocide.

  4. Nefertiti
    Posted November 1, 2015 at 9:13 am | Permalink

    the extinction of white people can’t happen soon enough!!! The world doesn’t want your kind in it… The day of reckoning is upon you and your evil offspring.

  5. Nefertiti
    Posted November 1, 2015 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    The moment YOUR kind stepped foot out of the caucus mountains there has been nothing but violence, disease and destruction spread about the earth. Instead of sharing and co existing on this HUGE EARTH, your disgusting devil spawned race decided to “conquer”. Your greed historically and present is why the socioeconomic status of non white people is the way it is now and I’m sure conservatives want to keep it that way. You greedy Devils need to become extinct so that the world can be a better place. I’m glad we are mixing because your race is genetically the weakest which is why you should be fearful of your extinction. There’s enough genetic material to wipe you guys out… That will be the best day and thing that has ever happened to mankind. Devils don’t belong on this earth and biology obviously agrees.

  6. Nefertiti
    Posted October 31, 2015 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

    The moment YOUR kind stepped foot out of the caucus mountains there has been nothing but violence, disease and destruction spread about the earth. Instead of sharing and co existing on this HUGE EARTH, your disgusting devil spawned race decided to “conquer”. Your greed historically and present is why the socioeconomic status of non white people is the way it is now and I’m sure conservatives want to keep it that way. You greedy Devils need to become extinct so that the world can be a better place. I’m glad we are mixing because your race is genetically the weakest which is why you should be fearful of your extinction. There’s enough genetic material to wipe you guys out… That will be the best day and thing that has ever happened to mankind. Devils don’t belong on this earth and biology obviously agrees.

    • Franklin Ryckaert
      Posted November 24, 2015 at 3:29 am | Permalink

      “Devils don’t belong on this earth…”

      I fully agree, so what is “Nefertiti” doing on this earth?

  7. Posted October 1, 2015 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

    FYI, I have translated the full article in french here : https://blancheurope.wordpress.com/2015/10/01/lextinction-des-blancs/

  8. Bjørn
    Posted September 15, 2015 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

    Just a little aside that may indicate that we have our own self destructive behaviour as part of the ‘Excessive predation’ problem.
    In my country, since 1973 (when abortion was ‘legalized’), we have carried out abortions equivalent to more than 10% of our population today.
    I suppose this could be categorized as a result of feminism, but the numbers are staggering. And all in the name of ‘personal freedom’.

  9. Sam smith
    Posted August 8, 2015 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    I have big plans and I will contact you when the time is right Greg.

  10. Hammerheart
    Posted April 20, 2015 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    I read this article thinking of the high-IQ whites (mostly wealthy) I know, & the fact that all of them have or would refuse to even read it. The comments by Greg Johnson were very illuminating & the big one near the top is what I refer to here. The response from high-IQ whites including people with advanced degrees in maths & engineering is: the facts are not real. ‘Objective evidence, figures etc to the contrary, are ignored.’ I could list examples at great length. This is followed by a guillotine-blade of ‘So what if whites go extinct?’ etc.

    What I deeply resent, what makes me bitter with anger, is the suggestion by all the WN people that people like me are somehow socially defective for being unable to “communicate” with these people. I have tried & tried & tried for many years. I will be quoting & referring to Johnson’s ‘the “so what?” crowd’ comment above, a lot in future. Most people who meet me at some point describe me (meant positively or negatively) as ‘extremely polite, very intelligent, well-mannered, quiet etc.’ (Possibly indicating I stand out like a lighthouse of civilised behaviour.)* My only ‘communication difficulty’ is trying to talk down to the level of American savages. This is usually affixed with ‘I just assumed you’re obviously gay.’ I am so glad for the Greg Johnson comment above. So many people from Prof Kevin MacDonald to Harold Covington repeat, over & over–& I grant that there are some individuals who fit the description–repeatedly make snide/ugly remarks about ‘nerds’/’geeks’, living in their mother’s basements (eg–??–the underemployed ‘loser’ still living in his mum’s basement who studied Greek philosophy, who spends his life behind a keyboard, with an aversion to meeting real people) and who fail to ‘connect with’ and ‘convert’ their fellow whites. I spent years in bars & Irish pubs etc having wasted huge amounts of both time & money trying to ‘communicate’ with fellow whites. The problem isn’t my ‘communication skills’ but fellow whites, who don’t care about facts & figures, who are either terrified of being un-PC even in private (literally behind locked doors–eg my friend the Mensan member computer programmer who, this literally happened, with his ‘Bibles’ of Nietzsche & Any Rand’s Atlas Shrugged on the table beside him, tearfully & with chin wobbling expressed terror that the NSA may be monitoring him and that [direct quote] “They could take my baby daughter away!” in response to my having sent him a handful of G-rated emails eg ‘Here’s a great article you might be interested in on that website I told you about, CC’)–or, in the contrary example, are so full of total BS bravado that ‘There’s no real problem, we’ll fix it when we feel like it.’ In either type of case communication is shut down at or near the beginning, they feel no obligation to acquaint themselves with facts & figures, etc. (My friend, the macho toughguy only so long as he was drunk every day, is now terrified of his uber-Left wing, liberal atheist-skeptics wife. He is the exception who did take a quick look at the facts & figures & concedes they’re probably right.)

    Every time I read this material (or hear it in the podcast, etc)–that the whole problem is that retarded nerds like me who watch anime are ‘hiding behind our keyboards, acting like autists & refusing to engage the whites in person around them–I both see red, & feel nearly unbearable guilt. Thank you, Greg Johnson, for a sort-of admission that it’s just impossible to even talk to these people. I know a lot of rich whites (living HIGHLY “implicit white” lives) who could fund you for a year with 1-2 checks. I’m glad to finally lay down my burden of guilt that I have somehow failed to ‘communicate’ with them.

    Btw, If the RFN podcast for this week is accurate (HAC on Mike Harris show), it sounds like even Harold Covington is getting the message–it isn’t us introverted nerds (who are high-IQ, watch anime, effeminate, & make friends on the internet more easily than in person etc) who are the problem or the reason for failure: it’s his bloody fellow whites, the rich/elites, the upper-middle class (like my friend) obsessed with upper-middle bourgeoise pursuits & paralysed with PC fear, etc. (It took me a while to figure out my atheist-sceptic friend only talks tough & macho when he’s putting down spoon-bending, astrology, & white middle-America ‘Christianity’.)
    * Contrast with HAC in a recent RFN podcast tut-tutting how WNs make poor impressions when they look like trailer trash, are obviously abusing substances, & the awesome ‘don’t beat up your gf or wife’ statement.

  11. Jim
    Posted February 18, 2014 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

    Exceptionally valuable article. One limitation of discussing the options for white survival is brought out straight-away in the comments: what if our people aren’t ready to act on *any* option (cf. the story above about the white acquaintance who asked what difference it would make if the white race did disappear) ?

    The racially aware among the White race are (apparantly) a minority. Those smart enough to think through the end-games on offer, and willing to speak up about it, are scarcer still.

    One problem I come back to again and again, is the sense of masochism and “species death wish” I get from White people. Has the race exhausted itself? Is this widespread defeatism merely the result of guilt-mongering public education and dead-end consumerist nihilism?

    It seems deeper than that; and until we ferret out the cause of this “urge towards twilight”, I fear we won’t have the key to unleashing the good old indomitable White spirit of yore; which never knew a challenge it wasn’t up to, and in fact ran out of frontiers to conquer for the sheer pleasure of it, never mind if it was “hard” or “difficult”!

    We talk all around this defeatism: lower birthrates; immersion in hedonism; children brainwashed by the multi-cult “educators”, etc. WE have allowed all these things; we ALLOW the browns and blacks to ride on our backs; we CHOOSE to feed and clothe them, and absorb their attacks on our women and children. But why? Who here doesn’t believe we could shake them all off with one hand tied behind our collective backs? As a race, have we simply ran ourselves out? Do we desire oblivion?

    • A Swain
      Posted February 21, 2014 at 11:16 am | Permalink

      #”One problem I come back to again and again, is the sense of masochism and “species death wish” I get from White people. Has the race exhausted itself? Is this widespread defeatism merely the result of guilt-mongering public education and dead-end consumerist nihilism?
      ………………………….
      “Do we desire oblivion?”#

      Widespread defeatism as a result of very powerful long term globally enacted plan of extermination is the reason. This plan has been designed to encapsulate the physical, cultural, psychical and philosophical spheres specifically of the Anglo Saxon/Nordic peoples.
      It is the first obstacle the true White European race must collectively attack and then use its tenets to turn back onto the common enemy.

      Yes, it can work! After all, the enemy cannot claim to be blameless and faultless – far from it. There is sufficient evidence throughout the realms of history to the contrary.

      Since this enemy tribe is also White and much of its hostile elite is actually genetically White European then why should this element not be earmarked for total genocide also.

      The true European White race should be concerning itself with educating the myriad non-White races across the globe about the dangerous beliefs and universal designs attributable to this faux White tribe thus encouraging these non-White races/nationalities to galvanise themselves against its hostile intent?

      If the true White European race fails on this score, any attempt to recover its demographics, territories, cultures and racial independence is not going to happen whilst the faux White tribe is still permitted to go on existing without being challenged collectively.

  12. Posted February 17, 2014 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

    Time to invent the artificial womb.

  13. Peter Quint
    Posted February 17, 2014 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    I have long entertained the idea that our race can only be saved through the use of unlimited biological warfare. People become indignant and outraged when I suggest such a thing, but remember this, the jews will not hesitate to use this measure against whites. Anyway, as time goes by and we increasingly become the smallest segment in all white homelands more white nationalists will come around to my point of view.

    • Lucian Tudor
      Posted February 18, 2014 at 11:42 am | Permalink

      In other words, you’re recommending global genocide. Have you ever considered that: (1) This is morally/ethically wrong (and not only from a Christian perspective)? (2) That non-whites around the world could react, prior to being exterminated themselves, by exterminating us before we finish them? (3) That whatever diseases or biological agents that we use against non-whites could come back to harm us even if we were to succeed in this goal (after all, epidemics created through biological warfare are not going to stay only among non-whites)?

      These are only some of the issues that immediately came to mind, but there are probably far more that could be brought up. Your manner of thinking regarding how we should solve our racial situation is close to what a 14-year old skinhead might come up with. I can’t even believe Greg Johnson let a comment like this through.

      • Peter Quint
        Posted February 19, 2014 at 10:30 am | Permalink

        It is also morally and ethically wrong for the white race too be enslaved and exterminated my simple critic and I do not believe in your degenerate christian perspective. And just how would these non-whites around the world react and achieve the destruction of the white race if they are too sick to stand. And how do you know for certain that the viral agent would mutate and spread? What if we created isolated areas where only whites existed? What if we made the viral agent race specific? What if we built in a time-limit (actually is this even possible?) in which the plague burnt out? I would rather see the world destroyed than to hand it over to the jews.

  14. Donar van Holland
    Posted February 16, 2014 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

    This was such a torturous read! The conclusions are inescapable. Even strict Apartheid will not save our people. I really had to force myself to follow the argument and not to quit reading. Well, at least that places me outside the “so what” group. In fact, I loved the comment in which Greg Johnson referred to creating a new white people. I envision a people with stars in their eyes, a Galactic people. Indeed, this would be the ideal vision for white propaganda. What slogan can invoke this vision? “White Power!”, or maybe “White Consciousness!” ?

  15. rhondda
    Posted February 16, 2014 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

    You know because a lot of Christian mothers of the 50’s and 60’s were so sex phobic, they neglected to tell their daughters that their being was worth something and not to give it away. They thought by not saying anything about sex that it would just be transmitted magically and we would understand. Well, it did not work and we were influenced by many factors including doctors whom our dear mothers sent us to to learn about that horrid thing. For the most part, they were men and gave double messages as they handed out the pill for various dubious menstrual problems. Well, guess where that lead? You cannot tell a child that something is forbidden without telling him or her why. I had sons. I am very glad I did not have daughters. I saw women my age promote sexually revealing clothes for their daughters and when I tried to tell them that perhaps boys would not see it as a right, I was told where to go. I asked my sons what they thought of these young women running around with everything hanging out and they were not impressed. They saw what they were right away. I was never ever protected from predators or even told about them, but I have had to tell my sons about women predators.
    Once I was in a nightclub with friends and a Jewish couple came in with their daughter. The typical Jewish princess, but holy cow, her parents were teaching her something I never got. I watched them as they (it seemed to me) told her how much more valuable she was than these gentile women. The way her parents treated her made me feel quite jealous and I wondered just what that would feel like, being regarded like that. Someone who was worth something. As the song goes, teach your children well. This is not a Freudian analysis where the mother is to blame. That is how the feminists managed to turn the tide. For both boys and girls, mother is the first love. And fathers, well you had better grow up. Don’t see her as a sexual object, you have the right to give away. Teach her about character and honour and loyalty to one’s people. It is not about being provided for, but joining in a mutual cause.

  16. Richard Lionheart
    Posted February 16, 2014 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

    Greg,

    I agree with everything in this article. However, I’m curious about what the exact definition of ‘celibacy’ is. It seems to mean a wide-range of things (the dictionary defines it as “not being married” roughly.) What does the word mean to you? Or is more of a negative ideology than an exact status or character trait that a person can attain? This is interesting because the “Julian Lee” celibacy guy who claimed to be pro-white once wrote for this site. I wonder how he would argue against your claim?

    Also, don’t you think promiscuity and different kinds of sexual deviancy are as damaging as celibacy is? Or do you think the new sexual environment is not worth complaining/trying to change and it would be better focusing our energies on adapting to it?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted February 16, 2014 at 8:42 pm | Permalink

      Celibacy simply means refraining from sex. Before the advent of reliable birth control, it was the only 100% effective anti-natal ideology.

      Celibacy, as they say, leaves a lot to be desired. Thus very few people have practiced it.

      Thus of course celibacy has been much less damaging than non-reproductive sex in the age of birth control.

      In the present circumstances, the only thing that individuals can do is adapt to present-day sexual chaos. But a White Nationalist society should reimpose traditional/biological sexual norms and roles and institute disincentives for promiscuity. In a sane society, the only women you would be able to pick up in bars would be professional whores working the waterfront.

  17. Posted February 16, 2014 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

    I believe we need White spaces and institutions to guarantee survival. When it comes to White spaces, the options are either White areas within multi-racial countries or outright White countries. I agree that an outright White country would be more efficient in maintaining survival, my concerns are with the cost of achieving these all White countries.

    What is the cost of partitioning lets say 2/3 of America for Whites only? How many people are you willing to see die (Whites and non-Whites) to achieve it?

    One more question: Lets say Americans were given total freedom of association (meaning the right to communities, institutions, businesses with who they wanted) and there was end to State financed anti-Whiteness (including a moratorium on non-White immigration) . How many here would still fight for an all White State?

    My take on it is this, as much as I’d like an all White State in North America, the cost of getting it would probably be too great. So instead, I’d see total freedom of association and the institutions (media, educational, spiritual) to make White people better off. Then over time as White communities join other White communities, slowly Whites may wish to form something new. This will be a slower process. A more organic process to White Statehood. This way would eliminate the death and suffering involved in cutting out a new White state in North America. It would also greatly reduce the chances for power elites to use us for their bigger plans.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted February 16, 2014 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

      1. Given that the consequence of not having white homelands is the extinction of our race, gaining a white homeland should be worth quite a lot of bloodshed, if that is the only way to achieve it.

      2. Who is going to “give” whites complete freedom of association? The current establishment would only “give” us that over their dead bodies, so to speak. Only a sovereign white people could “give” itself complete freedom of association, i.e., we would have to take it. But if whites had the power to give ourselves a libertarian system, then ipso facto we would have the power to give ourselves homogeneous homelands.

      3. The trouble with any libertarian, free association model is that some of our people will choose to associate with and breed with non-whites. We simply cannot allow them that option. Freedom of association is all well and good, but there are more important values that have to come first, namely the common good of the race.

      4. You have been sold the false premise that a white homeland can only arise through war, bloodshed, and political cataclysm. But if whites collectively decide that we wish to have a future, and we gain the right leadership, the cleansing process need not be sudden, violent, and cataclysmic.

      Whites today seem quite content with a slow march to extinction. Why not tell non-whites in America: you have no long term future here. We are stripping you of political power and influence. We are establishing racial segregation and strict barriers to miscegenation. We are also establishing incentives for your people to emigrate to non-white homelands, adopt low or zero fertility lifestyles, and eventually dwindle to extinction within the white homeland. But that is no threat to your racial survival, since you have flourishing non-white homelands around the world.

      That process, which I call the slow cleanse, might take three or four generations. But during that time, non-whites who remain within our borders will be perfectly content, well-fed, well-entertained resident aliens — just like whites today who seem indifferent to the fact that they have no future (no future at all, anywhere on this globe), as long as they are comfortable and entertained.

      • M. Erthal
        Posted September 8, 2015 at 8:57 am | Permalink

        As a garden needs protection from weeds, we need a white supremacist state. Our survival will never be guaranteed only by our individual strength, but by our unity.
        Let me quote some excerpts from Nietzsche about it:
        1. “A well constituted man, a man who is one of nature’s lucky strokes, must perform certain actions and instinctively fear other actions. He introduces the element of order, of which he is the physiological manifestation, into his relations with men and things. In a formula: His virtue is the consequence of his good constitution.”
        2. “Morality is merely a sign language, merely a symptomatology , one must already know what it is all about in order to turn it to any use. In the early years of the Middle ages during which the church was most distinctly and above all a menagerie (a French word, a kind of zoo, note by Vig), the most beautiful examples of the blond beasts were hunted down in all directions. The noble Germans for instance were “improved”, but what would the improved Germans who had been lured to the monasteries look like after the process? He had become a sinner who was caged up, who had been caged up behind appalling notions. He now lay there sick, rechid and malevolent even towards himself.”
        3. “An altruistic morality under which selfishness withers is in all circumstances a bad sign. This is true of individuals and above all of nations. The best are lacking when selfishness begins to be lacking. Instinctively to select that which is harmful to one, to be lured by disinterested motives, these things almost provide a formula for decadence. ( think of “our” culture and race mixing policies. Note by Vig) Not to have one’s own interest at heart, this is simply a moral fig leaf concealing a very different fact, a physiological one, meaning that I no longer know how to find what is in my interest. Disintegration of the instincts happens when selfishness begins to be lacking.”
        4. “Freedom is the will to be responsible for one selves. It is to preserve the distance that protects us from other men. To go more in different hardships, to severity, to privation and even to life itself, to be ready to sacrifice men for ones cause oneself included. Freedom denotes that the virile instincts which rejoice in war and victory prevail over other instincts.”
        5. “It is not only obvious that German culture is declining but adequate reasons for this decline are not lacking. After all nobody can spend more than he has. It is true of individuals , it is also true of nations. If you spend your strength acquiring power or in politics at any scale, or in commerce or in parliamentarism or military interests, if you spend the modicum of reason, of earnestness, of will and of self control that constitutes your nature in one particular fashion, you cannot dissipate it in another.
        6. “ …when morals decay, those men emerge whom one calls tyrants. They are the precursors and as it were the precocious harbingers of individuals……In these ages bribery and treason reach their peaks, for the love of the newly discovered ego is much more powerful now than the love of the old used up Fatherland. Individuals—being truly in and for themselves— care, as is well known, more for the moment than their opposites, the herd man. The times of corruption are those when the apples fall from the tree. I mean the individuals, for they carry the seeds of the future and are the authors of the spiritual colonisation and origin of new states and communities. Corruption is merely a nasty word for the autumn of a people.”

  18. WWWM
    Posted February 16, 2014 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    As George Lincoln Rockwell said, “Total geographic separation.” That is the ultimate answer, and it the wording is very similar to White Nationalism. We must think of the White race as a living being, that is either healthy or in a state of disease. To end sickness we expel waste matter and reduce parasites. Segregation and Apartheid-type laws are just another form of conservativism. Conservatives are just as destructive as liberals, if not more so. In this game it is the racially aware people, who are willing to do something, versus everybody else.

  19. R_Moreland
    Posted February 16, 2014 at 4:19 am | Permalink

    A few months back I happened to be discussing issues of race realism with an acquaintance. He’s white, middle aged, of general Nordic extraction (as the saying goes), single and gets most of his ideas from television. Still, he was somewhat open to the topic, provided issues were presented incrementally and not confrontational.

    At one point he asked, “What difference would it make if the white race disappeared?”

    Now, there are any number of answers one could make to his question:

    * “How would a member of any other race respond to your question? For example, supposing one were to ask a Chinese citizen ‘what difference would it make if the Han people disappeared?’ Or of a Muslim, ‘what difference would it make if Islam disappeared?’ I’d say that any self-respecting person would become indignant that such a possibility could even be considered.”

    * Another response might be along these lines: “Look at all the technological, industrial, scientific, artistic, and etc., inventions for which white people are responsible. If white people disappeared, the progress of the human race would likely come screeching to a halt, perhaps maintained as a Potemkin village by East Asians. We might also consider that without white people to push human rights campaigns, the world would likely see a return to slavery and every manner of despotism.”

    * Or, “What would happen to blacks?” [This fellow has shown some affinity for American blacks per the usual establishment party line.] “Globally, blacks would starve in epic numbers were it not for white food aid; not to mention the impact of loss of white medical aid, white development programs, etc. The same would be true here in the USA where much of black America is propped up by the welfare state, affirmative action, and every manner of redistribution of wealth and resources from whites to black.”

    * Or, “What happens down the line when you are retired in a country in which white people are a minority. Supposing the non-white majority decides to pull the plug on your social security payments, retirement account, and hospital care?”

    Thing is, I doubt if any of these answers would have satisfied this fellow. His question went much deeper than the words. What struck me was the utter indifference he had towards the fate of his own race. Even when this is wrapped up in his own personal fate.

    His general response to racial issues is that he believes that as long as he treats members of other races decently, they will be decent to him in return. Objective evidence to the contrary is dismissed by him.

    This gets to my point here: What answer do we have to the question, “What difference would it make if the white race disappeared?”

    I don’t mean facile rhetoric that sounds good in a college debate. The real answer has to go beyond words. The question this fellow asked is symptomatic of a deeper metaphysical void in too many white people these decadent days. What is the answer to that void?

    Thoughts?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted February 16, 2014 at 4:56 am | Permalink

      I have heard this “so what?” dismissal a thousand times. I doubt if most of these people are being sincere. They are just intimidated by the Zeitgeist. They know that thinking about white survival and what it requires makes them thought criminals, and they won’t go there. Since fear of political correctness — which, ultimately, goes back to fear of the Jews — is what is behind this, try asking them if they think that it would be a tragedy if the Jews completely disappeared. If they change their tune, press them for their reasons.

      Ultimately, I don’t worry too much about the “so what?” crowd. They are either very sick animals, with not enough biological vitality or intellectual seriousness to care about the future. Or they are such total PC cowards that they will allow themselves to be intimidated into oblivion. In either case, they are white people without a future, whereas White Nationalism is creating a new people, white people with a future, and I for one take great pleasure in leaving the dross to the oblivion they crave.

      But for open-minded people who might be listening, and for future generations who need to be inoculated against such ideas, we need a renewed sense of whites as a race with an exalted, even cosmic destiny.

      Frankly, I am disgusted by racial altruistic arguments like, “Without white people, all the brown parasites would die.” Our continued existence is not justified based solely on the services we render to our inferiors, services that should never have been offered in the first place and should immediately stop or be contingent on radical reduction in their fertility.

      Instead, I think we need to take seriously the idea that mankind, whites most preeminently, has an exalted role in the story of the cosmos, for as far as we know, this planet is the only one with life, and human beings are the life form with the highest form of consciousness, whites preeminently so. Our race, therefore, adds something enormously important to the universe. We are the self-consciousness of the universe, and with that self-consciousness, we can direct and perfect the previously blind forces of cosmic evolution. Without whites, that process may become impossible, and a great light in the cosmos may be extinguished. You would have to be utterly cold-hearted and selfish to regard that prospect with indifference, and we can do without such people anyway.

      I suggest you read John Carver’s “Cosmotheism” article (http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/07/cosmotheism/) as well as William Pierce’s longer statement of the Cosmotheist perspective “Our Cause” (http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/01/our-cause/). See also the other articles on this site tagged “Cosmotheism”: http://www.counter-currents.com/tag/cosmotheism/

    • Lucian Tudor
      Posted February 16, 2014 at 10:23 am | Permalink

      R_Moreland, the first response to your acquaintance’s indifference is an excellent one, which should be successful with any person open to the idea because it makes perfect sense. The last three responses are, however, not very good. The second response is simply untrue because we can see that despite the fact that whites were historically responsible for most major scientific and high technological developments, most non-white races, especially the Asiatic races, are capable of adapting these developments and even of developing and inventing further (look at the capabilities of Chinese and Japanese scientists, for example). Arguments about superiority are always the very weakest of racial arguments, always remember that.

      You third response has some truth to it, but I can hardly think it provides any motivation to a person like that to insist that the white race needs to be maintained. As for your fourth response, it is true that a majority black state would have an affinity towards treating a white minority badly, but the same cannot necessarily be said of other non-white races, who may very well give a white minority equal treatment. And remember that in a completely race-mixed state, whites per se are unlikely to be targeted because the non-whites themselves are a race-mixed mess without any racial solidarity or identity.

      You said: “What struck me was the utter indifference he had towards the fate of his own race.” I would say you are speaking to what Greg Johnson described below; either somebody who is a “very sick animal” or a “PC coward”. I personally cannot think of a moment in my entire life, even as a child, when the thought of whites disappearing would not have bothered me, so I can hardly sympathize with somebody that is simply indifferent about it.

      You said: “The question this fellow asked is symptomatic of a deeper metaphysical void in too many white people these decadent days. What is the answer to that void?” The answer to the void is not a question or a response to a question, the answer is Identity; Without a solid European ethnic and cultural identity (I say European because ultimately all whites, regardless of where they live, have their identity as whites rooted in European heritage) and a sense of pride in that identity – which should be developed during childhood – how could anybody care about their race?

      Those who have such an identity, even if it is unconscious and the person is infected with multiculturalist propaganda, are open to conversion if the right logic and commentary is used in a conversation with them (or in a text they might read). Of course, when dealing with those who have a latent European identity, one of the first steps is to get them in touch with and to see the value of this identity and heritage. The problem is that true European identity is not being kept up very well in North America, hence the reason you and I both see a lot of people like your acquaintance around us.

    • wobbly
      Posted February 17, 2014 at 1:19 am | Permalink

      “This gets to my point here: What answer do we have to the question, “What difference would it make if the white race disappeared?”

      Don’t worry about it. Once you’ve got them to that point the job is done.

      You don’t need to take people all the way from A to Z – apart from anything else their pride will kick in and start acting as a hurdle.

      If someone is at A take them to B.
      If someone is at B take them to C.
      If someone is at C take them to D.
      etc

      The average is what matters as that feeds back into the balance of peer pressure. Once the herd is moving they can stampede themselves.

    • Armor
      Posted February 18, 2014 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

      It is useful to talk to White people, especially young people, who fail to show any racial awareness. But if they start asking what difference it makes if the Whites go extinct, that sounds like passive-aggressive behavior, and I would cut the conversation short. A serious answer is not necessarily required.

      On the other hand, if the question comes up in a group conversation, it is useful to have a snappy comeback ready. A possible reply is what William Pierce said: “Why should we survive?” is like asking “Why is good better than evil?”

  20. WG
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 3:57 pm | Permalink

    Maybe this is a good time to suggest that young white men learn Game. Not in order to pump-n-dump white girls, but to make themselves more attractive to said girls, form and maintain relationships with them, and ultimately to form families with them.

    • Fourmyle of Ceres
      Posted February 16, 2014 at 12:25 am | Permalink

      WG in blockquote:

      Maybe this is a good time to suggest that young white men learn Game. Not in order to pump-n-dump white girls, but to make themselves more attractive to said girls, form and maintain relationships with them, and ultimately to form families with them.

      Perfect suggestion.

      Go to Roissy’s website, and see his latest advice to a single mother of a son. Line upon line, precept upon precept, this should be on the front of every refrigerator in America.

      The perfect way to destroy a nation, over time, is simply to destroy the Warrior Caste. This is being done in several ways, and can only be blocked by concerted, quietly effective, action.

      None of this is free, and that is all the more reason to contribute to counter-currents, monthly, without fail.

  21. Lucian Tudor
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    I think it is correct to conclude that most whites deny the possibility of white extinction because it is psychologically unpleasant or because it may seem improbable in cases where they live in a mostly white or all-white location. However, one of the things I always like to stress when this subject comes up is that this fight of ours is not merely about simple biological survival; the fact is that the multicultural/multiracial society is a sick one to live in. There is no socio-cultural stability in this form of society due to the fact there are so many contrary cultures, values, and groups conflicting with each other, thus causing constant cultural confusion. In other words, even if racial biological death (white extinction) were to never occur in such societies with such policies, the social and cultural consequences essentially lead to a kind of spiritual disintegration (of the white-European social/spiritual form with which the biological racial type is associated). And of course, it is also worth noting that other races may experience the same damaging effects of this society as whites when they live in the same multiracial system. What I have described above is what I think we need to stress as the most primary reason for being against multiracial/multicultural societies, and we should leave the notion of physical white extinction as a secondary reason.

  22. Lt. Greyman, NVA
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

    If I might suggest a culture of Whites to admire, the Mormons are well on their way to surviving. See: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700251966/Utahs-birthrate-highest-in-US.html?pg=all

    Whites, as you say, have a suppressed birthrate because of many factors. Mormons have found a way around that suppression through their church simply by following the commandment, “Be fruitful and Multiply.” It is hard to do alone. Worries about income and life tend to make thoughtful men cautious. The Mormons have found a way by participating an all inclusive religion. By all inclusive I mean that they don’t tolerate Jews, homosexuals or any crimes against children. Their kids are clean and morally straight and they protect their own. The church buys land and produces a huge amount of stored food and they teach their children to shoot, hunt and fight.

    I am not a particularly religious person, but I can see what works. For stable Government, Switzerland works. For a stable, growing community, Mormonism works. Whether you agree with the faith or not is not the question. Adopting the protective coloration and community of the church maybe a way for those who have more difficulty forming their own White Communities.

    As a side note, they are a powerful force in the Homeland (Northwest). They are one of the largest landowners, the largest growers of Potatoes in all of Idaho and have enough money to support all their members and institutions for over three years, much of it in Gold.

    Something to consider.

    • Fourmyle of Ceres
      Posted February 16, 2014 at 12:46 am | Permalink

      The Mormon Church is collapsing at an amazing rate, and we can learn from this, as well.

      It was – is – an Institution with a Gnostic Christian Core, overlaid by the pseudo-Christian Book of Mormon, nominally supported by the Holy Bible. The collapse is seen on many fronts – missionaries in the field, grossly overstated membership numbers, the list is endless.

      Astute students of Mormon history – and demography – note that is really is a massive extended family – pretty much the organic definition of a nation – descended from those who followed Brigham Young in the Trek of ’47. This is the real reason the Church is so limited theologically; the actual support comes from Family members, and the theology is only nominally “Christian,” as mainstream Protestantism defines itself.

      Thus, that Core is actually doing very well in supporting and sustaining the Church in all possible manners, regardless of the temporal collapse of the extant Church structures.

      Covington had this right, too. Families are the foundation of the organic nation.

      Now, thinking along Northwest Republic lines, look at the issues of young men – and women – from the perspective of White Extinction. Families are encouraged, from a young age.

      The newest change is the lowering of the age for Missionary Service by a year, done, many feel, to try to keep them in the fold for a critically younger year. Currently, remember, the purpose of missionary service is to bind the missionaries to the Church after they return from their two year mission. They really are married off as fast as possible. Yet, by making missionaries take the Armed Forces Vocational Battery, and numerous psych tests, the two year service could be melded with their doing apprenticeships while on service. No more wasting time knocking on doors. Missionary service would become a high valued-added benefit for members.

      Tying this in with WG’s comment, the Church is the biggest sponsor, by far, of Boy Scout troops, with enough say in the BSA to have their own badge, “Duty to God.” Again, butching up the Scouts, with the service component linked to their Talents, while having a new, masculine component based on Outward Bound (for example), would encourage the proper development of the Vital Masculine.

      Your idea of “adopting the protective coloration and community of the church maybe a way for those who have more difficulty forming their own White Communities,” is of greater importance that it seems at first glance. Operating under the protective cover of a Church allows the formation of a wide variety of institutions free of government control, including our own school system. Or did you forget about the Mormon (morning) seminaries?

      As always, Covington is so correct that he really does have the Gift of Prophecy.

      All the more reason to contribute to counter-currents, each and every month, without fail, while you can.

      • Maple Leaf
        Posted February 18, 2014 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

        Is it all Tax free?

        • Fourmyle of Ceres
          Posted February 21, 2014 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

          Maple Leaf in blockquotes:

          Is it all Tax free?

          Tax considerations only affect the marginal efficiency of capital, and should be at the end of all considerations of investment choices.

          As well, you can have taxable entities – 501 (c)(8), like most Churches, as, in effect, holding companies for tax exempt entities. Any “profits” the Church makes become reinvested in, say, the Church’s school system.

          This is a trap to be avoided. Churches that seek 501 (c)(3) – this is not legal or investment advice, see your lawyer and accountant about this – allow the boot of the State to be placed on their throat, and anxious members of the Church will insure the 501 (c)(3) status becomes sancrosanct. In effect, the means become the new end, and the tail wags the dog.

          Churches, after all, are exempt from taxation – for now, at any rate.

          Look at the marginal tax rate for most of us. If we need a tax deduction for the greatest Cause of all, aren’t we really looking for an excuse to NOT contribute, by any means necessary?

          How many people who have children do so for the tax deduction? What would such people be worth? By extension, what would people who demand a Church seek 501 (c)(3) status before contributing a dime really be worth? If you need the deduction, keep your money. It’s what you want to do, anyway. See the piece on counter-currents regarding DeWest Hooker, a man who – we are told – wanted so badly to contribute to Rockwell’s Initiatives, but, somehow, somehow, for some mysterious reason, could not find the time to give any money at all.

          That’s why it is so important to contribute to counter-currents, monthly, without fail. In metapolitics, as in politics, money does not talk.

          It speaks with authority.

  23. Arindam
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 11:10 am | Permalink

    ‘From an ecological point of view, a stable population of a billion or even half-a-billion whites is not necessarily a good thing. We cannot define victory as a population race with fast-breeding non-whites until the globe is laid waste.’

    I’ve found this viewpoint crop up in many contexts, and it can basically be summed up as: the global population exceeds the capacity of the earth to replenish its resources.

    In my opinion, it entails certain assumptions, which should be stated openly:

    The global population exceeds the capacity of the earth to replenish its resources given the current level of technology, and the current economic system.

    These two assumptions should be considered more closely. There is always the prospect of improvements in technology making it possible to sustain a larger population on a given territory. (Indeed, as Friedrich List noted long ago, agricultural societies sustain a population ten times larger on a given territory than pastoral societies; industrial societies sustain a population ten times larger on a given territory than agricultural ones…

    Of course, this also means that if a country undergoes deindustrialization…)

    The other point is the sheer wastefulness of the economic system, which is not fully appreciated by many people. An enormous proportion of resources are simply squandered in fields that provide no social benefit, (notably advertising and marketing). Stuart Chase calculated (at the end of World War One) that about two-thirds of human labour was squandered in one way or another in the United States, (see his booklet, ‘The Challenge of Waste’ for details). I dare say, the proportion is even higher today.

    I’d go as far as to argue that overpopulation is merely a bogey used to cover up economic mismanagement – ‘we can’t support so many people’ is an alibi for ‘we intend to keep pursuing policies that, whilst profitable for us, will make life hell for the rest of you.’

    • Jaego
      Posted February 16, 2014 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

      Many Baby Boomers consciously chose to have more than two children – and were betrayed by a Government that then opened the borders to the world. In any case, Whites are not the problem when it comes to over-population. We could have had a high tech American paradise with 200 million people, 90% White. They’ve chosen to create a hellish Brazil North with twice the population.

      You might like Bellamy’s socialist classic “Looking Backward”. He focuses on waste as one the chief features of our system. But of course his solution is Socialism, albeit not Marxist Socialism, but still very centralized. Consumer needs are respected but the choices are of course far more limited than under our consumer driven private system. On the whole it comes across as kind of grey and uniform. He does speak out in favor of Eugenics but never mentions race one way or another. I’d be interested to know what he thought about it.

      • Arindam
        Posted February 19, 2014 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

        Thank you Jaego.

        I’ve downloaded the book from archive.org, (which is also where one can find Stuart Chase’s ‘The Challenge of Waste’:

        https://archive.org/details/challengeofwaste00chas .)

        Although state socialism doesn’t give priority to the consumer and can indeed seriously neglect his finer needs and desires, a decentralized, stateless socialism (which anarchists like Peter Kropotkin and Elisee Reclus championed) might be able to avoid such pitfalls. Certainly, the products of the free-software movement are anything but grey and uniform.

  24. Peter Quint
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    White christians have broken every law of nature:
    1. They have allowed non-whites live in their ecological niches.
    2. They have declared themselves an inferior species unworthy of survival.
    3. They have accepted the idea that inter-racial couplings are preferable to mono-racial couplings.
    4. They have suppressed their own birth rates, going as far as financially penalizing their own birth rates.
    5. They have subsidized and encouraged non-white birth rates.
    6. They act slavish, obsequious and deferential when non-whites (especially blacks) are near, promoting the perception that a non-white is superior to a white.
    7. In all arenas they have leveled and tilted the playing field in favor of non-whites.

    • a censored GOP
      Posted February 15, 2014 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

      Peter Quint wrote: White christians have broken every law of nature:

      Let’s make that “White Christians were manipulated into breaking every law of nature.”

      • Peter Quint
        Posted February 17, 2014 at 9:30 am | Permalink

        The word “manipulated” does not paint the christian in a better light. It just makes them look asinine and imbecilic.

        • wobbly
          Posted February 17, 2014 at 3:06 pm | Permalink

          “It just makes them look asinine and imbecilic.”

          High trust societies are very high surplus. They are also very vulnerable to parasitic manipulation. Christian or otherwise, if White people want the ideal end result they need to figure out a way of combining a high trust society with defenses against parasitism.

  25. me
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    A question for Greg: You mentioned “white supremacy” a few times in your article. Unfortunately, that has a negative connotation, thanks to the jewish control of the press. Most whites are not interested in ruling over other races – they just want to be separate from other races. Can Greg please clarify the term “white supremacy”?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted February 15, 2014 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

      It just means white dominance in multiracial societies. I believe that ethnic conflict, as well as hierarchy and dominance, are entirely natural, and if there are multiple races in a given society, one race will dominate due to ethnic conflict and superior will to power. In America, it used to be whites. Now we live in a Jewish-supremacist society.

      • Ned
        Posted February 15, 2014 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

        Quoted for truth. Thank you, Greg.

      • me
        Posted February 17, 2014 at 6:51 am | Permalink

        Thanks. Since many whites have been conditioned about the negative connotation of the term of ‘white supremacy’, so maybe a word or phrase change is in order – instead of writing/talking about white supremacy, we could use the phrase “natural white dominance” or similar.

  26. kurt
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 3:23 am | Permalink

    That’s a pretty good analysis of the situation, Greg, and I like how you used the terms and ideas of how biological species can go extinct in a given geographical region from some combination of Loss of habitat, Invasive species, Hybridization, and Excessive predation: all four factors are currently going on in America, big time, that’s for sure.

  27. wobbly
    Posted February 15, 2014 at 3:12 am | Permalink

    How this stealth genocide is being done.

    1. The political elite import large numbers of young men from violent and or clannish populations into 1% of the neighborhoods of a settled population. This increases the ratio of young males to young females in those neighborhoods. Increasing this ratio *causes* violence mostly concentrated among the young in and around the schools and the places where youth gather.

    2. The media and political elite *cover up* this violence and turn speaking about it into a crime.

    3. Indigenous parents are then left with no way to protect their school age children other than to move away.

    4. As the indigenous population are forced out of that neighborhood they are replaced.

    5. Most of these displaced people won’t talk about it because as the process is slow and gradual at any one time the majority of the indigenous population won’t believe the people who have already been displaced because they won’t believe the media would tell such a big lie. (This whole process is a classic example of the effectiveness of the Big Lie.) Also as the process is bottom-up i.e. lower class first, it is easy to paint the few who do complain in an unfavorable light.

    6 Once the first 1% are displaced then the political and media elite move onto the next 1% and so on.

    This has been happening for 60 years, 1% at a time.

    I think it’s hard for people who haven’t experienced it yet to understand but what is happening is an absolutely standard violent ethnic cleansing / genocide *but* in slow-motion, 1% at a time.

  28. Aurelian
    Posted February 14, 2014 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    I think most people can grasp that whites will disappear. The biggest obstacle I have found is convincing whites that our distinct group is worth preserving. Most do their politically correct duty and appear horrified and offended that you would suggest such a thing.

9 Trackbacks

    Kindle Subscription
  • EXSURGO Apparel

    Our Titles

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Tyr, Vol. 4

    Reuben

    The Node

    Axe

    Carl Schmitt Today

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    Generation Identity

    Nietzsche's Coming God

    The Conservative

    The New Austerities

    Convergence of Catastrophes

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    The Fourth Political Theory

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Metaphysics of War

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Shock of History

    The Prison Notes

    Sex and Deviance

    Standardbearers

    On the Brink of the Abyss

    Beyond Human Rights

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    Archeofuturism

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Tyr

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Revolution from Above