What the Nordics Get Right

Swedish women are less likely than swedish men to miscegenate + native ethnic Swedish fertility is higher than every other country in Europe except Debmark and iceland.

https://www.thelocal.se/20150402/single-immigrants-less-likely-to-settle-with-swedes

Only three out of ten immigrant women and nearly two out of ten immigrant men were in a relationship with a Swede

These are a lot of them Muslims, especially Bedouins, who have ten child in each family, and these Arabs are starting to overtake South of Israel. (North of Israel is already majority Muslim).

Then Israeli governments forces the Bedouin children into the most high-achieving boarding schools in Israel, especially where there are Russian speakers, and the standards in those schools in the South are rapidly declining.

In addition, Israel uses affirmative action and scholarships for Muslims to go the universities, so that Arab do not pay tuition fees, while at the same time do not go to army. Here they could be planning to increase education level of the Arabs so that it will reduce their birthrates. However, anger created in the Israeli secular population from this, is more likely to cause more and more Israeli high human capital population to emigrate (Israeli Jews have to pay very high university tuition fees, in addition to years in the army which are almost without salary).

There has been a massive exodus of educated Israelis, who leave the country, and this is particularly with the more European and/or Russian speaking component of its population.

The friends I stay with in Israel, for example, are still planning to emigrate to Canada, and anger about unfair positive discrimination for Arabs in all sectors, as well as general too large Middle Eastern population (e.g. Moroccan Jews can be annoying neighbours), and too many religious Jews (Haredim), is one of the motivations which is causing educated secular people in Israel to want to emigrate from there to Canada.

Many of the Russian immigrants to Israel really wished to go to Canada or America, and were only using Israel as a waystation.

Israel isn’t really a country for people whose main consideration is to have an easy and pleasant life in an atheistic setting and who prioritize material comforts. Its more a blood and soil kind of place. It also has a culture that is sort of Southern Europe and Levantine, which may not feel so comfortable to many Russians.

So yes, a certain percentage of Russians, especially with less Jewish ancestry, certainly wish to leave and will do so.

As for the fertility, its difficult to see how the story is not positive. The highly educated are at 2.78 – that means more smart people each year.

The lowest educated are only at 3.5, less than a child more – and this will likely fall as groups like the Bedouin become more affluent.

As for your points about affirmative action for Arabs and the like, they are valid and as in all such cases, a regrettable source of tension.

Israel surely has its share of problems, and some resemble those found in other affluent countries.

Provide a source for that or you’re full of shit.

Cue the “white knight” screeching.

I think you are overstating the case for brain drain. Many leave temporarily and return, and it’s also well known that Israel has a flourishing hi tech industry with high paid jobs, not to mention, the extensive arms industry and military provide tech opportunities.

I personally know several Israeli hi tech emigres in NYC who dream of returning to Israel and plan on doing so, seeing their stay here as work related and temporary, and their hearts they left in Israel.

You are vastly overstating the case in your other list of problems. Israel built a fence that stopped African immigration to zero, and they are frankly described as infiltrators, not dreamers or undocumented Israelis by everyone. This demonstrates more political will than any other Western country.

The failure to deport Africans there is unfortunate, but in a diverse political system some concessions must be made even to idealistic dreamers, provided they are minor. In the West, such people have taken over.

As for demographics, all the trends favor Israel long term – the Arab growth rate has cratered since the 90s and continues to decline, and the Jewish growth rate is going up.

You are correct that orthodox Jews contribute much to the Jewish growth rate, but even the most highly educated seculars, we have seen, have above replacement TFR.

The Palestinian population is rapidly aging, and there is speculation that with far fewer young men it won’t be so interested in fighting anymore, and peace may cone as a result of demographic change.

The political solutions you favor would transform Israel into a globalist economic outpost stripped of its specific character, a sterile Singapore in the Levant, with economic efficiency the priority.

What is the optimal population size of the islands of Japan, under current tech level?

Or, is that when you reach 200 mil, the only way not dysgenic for you is to go for 300 mil?

A sudden drop of course can be bad, but look at what happened right after WWII. Or in China right after the hunger period around 1960. Rapid pop increases.

People often talk about the rate of replacement. May I ask why is it almost axiomatically good?

It isn’t axiomatically good per se. It’s good if one wants to maintain and continue a cultural heritage that one has been born into.

It is axiomatically good per se.

We are born with a mission to replace ourselves and increase our kin. We are biological machines programmed to do just that.

You could rebel against your very self, but it will not make you happy. On the contrary.

– Low-education mother genes: 31.8% –> 40.1% –> 48.4%

– Med.-education mother genes: 49.6% –> 47.5% –> 43.7%

– Low-education mother genes: 18.6% –> 12.4% –> 7.9%

Bottom row should read: “High-education mother genes”

The same calculation for Romania, maybe useful as a ‘control.’ The resulting child and grandchild generations (given replacement TFRs of 2.25, 2.15, 2.10 for low, med., high education, respectively):

Share of genes per generation, Romania: [Current] –> [Child] –> [Grandchild]
– Low-education mother genes: 32.1% –> 36.7% –> 41.5%
– Med.-education mother genes: 37.4% –> 36.9% –> 36.0%
– High-education mother genes: 30.5% –> 26.4% –> 22.5%

(Romania’s dysgenic-fertility profile looks quite similar to Russia’s.)

A slower slide than the alarming case with the Philippines.

Relevant to the Philippines is China’s eugenic-dysgenic profile. China is likely to make a bid to be the Philippines’ protecting power in Q2 of this century, as we have already seen the early stages in the 2010s. Is the IQ gap between the two widening? Narrowing?

Share of genes per generation, China: [Current] –> [Child] –> [Grandchild]
– Low-education mother genes: 61.1% –> 67.6% –> 73.5%
– Med.-education mother genes: 22.4% –> 19.4% –> 16.5%
– High-education mother genes: 16.5% –> 13.0% –> 10.0%

Now for trying to estimate actual IQ ‘hits’:

This can be attempted by attaching IQ estimates to the three education levels and seeing what the the next two generations look like, given the above shifts in the genepools.

The Philippines may be currently taking an IQ hit of up to -0.5 IQ points per decade (this depends on what the IQ for the much-expanding low-education group is); for Romania, it looks to be more like -0.25 IQpts/decade (but this depends on how stratified by IQ the education groups really are); China may be lowest of the three, at about -0.2 IQpts/decade, though a lot of talent probably remains in the low-education bracket in China. China may be more like a negligible -0.1 IQpts/decade (until they stratify fully and dysgenic fertility sinks in).

This is the first time the Philippines has ever ended up in one of Cicerone’s TFR tables, so I’d hoped to see some good news, but I end up seeing disastrous dysgenic fertility on top of brain drain…

The worst thing about it is that Philippine public “higher education” is a hotbed for all the classist leftist crap alongside Bioleninism that’s accelerating as I type about it. There’s pressure to get more STEM graduates, so the quality of those who do get accepted suffers somewhat. And, when they fail…they shift out to more questionable courses.

I want to hope, I really do, but if I watch us follow America (culturally) off a cliff, am I really right to?

I think you are suffering from PTSD 🙂

I thought I gave you a long enough time to cool off…

That’s a lot.

In London I would put it at under 10% of whites with children being mixed; a mixture of white women with black children and WMAF. A lot of the former are Poles or other Eastern Euros as well, sad to say.

10-15 years ago maybe. There has been a significant increase in miscegenation in the last decade and a half. It’s hard to put an exact number but a fair ballpark estimate, at least here in Stockholm, is about 20% of White women under the age of 35 and who have children have non-White kids, vast majority of them brown/black. That’s what I see and I move around quite a lot in this city and I purposefully try to guard against biases. (Many nationalists often overestimate these occurances due to strong feelings on the subject).

This is also my view. As I remember, most of Thorfinnsson’s memories of Sweden are from the 90s and 00s, when it was indeed highly segregated, and things have changed a good deal since then. Still in the mid-to-late-00s, for instance, most nightclubs around Stureplan, Stockholm’s glitziest district, refused entry to all but the best-connected immigrants, and as late as the early 10s, you could still run into people from small-town Sweden who had barely spoken to an immigrant their whole life.

As for Sweden’s TFR, there are two things to remember: (1) Swedish society goes at great length to put every young Swede through its higher education system — including newly-arrived immigrants — so a college degree is a worse proxy for intelligence here than in most other countries; (2) Even with an economy that is famously generous to motherhood, our TFR is still below the steady-state level. If Russia had our levels of welfare, I’m sure its TFR would explode.

I reserve the right to reply to your stupid comments remarking that they are stupid. If it triggers you, you can simply filter me out, or just scroll over my replies. I certainly wouldn’t mind you getting a nervous breakdown and leaving us altogether, but I suspect we’re still not quite there, nor will we be for a long while, unfortunately.

Have a nice day away from the computer and smartphone!

We’re not rabbits. If you have a country, then you know that you’re at least a tad bit more than that. What kind of animal uses fertility rate to preserve their culture heritage?

I can’t even imagine what even more dysgenic Haitians would look like

Don’t want to repeat myself here but, as per my point above, the classifications are really really low. The low and middle percentages should be added together and compared with the high for this table to be of much use. “High” here means someone has completed high school, or it’s vocational equivalent, nowhere near ‘smart faction’ level, “medium” means high school dropout and “low” means someone who left school before 16. In the western world that only really happens with juvenile delinquents and people with very serious learning difficulties so, even if some countires do better than others, those numbers are absolutely awful for most.

Thanks, very interesting.

I would note that there is less of a correlation between education and IQ in the Third World, so I would assume the dysgenic index for them isn’t as completely catastrophic as it appears.

Interesting that Indonesia is the highest Third World nation.

In my calculations based on PISA performance/number of siblings, Indonesia was the only country to see an outright positive trend: http://www.unz.com/akarlin/nor-breeding-their-best/

The rankings are in fact rather similar across both methods.

https://i.redd.it/xgtm6p7gq1a11.jpg

Obviously, I can’t vouch for this map…which claims its source is the Huffington Post, and of course even if true it doesn’t note the race of partners. But let’s assume it’s true while I establish my priors.

I have a Swedish background and family and have been to the country more than thirty times. I know what I’m talking about.

While Sweden’s welfare state and strong economy facilitate family formation, they also facilitate a “fun” early adulthood which gives youth the resources and time to participate in nightlife, travel, and study abroad. Young Swedes are encouraged to party a lot and experiment sexually, as well as to “find” themselves. And how do you suppose 20-somethings on vacation in Thailand for an entire month “find” themselves?

Higher “education” is free, and nearly half of young Swedes have attained tertiary degrees. Studying abroad for a year is very common, and it’s also quite common for young Swedes to work abroad for a time before returning to settle in Sweden.

Northern European men can be for many young Western women “boring”, so certain adventurous women are interested in having a lover from a more passionate, R-selected culture. This is nothing new and not even entirely the product of globohomo propaganda. In the postwar period there was a fad for Italian lovers among German and Nordic women. I believe there’s even a German pop song from the ’60s about this.

If you want to hear something really unpleasant, when my brother lived in Africa he reported than in Tanzania there was a group of Norwegian (not Swedish but close enough) nursing students on vacation seeking…guess what.

These “passionate” men obviously do not make suitable partners, and the sort of sexual dalliances women are keen to experiment with while on vacation or working abroad are not what they seek once they’ve established themselves and seek to start families and attain bourgeois respectability. Given the segregation and structure of Swedish society, the “marriage” (increasingly disappearing in Sweden) partner is a Swedish man.

I don’t see why there are men in our sphere who seek to defend the non-existent virtue of women from Western cultures. Or perhaps I should simply say modern, as this problem exists everywhere outside of the Islamic world. The entire structure of society promotes promiscuity, so why is anyone surprised when women partake in this? Other than those who end up murdered, there are practically zero negative consequences for them.

I’m surprised since Spanish women always seem much more flirtatious and easy with their favours than Northern European women. The Ukraine I can believe though.

I suppose by now the tipping point is passed to facilitate domestic mixing, particularly in the lower classes where the higher aggression of vibrant men makes them attractive as partners. My family is also of high class origin which limits exposure.

Earlier in this century the “vibrants” were still mostly self-contained in places like Rinkeby. I’ve also noted that they’ve actually finally started entering the workforce. You see non-white service workers now, which you didn’t fifteen years ago. I had an Iraqi tax driver the last time I was there, whereas it wasn’t so long ago that taxi drivers were from the former Yugoslavia or actually Swedish.

Correct. They are losing share to a modest degree, but gaining in absolute numbers.

Israel’s military situation probably makes this a suitable arrangement – you don’t want a top heavy populace, you need grunts. But you also want to grow your smart fraction in absolute terms.

I don’t have any experience in Spain, but if we grant that the map is true then it should be noted that young Spaniards suffer from high poverty and unemployment. They therefore have fewer opportunities to engage in irresponsible sexual behavior than young Swedes.

Since Spain became “modern” far more recently than Sweden, they’re also more likely to have disapproving parents, grandparents, and extended family. Within living memory Spanish women clad themselves like Arabs.

Scandinavians also have a simple solution to dealing with Scandinavian shyness: getting wasted. Northern Europeans have a “problem” with binge drinking that Meds do not.

It’s generally hypothesized that this is due to a shorter history of agriculture and alcohol production, and thus there are likely fewer genes in the population which protect against alcoholism.

It may be that the causation is different. Perhaps we have evolutionary adaptations that predispose us to binge drinking because this facilitates socialization and reproduction.

For the dysgenic trend, I used the six education groups available. For this table, I grouped no education, incomplete primary, primary and lower secondary into “low”, but in my calculation, I used them separately.

The thing is that fertility acording to education shifts over time, so studies using 20th century data can give little clues about the present situation.

Of interest:

Evidence of dysgenic fertility in China
Article in Intelligence 57 (July-August):15-24 · April 2016

Mingrui Wang
Beijing University of Agriculture

John G.R. Fuerst
Ulster Institute for Social Research

The relationship between fertility, intelligence, and education was examined in China using a large sample sourced from the population-representative China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) dataset. […] The strength of recent selection against gf in China substantially increased between the 1960s and the mid-1980s. Later (between 1986 and 2000), the speed of decline in gf due to selection stabilized at about [negative] .31 points per decade with a slightly downward trend

A negative relationship between educational attainment and fertility was additionally found. Both negative relations were stronger for women.

Israel is in a fantastic situation compared to the rest of the developed world.

The developed world is not in a fantastic situation due to Jewish political influence from within their nations.

The foremost example in the twentieth century being the fact that Jewish Power would not let Germans have their nation because Jews oppose European eugenic policies. Which is, in fact, the same policy of resistance to any minor to major modern eugenic policy for Europeans.

Diaspora Jewish political power is the core supporter of modern policies that bring in dysgenic populations and discourage healthy European gentile culture that would be eugenic for smart populations.

How eugenic the Jewish group is, in general, is debatable and difficult to ascertain outside of all of the propaganda, oppression of other groups, and overt nepotism / mafia behavior that leads to Jewish achievement well outside of individual ability that the European gentile population almost universally can only rely upon.

That map is BS, there is no way in hell that Irish women are the most promiscuous in Europe

One of the problems with these types of approaches is that they just assume women are the ones who decide how many children a couple have.

This is true. I have even seen it in my family. The wife of my older brother dearly wants another child (they have two), but he won’t hear of it since it’s too much work already, he says, with two. I have tried to make him see reason, but to no avail.

Sweden and Belgium also have extremely high rates of promiscuity. It’s technically not clear whether Swedish or “Belgian” women are actually more promiscuous than Irish women, or which country’s women on average are the most promiscuous.

Earlier in this century the “vibrants” were still mostly self-contained in places like Rinkeby. I’ve also noted that they’ve actually finally started entering the workforce. You see non-white service workers now, which you didn’t fifteen years ago. I had an Iraqi tax driver the last time I was there, whereas it wasn’t so long ago that taxi drivers were from the former Yugoslavia or actually Swedish.

There are. This is in part because of more immigrants in absolute numbers, in part because of affirmative action, and in part because the traditional Swedish working class has moved up a step or two on the educational ladder.

Raising children is too much work in many respects, and this needs to be addressed at a societal level.

Parents are expected to be chauffeurs, event coordinators, unpaid academic tutors, sports coaches, legal advocates, college prep coaches, personal chefs, and more. I’m sure it’s all very exhausting, especially since parents are mostly out of shape and older these days. And frequently both work full time, which increases the work burden on the father while further draining the already tired mother.

Even little things like child safety seats are an issue. When baby boomers were children, child safety seats didn’t even exist. Just throw your kids in the car and go. In fact seat belts were optional on cars. Now you’re legally required in most cases to have them. They cost money, they’re a pain to install, and it takes quite a bit of time to strap in and release children.

Each additional safety seat is more work and expense, and once you have more than two kids you generally need to buy a larger, and thus more expensive, car. These larger vehicles which are still affordable are usually minivans, which any self-respecting man is ashamed to be seen in or even admit to owning.

Is the social benefit of increased safety in car accidents for children worth the cost? I don’t know.

There was a post on Marginal Revolution lately asking the rhetorical question if big business hates families. We might go on to ask if our entire society hates families. Families are saddled with massive burdens but receive little assistance in managing these burdens other than lip service about how wonderful parents are.

The Nords are doomed unless they deport the muslim invaders.

They won’t be deported.

They’ll be slaughtered in the final apocalyptic war that is slated for the West, which is what they are being imported to fight.

The war is designed to destroy Western nations in-total, as well as the Arabs as a race, leaving Israel as the only nation left standing.

This is the final fulfillment of the Jewish Messianic idea and their scriptures.

Read your Bible for some clues, but the Jewish texts state these facts outright.

Our current leaders are unequivocal traitors and our destroyers: serving Jewish strategy.

http://www.betemunah.org/edom.html

Edom

By Rabbi Dr. Hillel ben David (Greg Killian)

Jewish tradition gives us the following formula:

Esau=Edom=Rome=Christianity.

These two, Yaaqov and Esau, are going to be fighting throughout history. Later, these powers coalesce; Rome gives rise to the Western culture and its religion and it continues to fight the Jewish people.

In the future, the children of Yishmael will rule over the Holy land for a long time while the land is
empty, just as their circumcision is empty and without completion. And they will hinder the children of Israel from returning to their place, until their merit in the Holy land runs out.

The Jewish scriptural reference for the below text that founds my primary claim in my opening paragraph of this post:

Zohar Torah portion of Va’era page 32a

alternately:

Soncino Zohar, Shemoth, Section 2, Page 32a

In the future the children of Yishmael will stir great wars in the world. And the children of Edom [the West] will gather against them, and make war with them, one on the sea, and one on the land, and one by Jerusalem; and each one will prevail over the other but the Holy land will notfall to the hands of Edom.

At the same time, a nation from the end of the world will be awakened against wicked Rome. (Rome here is said to refer to the spiritual center of western civilization) and it will make war against her for three months, and many nations will gather there, and they will fall by her hand, until all the children of Edom will gather against her from all corners of the earth.

And then G-d will awaken Himself against them, as it says, “a sacrificial slaughter for the Lord in Batzra”, and it says, “to shake the corners of the Land”. And after this, the children of Yishmael will be finished from the world. And all the supernal powers of the nations will be broken, and no power will remain above except for the power of Israel alone.

Our festival readings during Succoth also speak to the war between Edom and Ishmael

The Haftorot for both the first day of Succoth, from Zechariah 14:1-21, and Shabbat Chol HaMoed Succoth. from Yechezkel 38:18 – 39:16, describe the wars of Gog and Magog, the battles preceding the advent of the Messianic Era. These battles revolve around Jerusalem with the chief combatants being Edom and Yishmael (see Malbim to Yechezkel 38:2).

The small book written by the prophet Ovadiah contains a prophecy regarding the end of Edom:

Ovadiah 1:17-21 But upon mount Zion shall be deliverance, and there shall be holiness; and the house of Jacob shall possess their possessions. And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph aflame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be [any] remaining of the house of Esau;

If Esau / Edom’s success is inversely proportional to that of Yaaqov / Israel, then it follows naturally that the punishment of Edom who now enslaves us in exile will come at the same time as the redemption.

Note that Jews see Westerners in control of their own nations as a form of Jewish slavery.

It is also worth noting that “Shemot”refers to the book of Exodus.

The next text excerpt in this post is from the Zohar (Kabbalah) commentary on Shemot-Exodus.

In the Zohar commentary on Shemot-Exodus, the commentary is not in regard to the past (which has no meaning in the Jewish religion as non-Jews perceive the past) but in regard to the events leading up to their future concept of the Messianic Era.

This gives you a clue on how to understand the Jewish religion and its texts. In this instance: Exodus.

Arguably the most relevant code in the texts, out of many codes, is that they are meant to be read as events happening in the present.

Whomever sees themselves as historically rooted in the events of the OT, when properly interpreting it, is to see the OT as a continuing modern narrative (and therefore modern political instruction for that group).

Exodus is not a myth that lives in the past, but in the present. Mircea Eliade documented this religious system method in his book: The Myth of the Eternal Return

The Jews are now symbolically marching out of Egypt

(or the West, which they view as enslaving them whenever they do not fully control it).

The Exodus from Egypt having always been a myth (as asserted by mainstream scholars), or more accurately veiled political instruction to control and then destroy whatever enemies the Jews invent on their march toward destroying their Northern enemies as well as the Arabs.

Acquiring the promised land in the myth of Exodus, along with the genocide of the non-Jews to get it, is modern political instruction on how to achieve their Messianic Age.

Nothing in the below Chabad excerpt was inserted by me. It is 100% a Rabbinical edit:

https://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/1391003/jewish/Daily-Zohar-Vaeira-Day-5.htm

Zohar, Shemoth, Section 2, Page 32a

The children of Ishmael [i.e. the Arab nations] will cause great wars in the world and the children of Edom will gather against them and wage war against them, one on the sea, one on the dry land, and one near Jerusalem. And they [the children of Edom] will rule over them [the children of Ishmael], but the Holy Land will not be given over to the children of Edom. [The children of Edom is the Christian West, for Edom is Rome (see Num. 24:19, Rashi) and Rome signifies Greece-Rome and the Roman Catholic Church, the foundations of Western Civilization]

At that time, a nation from the end of the earth will be aroused against evil Rome and wage war against it for three months. Nations will gather there, and [Rome] will fall into their hands, until all the children of Edom will gather against it [that nation] from all the corners of the world. Then G‑d will be roused against them. This is the meaning of: “For G‑d has a sacrifice in Botzrah”. (Isaiah 34:6) And afterwards, it is written: “That it might take hold of the ends of the earth…” (Job 38:13) He will destroy the descendants of Ishmael from the land, and break all the powers of [all the nations’ guardian angels] Above. There will not remain any power of any people on earth, except the power of Israel alone.

BeRahamim LeHayyim: One cannot ignore the facts. To do so entreats disaster. Read this in terms of the daily news, and substitute Arab nations for Ishmael, and the West and US for Edom.

From this text alone, within which we can observe Jews being the only beneficiary, Jews are not our friends, nor friends or Patriots of the USA.

This text, calling for the destruction of the West in total to include the United States so that Israel can be the only World power left standing, marks the Jewish group as a traitorous group intent on destroying our nation as well as the entire West for their benefit.

No more shuckin and jivin by Jews on this website should be tolerated, given this context.

No matter what other arguments that they make, this Jewish scripture marks them as our primary enemy: which is how they see us (as stated by the first Rabbi quoted above).

Nothing else matters in that context, and they should not be engaged on any level. Every one of their positions should be read as having a primarily hostile intent if not to be an outright lie.

…

I agree with all this. Another great difference with previous eras, and one that Spandrell twittered about some months ago, is that kids back then would spend whole evenings and weekends outdoors, romping around with the neighborhood kids. This seems very rare these days (but not in developing countries, as Spandrell noted) and means that parents get very little quality time on their own. If you have ever babysat kids, you will know how hard it can be even to read a book while they are around. Now imagine this setup every weekend for half a decade.

What is odd about this safety mania is that the dangers of having kids running around unsupervised are very low. Every passing adult will keep an eye on them, and kiddie fiddlers — so far as you find them in a leafy suburb — are typically family members or otherwise related to the child, not random strangers who happen to pass a playground.

I grew up in a smaller town and your observations are 100% correct. We basically had almost no non-Whites. In my secondary school (ages 12-15), we did not have a single non-White in our class. There were 5 other parallell classes for all three age groups and I think there were at most 2 or 3 non-Whites across all classes per age group, so something like 2-3% in total. And they were all hyperassimilated.

Everything really went downhill after 9/11. We didn’t get afghans but we got huge amounts of iraqis and especially somalians. I went back to my old school a few years ago when I was visiting and I could literally count the amount of white children on a single hand on the schoolyard. This is a school that has capacity for 500 kids. I was told that all the white kids now go to schools just outside the small town in a small village. It’s ironic because back then these small villages had to send all their kids to our town, which created some amount of resentment. We also looked down upon them as hicks (though we were all provincial types in reality, but there’s always a pecking order). But apparently they have created new private schools outside of town (fria skolvalet) to deal with this demand, giving rise to substantial segregation. SD is now big in the municipality so the social justice warrior types are a lot weaker, so despite some bleating, not much is being done about this.

I have a hard time feeling sympathy. These people voted for what they got, by and large. Most young Swedes just go to the bigger cities. There’s actually less ethnic tension here in my experience. Even Rinkeby is getting slowly gentrified with a lot of newly constructed buildings. Only the most socioeconomically successful immigrants stay on and many of them are more liberal.

Plus Stockholm gets most of the best international migrants to Sweden, which have been coming in large droves since the last center-“right” government radically liberalised work migration requirements in 2011. While there are still many rapefugees coming, a non-trivial share of decently skilled Asian migrants are also showing up, and they concentrate in Stockholm whereas rapefugees get pushed out into the hinterlands and on the margins. So elite Swedes get a kind of “soft multiculturalism” with mostly assimilated immigrants. It’s really the working/lower-middle class Swedes out in the sub-50K towns and villages who get the raw end of the stick, but who cares about them right? Just about a bunch of obsolete racists. Those are also the strongest areas for SD.

If women nurse, which I assume you favor, this inhibits pregnancy for a few years.

Right. That’s what your doctor tells you. Then you turn up pregnant while you’re still nursing your 1 year old. Even if you start at 26 and space your children four years apart, you can still have 3 before 35.

Huh? I was suggesting that we (re)normalize young women marrying older men (within reason).

And my question to you is what are these young men going to be doing with themselves if they’re single during their twenties?

I have a hard time feeling sympathy. These people voted for what they got, by and large.

People can’t think for themselves. That’s reality, and therefore it’s appropriate to feel sympathy.

Though the appropriate lesson to be drawn is that normies are cattle who must be ruled with an iron fist by a belligerent, autistic vanguard.

In America things have gotten so bad that busybodies now call the police when they see unsupervised children playing outside.

The shift from rail to motorized transport is also a major problem in cities. Used to be kids played outside in the streets in urban neighborhoods, which now is obviously dangerous.

Obviously begs the question how many “Swedes” listed here are white, and how many are white women miscegenating with non whites?

Exactly.

I was thinking about the chauffeuring problem in modern parenting, and it seems that bicycles are at least a partial solution. You can get pretty far on a bicycle in a surprisingly short period of time. This is doubly true with a properly maintained road bicycle instead of the mountain, trick, and fat tire bikes that have been favored by casual riders since the ’90s. You can also carry a lot on a bike with panniers and a good old fashioned backpack.

Of course, not all infrastructure supports bicycles, and there are activities that are too far to ride to in a reasonable period of time.

It would also require the aforementioned busybodies not to call the police because they see eight year olds cycling unsupervised (the horror…). I could also see some ridiculous thing transpiring like CPS being contacted by the school when your kids arrive there on their own by bike in the winter. Obviously children will freeze to death if they’re not transported to school in a Chevrolet Suburban in January.

“It’s the smart fractions that overwhelmingly determine socio-economic success, and that smart fraction would appear to be quite vigorous.”

No, it’s the general IQ that determines success and livability. Having a small percentage of geniuses won’t drag a dull mass up. You can see that all over South America. This is particularly true if the country is democratic and multi-racial. Voting for someone who looks like you trumps performance or intelligence. These lower intelligence groups might vote for someone who is relatively decent at first but when that doesn’t get them what they want (because it doesn’t change their biology) they’ll soon turn to racial demagogues rather then face the reality of their inabilities and dependency. You can see THIS in the modern U.S. where every public figure has to pretend that blacks are economically oppressed rather than admit the truth that blacks live far above their abilities for no other reason than that they live(d) in a majority European nation. The result is that most black leaders are ignorant, racist demagogues who value extortion rather than building.* Much of the smart class will eventually flee such a society.

• I know, they’re not much worse than other politicians.

Everything really went downhill after 9/11. We didn’t get afghans but we got huge amounts of iraqis and especially somalians. I went back to my old school a few years ago when I was visiting and I could literally count the amount of white children on a single hand on the schoolyard. This is a school that has capacity for 500 kids. I was told that all the white kids now go to schools just outside the small town in a small village. It’s ironic because back then these small villages had to send all their kids to our town, which created some amount of resentment. We also looked down upon them as hicks (though we were all provincial types in reality, but there’s always a pecking order). But apparently they have created new private schools outside of town (fria skolvalet) to deal with this demand, giving rise to substantial segregation. SD is now big in the municipality so the social justice warrior types are a lot weaker, so despite some bleating, not much is being done about this.

I’m sorry to hear what became of your hometown.

I’m a little torn on the question of where to place newly-arrived immigrants. My experience is that immigrants from small towns are far better integrated — that is, more Swedish in their ways and tastes — than those who grew up in the burbs of Stockholm/Göteborg/Malmö, which is obviously a good thing, but cramming thousands of them together in a small town is a sure recipe for disaster.

Another downside with placing them in the countryside, and it’s a huge one I think, is that turning the countryside multicultural deals our cultural heritage a heavy blow. A culture needs a traditional and backward-looking countryside to sustain itself since big cities are anti-tradition almost by definition. That’s how they thrive.

Plus Stockholm gets most of the best international migrants to Sweden, which have been coming in large droves since the last center-“right” government radically liberalised work migration requirements in 2011. While there are still many rapefugees coming, a non-trivial share of decently skilled Asian migrants are also showing up, and they concentrate in Stockholm whereas rapefugees get pushed out into the hinterlands and on the margins. So elite Swedes get a kind of “soft multiculturalism” with mostly assimilated immigrants. It’s really the working/lower-middle class Swedes out in the sub-50K towns and villages who get the raw end of the stick, but who cares about them right? Just about a bunch of obsolete racists. Those are also the strongest areas for SD.

Yes, there is a strong city/country divide here. Something like a reverse class war. And it’s hard to overstate how insulated inner-city Stockholmers are from what happens in the country. Many never even set foot outside the city limits, save for a short drive to Arlanda or their summer house by the sea.

People can’t think for themselves. That’s reality, and therefore it’s appropriate to feel sympathy.

That’s an interesting spin. I can’t say I disagree.

Integrating immigrants is undesirable since successful integration means miscegenation and thus dilution of the Swedish genotype and phenotype. In addition to it being desirable to preserve this from the point of view of Swedes themselves, the Swedish type has aesthetic and practical merit worth preserving.

The best place for the immigrants is their countries of origin. Or at the bottom of the Gulf of Bothnia.

The result is pictures like these:

It’s also different units in Israeli military, have a different racial composition. And different units are fashionable, with different races there.

So pictures are not representative of total population.

For example, Magav – which is includes a lot of the most dangerous jobs defending Jerusalem – is full of Druze and even Bedouin men. However, their Druze and Bedouin women are not conscripted to the army.

So women in Magav are all Jews- but obviously, very much Moroccan, Kurdish, Ethiopian, women.

Men guarding in Jerusalem are often…

https://i.imgur.com/R6xrqPC.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/qmlf4Vp.jpg

But women “Magavnikot” are not any Druze and Bedouin, but includes a lot of Ethiopians

https://i.imgur.com/InpfQVF.jpg

–
They have units where all soldiers are autistic.

They have courses of stupid soldiers, who restudy highschool.

They have bootcamps where all soldiers are juvenile criminals, and women train all day shouting at them

They even bootcamps where all soldiers are recent Moroccans (often via France) and Ethiopians who do not speak Hebrew.

There are even Turkmen Muslims from Turkmenistan who are soldiers in the Israeli army (I’ve seen recently a report about this)

On the other hand, cleverer youth are often recruited into special computer units.

That European statehood is itself undergoing a crisis in the 21st century can be seen as a kind of karmic response on the part of the universe, although it seems self inflicted rather than Jews being responsible.

It is good that you are, albeit slowly, beginning to reveal your ressentiment, but as I noted during the “proof of god” thread it is a dangerous line of thought that could well backfire on Jews.

Using this bizarre logic, West Germans were punished for being turned into vassals of Jewish power and East Germans were rewarded (or at least not punished) for their heroic stance against Jewish Imperialism.

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/sixth-proof/#comment-3211245

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/east-germanys-undeclared-war-against-israel/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reparations_Agreement_between_Israel_and_West_Germany

This Israel of yours sounds like a terrible place – I am surprised you wish to take any vacations there 🙂

Yet you keep on going back.

I am moving there soon, myself.

If racism is wrong, then nation-states themselves are wrong.

Not exactly rocket science.

That said Israel is a bit of a different case owing to its recent establishment via immigration (including illegal immigration), military aggression, colonial settlement, and territorial expansion.

If racism is wrong, then nation-states themselves are wrong

This kind of thinking is too binary and stark – its modern science thinking and not suitable to what is a complex organic phenomenon.

Ethnicity is relevant to nation state formation, but it is only one factor, and requires a certain amount of flexibility.

But I would never deny that its relevant, and I support Europeans making it a significant factor in the formation of their own identities and states.

Bardon Kaldian has recently been making original creative contributions in describing what might be a the elements of European and American nation states, based on history and respecting the element of organic flexibility and compromise.

What emerges is stricter than the Jewish conception without being based on race in a simple fashion, but then Jews have a different role to play in history and we each must develop different concepts of our nation states – although there will naturally be significant overlap.

That said Israel is a bit of a different case owing to its recent establishment via immigration (including illegal immigration), military aggression, colonial settlement, and territorial expansion.

Obviously a tendentious characterization, but in more accurate and benign language, these phenomena can be good or bad depending on context.

For instance, Europeans settling in the vast empty expanses of undeveloped Africa hardly strikes me as any great crime.

And military aggression can be defensive.

And so forth.

As expected, lots of rambling nonsense but not a single source was posted that day. On the other hand, the aource I posted shows that Swedish women are less likey to get with immigrants than Swedish men are. Less than 0.1% of Nordic women will ever travel to Tanzania, and there were no “foreign lovers” in postwar Scandinavia. Northern European are the most popular in Europe.

moving there soon,

I love Israel – I am attracted to strange, terrible and interesting places. Where do you plan to invest in property, if it’s not too personal?

Here is the city where I stayed for vacation last year in Israel (with my friends who live there) . These are not my pictures, just from internet.

https://images1.calcalist.co.il/PicServer3/2017/06/03/730619/CAL047772_l.jpg

https://i746.photobucket.com/albums/xx108/puerrtto/Israel/DSC_0061%20Medium_zpsqn3uvcom.jpg

http://sfilev1.f-static.com/image/users/329884/ftp/my_files/FreeImages/38.jpg

Its local youth (only slightly self-ironically – youth like this there are waiting outside shops asking you buy them alcohol)

https://i.imgur.com/v7iy7LN.jpg

• The funny thing is, this property is extremely valuable, because if developers will build a skyscraper where the old apartment slum building is (and they will within maybe 20 years), then according to Israeli law, they have to give you a free apartment in new skyscraper they will build there.

Sadly, many immigrants just rent there (they cannot afford to buy apartments, for the reason above).

And how small and shabby inside, the apartments are all there. At 3:45 in video – the courtyard lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPutWx50Ow

Raising children is too much work in many respects, and this needs to be addressed at a societal level.

That’s true, but a lot of “raising children” today is just costly, wasteful signaling. All these expensive interventions aren’t going to turn your child into a pro athlete or genius.

In many ways, the marginal cost of more kids goes down because older siblings are a source of hand-me-downs, guidance, care, tutoring, babysitting, etc. Moreover, there are intangibles that only siblings can provide. Older siblings who already went through your high school, college, early professional life, etc., can provide much better social, academic, and career guidance and advice than a parent can.

I suspect a lot of the costly parental “investment” today serves as a rationalization to avoid having more children for other reasons.

My experience is that immigrants from small towns are far better integrated — that is, more Swedish in their ways and tastes — than those who grew up in the burbs of Stockholm/Göteborg/Malmö…

I spent my formative late childhood & teenage years as an immigrant in a relatively insular, prole northern English town.

I will admit that I disliked and resented the place, and its denizens returned the favor. I would wager that I’d have fit in a lot better in much more cosmopolitan London, or even a “millionik” such as Manchester… perhaps even assimilated into British society… precisely because there is less to “assimilate to” in those places.

I honestly feel myself to be more American than British (though I am of course neither), despite having spend only a decade in the latter.

Older mothers produce babies with greater mutational load…

AFAIK that’s mainly just true for men, and negligible for women.

If anything you said was even remotely true, we would not see the patterns we see in the Swedish data. But of course what you say is not true, and is based on made-up and seemingly irrelevant anecdotes such as “muh pop song from 1960”, “muh grandpa”, and irrelevant factoids such as “Yogoslavian workers arrived in the 60s”.

And they were all hyperassimilated

Which goes to show you that assimilation is not just a pipe dream but a reality, but only in small numbers.

At least we also spread homophobia at the same time

Plenty of societies regulated or opposed faggotry. Even the Greeks did it.

Didn’t exist until Jews took over American culture

And who let the Jews in?

Despite hundreds of years of contact, the average white American is at most in the very low single digits of black/native ancestry and the average black at about 20%. I don’t think there is anywhere with similar levels of racial interaction over hundreds of years which remains equally separate.

That’s not from lack of trying. That’s from dumping the bastards in with the Negroes. Euro ancestry in the American Negro is paternal largely.

Also Israel seems to be doing alright compared to other 1st world countries.

This is surprising to me as I thought the Hasidic’s and related groups were generally economically less productive.

But maybe the Torah studying/ limiting work actually continues to have a eugenic effect where the brightest kids become the Rabbis and end up able to attract alot of girls.

While there may be some exceptions, such a late starter will in practice have two or less.

If she only has two children, it’s unlikely to be because she started late. Rather, it’s probably going to be because she (and/or her husband) only wants two children. When you see very widely-spaced siblings, there is usually a reason for that. Often, there is an unplanned pregnancy early in the mother’s life, and it took her some years to get herself together financially to have another child. Sometimes, there is a divorce and remarriage, or some other less-than-ideal situation.

According to this article, the average spacing between siblings is 30 months. I don’t know where they got that figure, but it rings true from my observations.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/learnvest/2012/11/08/how-far-apart-should-you-space-your-kids/#3a26b99f1b76

Personally, I do not recommend waiting until thirty. I think mid-twenties is much better. That way, you’re still young enough to go double digits if that’s what you decide you want. On the other hand, you can quit and do something else after two of you’d rather. Younger motherhood actually makes sense from the standpoint of women’s autonomy (not that that’s the most important thing), because it’s hard to know how many you want until you start having them.

But realistically, some couples may need the extra time to get prepared. If that is the case, they can still have a very good size family if that is what they want. Moreover, if you start too early, you may not enjoy motherhood as much as you otherwise would have, in which case you might wind up having fewer children than you might have if you had waited. I suspect that is the gist of this article, though it’s behind a paywall.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/07/us/us-birthrate-hispanics-latinos.html

4 kids today with low infant mortality and consequently a regime of relaxed selection are not equivalent to those 4 kids in the past.

So what? There’s nothing that can be done about that.

It’s a hypothesis, based on an incontrovertible fact.

Just like the hypothesis that there must be some advantage to male height, based on the incontrovertible fact that women tend to be attracted to taller men.

It would be good to research this subject further and try to obtain evidence for it, but it’s a very sensitive subject and not politically correct in an age where the mainstream culture is anti-natalist and promotes childlessness, delayed marriage and childbearing.

The explicit claim is that a woman today can with the same likelihood have the same number of children as a woman in the past did, despite starting much later in life.

Yes, she can have the same number of surviving children.

The implicit claim is that children born today, to much older parents in a regime of low infant mortality and relaxed selection, are identical to children born in the past.

Every single thing you say always boils down to this: less freedom for women. Is there not even one single scenario in which the right thing would be to give women more freedom? It almost seems like you have some sort of axe to grind.

We don’t need to have eight kids to keep the population stable anymore. You just can’t stand it that women don’t have to spend their entire lives pregnant, can you?

I would wager that I’d have fit in a lot better in much more cosmopolitan London, or even a “millionik” such as Manchester… perhaps even assimilated into British society… precisely because there is less to “assimilate to” in those places.

This is true, but it also goes both ways. Northern England has a lot of insular and backward Pakistanis (the grooming gang scandals took place there for a reason). Pakistanis in London are far more educated, but also more liberal. Even if the community as a whole is quite regressive, there are stark contrasts between the two. This pattern holds for most groups, natives and immigrants alike.

Importantly, some immigrants actively choose to go to these cosmopolitan cities precisely because the corrosive acid of their social milieu act as a restraint on more regressive (in their view) cultural practices and norms from their own community, as links are generally much weaker in larger cities where there are less avenues for social control. This is particularly true for young girls.

Stockholm gets the cream of the international work migrants coming to Sweden, but we also get a large share of the best educated/smartest of the 2nd and 3rd gen immigrants from smaller provinces. Some of this is simply economics, but some of it is also an active social choice by 2nd gen immigrants, particularly young educated girls.

Yes, she can have the same number of surviving children.

In general, all else equal, a population of women that starts having children sooner will be able to have more kids than a population of women who start later. I’m not talking about individual cases here and there, but in general.

We don’t need to have eight kids to keep the population stable anymore. You just can’t stand it that women don’t have to spend their entire lives pregnant, can you?

I never said women should be less free. I’m simply pointing out that age of marriage and motherhood impacts fertility rates.

By all means promote women’s freedom to choose their own lifestyles and have fewer kids, but do so without spreading falsehoods about women’s marriage prospects and fertility. This is exactly what the mainstream culture and media does by promoting the lite that women can “have it all”. The media promotes the myth that women can wait until their 30s and beyond to get married and have kids with no problems, and a lot of young women today believe this myth.

Is there not even one single scenario in which the right thing would be to give women more freedom?

Not him, but no. There is no such scenario in this universe.

Moreover, there is no scenario where the right thing is to give men more freedom, but I doubt you give even a slightest rat’s ass about that.

Moreover, there is no scenario where the right thing is to give men more freedom, but I doubt you give even a slightest rat’s ass about that.

What sorts of freedoms do you want that you don’t already have? Not a rhetorical question.

You’re conceding my point here.

I certainly am not.

Men are attracted to younger women because younger women are more likely to produce more surviving offspring into adulthood, which implies more births and greater viability, healthy, survivability of offspring.

Are you retarded or something? During to lower infant mortality, women do not need to have eight babies apiece. WTF do you find so incomprehensible about this simple fact?

Women don’t produce offspring for as long as possible, and live quite long during their post-menopause years, which suggests there is a cost or disadvantage to continually producing offspring.

Yes, there is a disadvantage to have children after a certain age, and that is totally irrelevant to the question at hand, which is the ideal age at first birth in an advanced society with ample nutrition and low infant mortality.

(Commenters: Should I ignore this troll?)

Oh of course, women as a group are totally not eager voters who are inclined towards leftism and subversion at all. All the statistics where women are much more inclined to support civilization destruction, and go against the interests of the collective which they are a part of with men, aren’t true. Of course not, how could they be, women are too innocent, weak, and helpless to ever be capable of doing anything to ruin their own civilization and nation …

Women totally aren’t eager or interested to replace their own men because they consider them to be weak and pathetic …

http://www.snouts-in-the-trough.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/refugees-welcome-women.jpg

https://www.eutimes.net/2016/09/female-volunteers-at-calais-jungle-having-sex-with-multiple-refugees-a-day/

As for your deflection of blame, which is of course a typical female trait, onto Jews and male greed (cheap labor), women’s suffrage and the right to vote is what lead to Jews being able to successfully persuade women with garbage like feminism, consumerism, LGBTQ, human rights interventionism, and literally everything else that’s absolutely civilization killing.

After all, women are never responsible or at fault for anything in this world of course. It’s actually shocking how similar the behavior of women and Jews as collective groups really is. The constant whining, the subversion, trickery, deceit, selfishness, shallowness, shortsightedness, and need i go on?

Of course, your last line of defense is Cuckservatism. All of the GOP besides maybe Trump, although he’s done a lot to join their ranks, are Cuckservatives that are basically conservative only in theory but in reality completely give in to their opponents in order to virtue signal about how they’re so moral and humane for subscribing to liberal doctrines. Considering Trump hasn’t “done something about the border”, what makes you think if Mitt Romney won in 2008, that he would’ve done so?

Why should white males be loyal to the GOP and cuckservatives? They are arguably even worse than all of their other enemies because they pretend to be on the side of white men, but are completely useless and surrender on anything remotely important. Of course they’re not going to vote GOP. The only reason they voted for Trump was because he promised to be different.

Is it? I think that’s a completely unproven assumption.

It’s not an assumption; it’s a statement of value. If you don’t value freedom, then I have no common ground to have any sort of discussion with you about anything.

Oh of course, women as a group are totally not eager voters who are inclined towards leftism and subversion at all.

We value the welfare state. If you consider that “subversion” then so be it.

Women totally aren’t eager or interested to replace their own men because they consider them to be weak and pathetic …

You’re paranoid.

https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ethnic-preferences2.png?w=1400&strip=all&quality=75

women’s suffrage and the right to vote is what lead to Jews being able to successfully persuade women with garbage like feminism, consumerism, LGBTQ, human rights interventionism, and literally everything else that’s absolutely civilization killing.

What an incoherent load of nonsense. Having the right to vote didn’t allow Jews to persuade us of anything. What did allow them to do so was White men handing over the commanding heights of the culture (media, academy, courts) over to the Jews.

The things you mention have nothing to do with women’s suffrage. Women have consistently been more opposed to military adventurism than men.

https://www.e-ir.info/wp-content/uploads/fig1clements.jpg

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/files/2011/12/Clements-fig-1a.jpg

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/files/2011/12/Clements-fig-2.jpg

LGBTQ has only been slightly more popular among women than men, who liked the idea of permissive sexual mores.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/playboy-founder-hugh-hefner-early-proponent-lgbtq-rights-n805591
https://www.newsweek.com/hugh-hefner-playboy-gay-rights-advocate-673046
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/9/28/16379500/hugh-hefner-lgbtq-rights&ved=2ahUKEwi50a2YtMjjAhVBTt8KHVCHDh0QFjADegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw0xlaij-djIPvptXZ6971fn&cshid=1563794510287

As for your deflection of blame, which is of course a typical female trait, onto Jews and male greed (cheap labor),

When some woman-hating jerk blames women for things we have no control over, we can agree (in which case the allegations are true) or we can defend ourselves (which will be construed as further evidence of our incorrigible wickedness). It looks like you’ve got all of your bases covered.

Cheap labor:

https://www.businessinsider.com/koch-network-to-support-dreamers-legal-status-2019-1
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/17/kochs-dreamers-talks-529687
https://time.com/5491587/koch-brothers-network-immigration-reform/

You find me one White billionaire (just one out of several hundred) to fund conservative women’s activism and I’ll get some heels on the ground. Until then, STFU.

Why should white males be loyal to the GOP and cuckservatives? They are arguably even worse than all of their other enemies because they pretend to be on the side of white men, but are completely useless and surrender on anything remotely important.

Indeed. And whose fault is that?

On gay marriage:

https://www.people-press.org/2019/05/14/attitudes-on-gay-marriage-2019-appendix-charts/pp_2019-05-14_same-sex-marriage_a-03/

Mitt was going to make conditions such that they would “self-deport.”

Lol my achin’ sides!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2012/11/26/trump-mitt-romneys-maniacal-self-deportation-policy-cost-him-minorities/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5effe077ba98

Trump: Mitt Romney’s ‘maniacal’ self-deportation policy cost him minorities

Romney “had a crazy policy of self deportation which was maniacal,” Trump told NewsMax.com. “It sounded as bad as it was, and he lost all of the Latino vote … He lost the Asian vote. He lost everybody who is inspired to come into this country.”

Romney said during the Republican primary that illegal immigrants should “self-deport,” meaning that if the government made it impossible for them to find jobs or obtain driver’s licenses, they would leave the country of their own accord.

why is it almost axiomatically good?

i don’t think it is any more.

i’d say it’s usually true but when technology gets past a certain point then quality > quantity becomes more important.

(for a fixed living space)

personally i think the populations of industrialized nations grew too high due to the labor needs of early industrial society and ideally would shrink to maybe 2/3 their current population while at the same time improving health and intelligence.

once they’re at a new optimal level then replacement would become an important marker again.

#

What is the optimal population size of the islands of Japan, under current tech level?

my guess of 2/3 current size is just a guess.

i think what would happen (if immigration is restricted) is the population would shrink to the point where it hit replacement – which would be a function of people feeling less crowded and the natural increase in the proportion of pro-natal genes over time as the women who most wanted kids had the most (as long as that desire was supported and made possible).

i think much lower population density and expansion into space would be a lot better than the ant’s nest we are going to get under current extrapolation.

Northern European men can be for many young Western women “boring”, so certain adventurous women are interested in having a lover from a more passionate, R-selected culture. This is nothing new and not even entirely the product of globohomo propaganda. In the postwar period there was a fad for Italian lovers among German and Nordic women.

There was a similar pattern with middle-aged Nordics and Germans going to Greece to pick up young men (who were know as ‘spear fisherman’). A modern equivalant is the middle-aged woman from Northern Europe who go to refugee route stopping points (in Northern Greece and the islands) in order to ‘help’ refugees – in other words, to fuck young men. Many of the men who go to ‘help’ are pedophiles who are after boys and young men.

As is often the case with people who are ostensibly ‘doing good’, such degeneracy is overlooked. The charity is a useful mask. It wouldn’t surprise me if this was the main impetus behind the left’s obsession with refugees. It reminds me of Lawrence of Arabia – whose passionate advocacy of the Arab cause originated in a boy who he liked to bugger. (the other driver of the refugee influx is the corrupt local Greek businessman who recieve big EU funds to feed refugees, and then feed them close to dogfood while pocketing the difference)

The mindset Europeans developed in their war against Israel bore fruit against themselves, after it failed to work against Israel and had nowhere to go.

other way round.

the anti-nationalist and anti-colonialist mindset that infected Europe was applied equally to Israel.

But realistically, some couples may need the extra time to get prepared.

the welfare system should be arranged around this imo – helping the healthiest couples have kids.

Whites/Europeans are currently in a situation where they are a tribe being conquered by other tribes, if you haven’t noticed.

Yes, I had noticed, and sadly, stupid White men like you are actively going out of your way to ensure that nothing can be done about that fact by alienating your only allies.

Whenever women are empowered with the “freedom” of abortion, they’ll always be eager and certain to mass murder millions of babies.

Abortion chiefly empowered men…to walk away from their responsibilities.

https://www.brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/

Women are genocidal scum that mass murder millions of babies …

What does that say about men?

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/395816-dem-pollster-women-are-less-likely-to-be-pro-choice

Mr. Karlin, are there any limits?

the welfare system should be arranged around this imo – helping the healthiest couples have kids

I certainly don’t disagree, but you’re always going to need a safety net. You can look to countries that don’t have one to this very day, and it’s not a pretty picture. Human trafficking, even child sex trafficking becomes a commonplace, as it was in Victorian England.

That the concept would imply..

it hasn’t been proved yet but i believe regression to the mean will end up being male variance anchored by female variance cos that’s such a neat fail-safe system.

if so it wouldn’t imply any of the things you mention.

in my experience the vast majority of the demand for child prostitutes (in the West) comes from immigrants working for minimum wage and sending most of it home so they have no spending money – in particular immigrants from countries where the age of consent is much lower so 13 (for example) is not even seen as a big deal – and for the most part the girls are supplied by gangs from the same ethnic group.

it may be different elsewhere.

balanced selection – what’s favorable?

right – but if a particular trait had both costs and benefits you’d want the mean value to be the optimal value for the average person – outliers might have more of the benefits but more of the costs too.

regression to the mean = fail-safe

Regression to the mean is a very simple concept. It’s certain to be true, because it’s almost tautological. Do you really not understand it? Or maybe you never thought it through.

Aha, can a favourable genetic mutation be classed under the random component?

Surely, some children are smarter than their parents through a random favourable mutation, which gets passed down. Perhaps that is how dynasties of talent start.

Of course, that is how the human race got smart to begin with. Or became human.

Ok, if some children are smarter than their parents for random unknown reasons, I can see why we have no grounds to expect these random unknown reasons to precisely reproduce themselves again.

Although since we don’t know what they are, we cannot really estimate the probability, and cannot establish a rule of reversion to the mean.

What percentage of the smart fraction then is there only because of some random unknown reasons? I suspect it isn’t very high, or we’d be seeing much more turnover among the elite.

Also, we have no grounds to posit a reversion to the racial mean in any given case if, as you say, the mean is that of the two parents.

The two parents may belong to the genetic smart fraction of their race, or one or both may belong to that percentage that is smart due to random unknown reasons, and their offspring will under revert.

Since the percentage of people smarter than their parents for random unknown reasons is probably not very large, reversion to the mean must be fringe phenomena.

Are you keeping up with all this Tor?

In many cases, it’s clearly bad for some humans. One need only observe the behavior of drug addicts, alcoholics, tobacco users, and morbidly obese people to see that freedom is not always good.

Also many types of freedoms are at odds with each other obviously. One’s freedom to enjoy peace and quiet is harmed by a neighbor’s freedom to listen to loud music.

Ok, that makes sense.

But it does seem like a marginal phenomenon.

And the example that started this discussion, Ashkenazi Israelis marrying smart Sephardis, doesn’t seem like a situation where regression to the mean might be a significant factor.

A simple model.

IQ is the sum total of three variables:

1) genetic IQ (GIQ)

2) systematic environmental effects (SIQ), which is found in modern environments to be close to 0 (in medieval environments it was substantial, with poor children starving and so their IQs were systematically negatively affected by their environment)

3) random environmental effects (RIQ), which is substantial, and currently accounts for maybe 20% of variation

Since SIQ is close to zero, let’s not think of it any longer. So, IQ=SIQ+RIQ.

To make the model simple enough, let’s imagine that SIQ can only be a round number (so, either 110, or 120, but never 117), and that RIQ is ±10.

Also, to keep things simple, imagine that there’s a perfect assortative mating. 140 IQ guys marrying 140 IQ gals.

So you have a guy whose IQ is 140. This is the result of GIQ+RIQ. So either he has 150 or 130 GIQ. However, there are many more people with a GIQ of 130 than those with a GIQ of 150. Therefore, it’s overwhelmingly likely that the 140 IQ guy actually only has a GIQ of 130. In other words, smart people (those above the average, especially those very much above the average) are very likely to be the beneficiaries of random luck. Their GIQ is probably lower. Imagine two 140 IQ people marrying. Their expected GIQ is 130 in both cases (there’s a small chance for both to be 150, so the expected value might be maybe 133; the important point is that the expected GIQ for both is lower than the actual measured phenotypical IQ), so naturally their child will also have a GIQ of 130. This means that their children will have an IQ of either 140 or 120: so on average, just 130. Now, the 140 child in the next generation will also have a 140 IQ spouse, repeating this. The 120 IQ child will have a 120 IQ spouse. Now, the 120 IQ spouse could have a GIQ of 110 or 130, but, alas, 110 is more likely than 130, because there are way more people with a GIQ of 110 than 130. So the 120 IQ spouse will now probably have a 115 GIQ child (okay, now we have to allow this, but this was just a very simple model to explain this), who will either have 105 or 125 actual phenotypical IQ, marrying someone with 125 or 105.

However, if you are substantially below the average, the dynamics will be the opposite. So the 70 IQ guy will likely have a GIQ of 80, rather than 60. Same thing for his (presumably also 70 IQ) spouse. His children will therefore have a GIQ of 80, and with a little luck could reach 90. (But with no luck will still be floored at 70, i.e. the average of the parents.)

Now, of course, RIQ is actually something like a normal distribution like most of these things, so its effects are usually small (maybe just 5 IQ points), but its results are less binary than in my example (i.e. it won’t be one child exactly at the parents’ level, the other substantially closer to the mean, instead it will be both children somewhat closer to the mean than the parents were), but it will continue in the next generation (because the 140 IQ couple’s 137 IQ child will marry a 137 IQ spouse, so his children will only be 135 IQ, and so on and so on; similarly, the 60 IQ couple’s child will be expected to be 63 IQ, who will thus marry a 63 IQ spouse, and his children will be 65 IQ, etc.).

Please note that in the second generation the effect will be slightly smaller, because whereas in the first generation we expected both members to benefit from good luck in the high IQ case, or bad luck in the low IQ case, one generation later we only expect this of the spouse. This is, of course, merely expected value. It’s random, so theoretically it’s possible that both members of a 150 IQ couple actually have a GIQ of 160, in which case their children are expected to be even smarter. But it’s not very likely, so the expected IQ of a 150 IQ couple will be lower than 150.

As we get closer to the mean (of the population), the effect gets weaker, and if you cross it, it will reverse. So a 110 IQ couple’s children will be expected to be lower IQ, but not very much lower. And a 95 IQ couple’s children are already expected to be more intelligent than their parents.

Now, if you managed to get a bunch of 140 IQ people with an average expected RIQ of -10, and put them on an island, then the resulting population would have an average IQ of 130. This is high, but not as high as the founding population. But then it would stay there forever. (Absent any selective pressure, of course.) It won’t revert to the mean of the bigger population, now it would be a new population, whose mean would be, from the second generation, 130, and all reversion would be purely to this new mean of the new population.

Thank you. That was very well and thoroughly explained.

I suppose the presumption would be that the high GIQ section of the Sephardic population would be marrying into the Ashkenazi.

Populations with different mean GIQ will have a certain amount of overlap – however, the existence of RIQ partially masks the overlap. Obviously if we could precisely pinpoint the GIQ overlap there would be no reversion to the mean resulting from their union.

So RIQ introduces a wild card. So I think it is fair to say that the new population resulting from the union will have a slightly lower mean IQ, but I think it’s fair to presume many unions will be within the GIQ overlap.

So I accept that slight lowering may occur, but it is unlikely to be significant or have a very large impact.

A small price to pay for social harmony and good will.

Only one thing you said was not quite right – it isn’t random environmental effects. We actually cannot characterize what it is at all, we are completely in the dark about the nature of these effects.

What percentage of the smart fraction then is there only because of some random unknown reasons? I suspect it isn’t very high, or we’d be seeing much more turnover among the elite.

Yes, the standard deviation I gave is probably far too high. I’m sure there is hard data on this, but from my observations, brothers and sisters seldom differ very obviously in intelligence once you account for differences in interests and so on.

You did concede my point there.

You’re an idiot and a troll.

You’re conceding another point here by agreeing that there is a disadvantage in having children after a certain age.

Did anyone ever deny that? If you’re going to claim uncontroversial, trivial points as some sort of “concession,” then all you’re doing is showing yourself to be an assholea and a sophist.

Now that you have admitted that we don’t need to have eight kids, the only questions are: how many will we have and when do we need to start having children to achieve our desired fertility? Assuming a woman wants to have three children, spaced the usual 30 months apart, a woman should aim to start no later than her mid-20s. That leaves plenty of time for four years of college, and even a master’s degree, which is what this is all about, isn’t it? You don’t want women getting an education.

It’s ideal in terms of women maximizing their pre-marital lifestyles.

Bullshit. It’s about a woman accomplishing her own personal goals, which I know is deeply offensive to you, since you see us as nothing but baby-making machines.

Not that you care, but FWIW, some husbands are considerate enough to wait for their wives to finish their education before demanding children.

Sure, but Romney had a tendency of getting things done. Arguably, a soft but actually implemented policy would have been better than a hard policy that was not implemented.

Romney wouldn’t have done a damned thing about immigration, for the same reason that Trump isn’t doing anything: the donor class veto.

It’s all academic anyway. College-educated White White women voted for him for muh tax cuts. Non-college White women had no use for him. With Trump, that was reversed. In either case, White White women have never been fully won over by the GOP, and for good reason. They’re useless.

Ackshually…

How much of an idiot is 375?

Women buy shit, keeping men employed in factories. Greedy men fire them and replace them with Third World sweatshop labor.

Conclusion: It’s all women’s fault.

It would benefit American households by curtailing wasteful consumer spending. Spending is also a cost to household budgets.

I’m not contradicting myself. There are only so many boats a middle class man can buy. Traditionally, married middle class men who control their household budgets are very cheap.

BTW, things like boats are high value added manufacturing goods. Women’s consumer spending tends to be for low value added, low tech goods.

I would say, however, that I’m an attracted to places with depth and character, that are the opposite of a clean and beautiful American suburb, and whose deficiencies can only be considered serious from the point of view economic efficiency, but not from the pov of life.

Lol, this should be interesting.

Have you ever actually been to Israel? Can you speak Hebrew? Do you plan to live in a religious settlement?

My guess is you’ll be cleaving to Americans/Anglos as much as possible and struggling to come to terms with the quirkiness of Israeli behavior (less for it being specifically “Israeli,” rather simply foreign). I’d be impressed if you lasted a year.

Generally speaking, most young women who are highly interested in higher education and postgraduate studies aren’t determined to settle down in their mid-20s and start having 3 kids. Why would they be? Higher ed opens up new career and social opportunities that they will want to explore. Settling down right after college wastes those opportunities.

And here you reveal your ridiculous lack of insight about women. You are projecting Male values and sensibilities (spread your seed) into women. You literally have no idea what you’re talking about.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/Ring-by-Spring-How/241840

I think higher education is largely useless for most men as well. It’s not a sexist thing

Then you’re just a cretin who doesn’t understand that education isn’t just about money.

But have they? Obviously not. They have been – and remain – enthusiastic cheerleaders for massive and endless immigration.

Male or female, the politicians are all puppets, every single one.

i think the populations of industrialized nations grew too high due to the labor needs of early industrial society and ideally would shrink to maybe 2/3 their current population

That’s quite possibly true. But how do you rate your chances of persuading the corporate sector that ever-shrinking markets might be a good thing? And in today’s world the corporate sector has more influence over policy than elected officials.

I never said that the welfare state was “subversion”. Truthfully though, as far as punishing men through no-fault divorce, payments to single mothers, and encouraging women’s education, the welfare state really is an extremely subversive, harmful, and destructive influence on any given society.

No-fault divorce is disastrous but it has nothing to do with the welfare state. Nor does encouraging women’s education have anything to do with the welfare state. You could have a very successful welfare state without no-fault divorce and encouraging women’s education.

The welfare state and the social experiments which you (quite correctly) identify as harmful are two different concepts. Two different animals. The welfare state is an Old Left concept. It is not necessarily anti-family. These social experiments are the product of the New Left. There is no common ground between the Old Left and the New Left.

Yup.

Your link is about students at Jerry Falwell’s university and other fundamentalist Christian universities. It describes a minority subculture in the US. Most young people are not a part of that culture. It’s not representative.

Education isn’t about money, which is why higher education is pointless for most men and women.

I never stated that male politicians weren’t behind harming the west. Male politicians are also theoretically much more likely to try and resist their masters if given the opportunity. Trump, Salvini and Orban could theoretically be considered to be such politicians.

Still, i only pointed out that women are doing much more harm than they are helping much of anything. They are doing more harm than good because they’re too dumb to realize what’s really going on, and their emotional irrationality has been weaponized against their own men and society …

nah

I’ve recently been reading the blogger Bohemicus (an explorer and admirer of old monarchical Europe who used to write for Sputnik and Pogrom before it got blocked), and given the level of stupidity this discussion has come to, his quote is apt:

In fact I think third wave (or fourth, or whichever they have now) feminism is a criminal, and worse, cretin ideology.

But emancipation of women and their fully equal rights are self-evident things. The clowns that come forward against women’s equal rights should be kept in cages and shown in zoos for money. I would place two rows of cages facing each other. Radical feminists would sit on one side, and patriarchal morons with the Domostroy in their heads on the other.

https://bohemicus.livejournal.com/134352.html?thread=35782096#t35782096

The welfare state and the social experiments which you (quite correctly) identify as harmful are two different concepts.

Doom on the record for thinking “women’s education” is “harmful.” What an asshole.

So it is very clear that the percentage of women who support an absolute “right” to abortion is larger than the percentage of men who support it.

Just barely, and in either case, it’s a minority of both men and women, yet we have unlimited abortion anyway. That right there tells you that women are not the problem, because the courts have taken the issue away from the voters.

After all, why should they be? Since then, women have been allowed to openly run around being degenerate whores without any form of social restraint.

When it’s women’s fault, it’s women’s fault. When it’s men’s fault, it’s still women’s fault.

If a man enters into a conventional marriage with a woman, he’s signed himself off with at least half of his financial value to the complete mercy of a woman,

Here again is the bizarre claim that men refuse to get married because marriage is a binding legal contract with real-world consequences. IOW, we can’t actually expect men to get married for real. We can only expect them them to get dressed up in a suit and pretend to get married, all the while not actually signing on to the community of property and interest that institution entails.

The government’s eagerness to grant welfare payments to single mothers encourages women to be complete whores and cheat on men whenever they like because they don’t depend on men to survive.

Because women should be relegated to forced prostitution.

The education of women is also a complete disaster because women are on average, as a collective, inferior to men in terms of intelligence and physical strength in literally nearly every category.

White men shouldn’t be educated because they are intellectually inferior to Asian women. Let them do the physical labor.

http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/sat2.png

Women simply must become the private property of men in any society, if that society intends to survive in the long term.

I should have just skipped straight to the end.

Mr. Karlin, is advocating or the enslavement of groups of human beings kosher on this site? Seriously, do you think the presence here of this deranged individual is good for the dissident right?

You would only have a point with this argument if male politicians in the west consistently took an opposing position.

But have they? Obviously not. They have been – and remain – enthusiastic cheerleaders for massive and endless immigration.

The entire political class in the West is worthless and toxic. Male politicians and female politicians are equally toxic.

But any argument that women improve the overall quality of the political class is clearly absurd.

But any argument that women improve the overall quality of the political class is clearly absurd.

Um, ackshully:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268118300933?via%3Dihub

Of course, by whining for Anatoly Karlin to ban me, you’re showing how strong and empowered women truly are.

You are a reject and a misfit with no stake in the future. As such, you do not care about securing a future for White children, so it’s no surprise that you disgrace the dissident right with no concern whatsoever for the optics.

That is not so for me. I have six White children whose future depends on a functioning White advocacy movement. You (and all your friends) need to go.

Women simply must become the private property of men in any society, if that society intends to survive in the long term.

As it happens, we have a natural experiment with extreme misogyny in rural India right now.

How is that working out for them? 200,000,000 women (yes, you read that right, 200 million) women have gone demographically missing because of sex-selective abortion, neglect of female children, and outright murder (euphemized as “female infanticide”).

Parents kill their daughters because they will never control wealth and won’t be able to provide for them on their old age. They are therefore seen as a burden. Mothers don’t resist because they see no point in bringing a girl into a world that despises and abuses them.

Even for those of you who don’t think female lives matter, consider that a dead girl will never bear sons.

https://youtu.be/ISme5-9orR0

Mr. Karlin, is advocating or the enslavement of groups of human beings kosher on this site? Seriously, do you think the presence here of this deranged individual is good for the dissident right?

That’s an odd statement coming from a regular commenter. The whole point of this site is precisely that everyone is welcome to comment, no matter how extreme his views. Instead of getting worked up over this, cherish the fact that you are getting the unfiltered opinion. This is very rare. (But not in Sweden, funnily enough: our biggest forum is rather like Unz Review in this respect*, so we Swedes find free-speech absolutism normal.)

• For a time, it even had a subforum where enterprising criminals could ask veterans for advice on how best to carry out bank robberies, prison breaks, tax fraud, and things like that, but that was too edgy even for libertarian Swedes.

Women dominate consumer spending in the economy. There are entire retailers like Target devoted to selling women unnecessary household consumer goods crap.

(But not in Sweden, funnily enough: our biggest forum is rather like Unz Review in this respect*, so we Swedes find free-speech absolutism normal.)

Really? That is indeed strange to hear, and certainly not what one would expect given the news which arrives about your country’s political disposition. How do the PC brigades square free speech absolutism with their PC values?

But any argument that women improve the overall quality of the political class is clearly absurd.

Women’s political participation was never based on the argument that they would improve “the overall quality of the political class.” The argument for their inclusion has generally been couched in the language of fairness and equality. To that end, I think it’s the fact that women have done no obvious damage to the overall quality of the political class that deserves to be emphasized.

we have ever shrinking markets now – it’s why the global economy is crumbling

Based on metrics not known to any actual economists, I take it.

It’s a subculture that indoctrinates young women to believe that they will spend an eternity in hell and not reach heaven unless they are good Christians, and being a good Christian involves conforming to traditional gender roles.

Here you go shooting your mouth off without evidence again, assuming women but not men need indoctrinating and threatening to do the right thing.

Nevermind the fact that you are theologically illiterate. Evangelicals are solar fide/sola Garcia. You can live your entire life as a single career woman and still go to heaven, no problem.

Property exists because men employ force to defend particular pieces of property, either as individuals or part of a group in militias, militaries, etc. Women aren’t expected to do this, and can’t do it.

No, we just give birth to and nurture the men who do so, and have been doing since then dawn of civilization.

https://blogmilitaryfamily.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/gold-star-mothers-day-graphic.png?w=762&resize=660%2C597

No matter how much you try to claim sole credit for civilization, you can’t change the facts of life.

Property is a male social construct.

I am full-fledged human being with a soul and God-given rights. You, on the other hand, are a psychopath. I have always been very curious about your kind. How did you come to be? Were you born that way? Will God ever have mercy on your soul?

Married middle class fathers are naturally extreme cheapskates and would be happy with hand me downs and used stuff from yard sales if they controlled consumer spending.

That must explain all the men I always see bargain-hunting at yard sales. Anyway, yard sales are increasingly rare these days. Clothes are so cheap now, you can’t give them away, and I’m not kidding.

Marriage is a binding legal contract with real world consequences. Are you just dumb or what else? Only a woman can believe that getting legally married has no legal consequences at all …

To date I’ve never actually said that “women should be relegated to forced prostitution”. Then again, what do you exactly even consider to be forced prostitution?

My take is that women should either be mothers or prostitutes. That’s literally the only two things they are really good at in the overwhelming majority of scenarios. In a small subset of cases, like only a few percentage points, if some woman happens to show some rare talent at something, then exceptions can be made. Otherwise motherhood and prostitution must be the norm for women. More motherhood than prostitution is ideal, of course. Some women going into prostitutes would be necessary to allow a percentage of the population with irresistible degenerate impulses to vent them.

I’ll interpret your perspective such that:
“forced prostitution” = women being the private property of men.

That’s far fetched and an incorrect interpretation. Pets are the private property of their owners. Children are the property of their parents until they reach legal age. None of those things are “forced prostitution”. Of course, “forced prostitution” in those contexts would be completely inappropriate, or any other form of sexual relations for that matter.

Women being the private property of men is a completely healthy and natural phenomenon of human history that has existed for thousands of years. You also seem to believe that is slavery as well.

There are too many Indians on this planet anyway. The less of them, the better. India’s overpopulation issue, just like Africa, is unique and bizarre in the world. Also applies to Africans as well, the less of them the better. They are literally waging demographic war against the whole planet. The less of them there are, the more secure the existence of my own kind is, and that they won’t replace me out of existence.

The fact that you’re so moved by the plight of poor brown women shows just how much being a woman matters for you more than anything else. What’s happening in rural India is only proof of my argument and point. People in India correctly recognize that women are extremely useless at much of anything besides motherhood and prostitution. They understand that overall, men are superior forms of life. The Chinese also understood and understand this quite well (Unfortunately there are some naive cucks among them as well). Your video and whinging prove nothing beyond the fact that i’m correct.

The point of women being biologically inferior was only one part of the argument about why educating women, especially with college and university, is horrible. The other part was that college and university are places where women are “liberated” to be completely promiscuous without any social restraint at all. Even encouraged in many cases. All men know that this is true, at least on an unconscious level, which is why nobody has countered my true statement that university and college are places where women can be promiscuous without any social consequences in most cases.

As for that just being a “tirade”, and apparently a sign that i have “a lot you want to get off your chest”, I gave some very good knowledge there on how to save most men who currently live in the west from being completely psychologically castrated and whipped cuckolds. In fact, it actually counts for men worldwide, but besides a few rare scenarios, on average, overall, men in the west are literally the most cucked men that exist on the planet.

As for “Try to think through the implications of that line of reasoning being applied more broadly – does it still seem like such a great idea?”, i assume you mean if it was supposedly applied to a scenario where men were denied education by say, a matriarchy of women that ruled everything? Or something like that?

Women’s political participation was never based on the argument that they would improve “the overall quality of the political class.”

That’s not really true. I’ve seen countless instances of feminists using the “women leaders will be more moral” and “women leaders won’t start wars” and “women leaders will promote fairness” arguments. I’ve seen those arguments advanced on this very site.

I’ve also seen instances of feminists using the “women CEOs will be more moral and will make corporations more moral” arguments.

So, basically Whites and Asians at the top, then Middle Easterners, then Hispanics/Latinos, and then Blacks.

This doesn’t exactly bode well for the success of Hispanic-majority and Black-majority countries.

The friends I stay with in Israel, for example, are still planning to emigrate to Canada, and anger about unfair positive discrimination for Arabs in all sectors, as well as general too large Middle Eastern population (e.g. Moroccan Jews can be annoying neighbours), and too many religious Jews (Haredim), is one of the motivations which is causing educated secular people in Israel to want to emigrate from there to Canada.

Why Canada and not the US?

Also, right-wing Israelis should be quite happy that left-wing Israelis are emigrating since this would mean a more right-wing Israel. Of course, the smart right-wing Israelis should also follow Yoram Hazony’s lead and have lots and lots of children (with Hazony himself having a whopping nine children).

No, it doesn’t mean women should be denied property rights. It simply reveals the true origin and nature of property rights from the various obfuscations that are employed to hide it.

Different societies can have different responses to this fact.

Feudal organization made the nature of property more evident because the sovereign would grant property to military men who would furnish defense and provide property rights as a result. Contemporary society is so far removed from that today that people just assume property rights magically exist as some inviolate, sacred thing.

Some societies may respond by militarizing their women as much as possible and make them participate in active military responsibilities in order to justify their enjoyment of equal property rights. Others may take a more sexist approach.

I’m not sure what purpose is served by being so cryptic. Can’t you just spell it out? Just imagine everyone agrees with you and openly acknowledges what created and preserves property rights. For women’s rights this implies _____________ (fill in the blank).

By the way, I should add, even though I’ve been siding with Rosie in this thread, there are limits to my patience. If too few women take an open and angry stand against 21st century lunatic femmcunts, I will conclude that women have proven unworthy of being granted political equality and I will reluctantly side with the misogynists and work to deprive women of it.

Thanks for breaking that devastating news to me. I had no idea.

Look, obviously people are inherently unequal. But that fact in and of itself tells us next to nothing about how we should treat those inferior to us (or attempt to relate to those superior to us). Those decisions can only come from reflecting on the issue and discussing our conclusions with others. You can hardly claim that the knowledge that some person or some group is inferior/superior to you automatically equips you with the precise behavioral disposition towards those people/groups.

This response is meaningless and it doesn’t argue anything. It’s bland. It doesn’t say much of anything. Perhaps maybe you should be more direct. As a side-note, it took me way too long to realize how to block quote, but better late than never.

The question is whether they exercise that power justly or unjustly. I claim that denying women the right to be educated based on some minute, almost non-existent difference in average intelligence is manifestly unjust. (It would also be manifestly unjust for whites to deny the blacks under their care a right to an education even on the basis of the substantial intelligence difference between the two groups.)

Your argument is that women deserve education because they have near equal average intelligence to men. Well, my arguments about denying them education don’t have to do with that reason, but other reasons instead. My argument is that educating women is disastrous for any society because educating women causes them to delay family formation and women do not make economic contributions of high value (inferior to those of men anyway). There are other things which are much more problematic than educating women of course, but educating women is still a part of the problem.

I’m not telling you what to do. You can do as you please. I just have my doubts that you’ll be as pleased as you seem to expect to be with what you’ll find there. Much of that depends on whether you grew up there, or else your facility with the language and familiarity with the local folkways, etc. (Did I have it right that you’re Serbian? I think I read a post of yours in which you said you are.)

You can check peoples’ post and comment history by clicking their name tag to get a full list of their comment history (not an @nametag because then you just go their previous written comment only in the same thread).

I have no illusions about anything. Don’t worry about me. My biggest life problem is money and income. I’m doing completely fine as far as everything else is concerned.

I’ll interpret your perspective such that:
“forced prostitution” = women being the private property of men.

That’s far fetched and an incorrect interpretation.

Lol.

Women being the private property of men is a completely healthy and natural phenomenon of human history that has existed for thousands of years. You also seem to believe that is slavery as well.

Lolol.

Children are the property of their parents until they reach legal age.

It looks like someone doesn’t understand the difference between ownership and guardianship.

. If too few women take an open and angry stand against 21st century lunatic femmcunts, I will conclude that women have proven unworthy of being granted political equality and I will reluctantly side with the misogynists and work to deprive women of it.

What do you suggest we do. The radicals have billionaire backing to support their radical activism. Conservative women have nothing. Find me a billionaire financier and I’ll get right on that.

Well one of our most powerful commenters Thorfinnsson has eloquently argued for reinstating slavery so I guess that’s the answer.

Mr. Karlin, this is why White will be destroyed- dysfunctional and self-defeating adherence to principle. If you refuse to do what works, you will take your principles with you into the dustbin of history.

Yes, and if some fish way back when didn’t move onto land, we wouldn’t be here, so I guess fish are also responsible for property rights…

Women = fish

https://www.aconsciousrethink.com/4361/dehumanization-mechanism-narcissists-sociopaths-mistreat-others/

Dear White Men:

I’m getting really tired of being solely responsible for fighting off these trolls. Many thanks to silviosilver for stepping up here, and to Mr. Karlin for at least expressing his support for basic human rights for women. Still, it’s not enough. On the whole, Talha the Muslim and AaronB the Jew have pushed back against the misogyny more than the rest of you combined. I can’t make you care about the future of your people. People who LARP about disenfranchising or even enslaving women are just giving themselves an excuse to do nothing and wasting my time and yours as well as their own.

You will be called “cuck” and “White knight,” but I promise you will survive with your male ego mostly intact. It will be good practice for you to learn how to laugh it off when (((someone))) calls you a mean name. This is direly important to your survival, as we wouldn’t be in this situation if you were capable of responding to the “racist” epithet with a full-throated “f*** you.” Please, do it for the (White) children.

I have other things to do. My homeschooled children and I have a big year planned for the fall. I plan to scale back my time here significantly, even though I feel like all my maternal efforts are for naught if my children have to live in a hostile with no identity group to resist violence and discrimination against them. Most moms can just focus on their own duties without worrying about the larger forces that will determine their children’s fate, though their fears may haunt them as they lay awake at night. I cannot do this, for good or ill.

For a time, I thought maybe some of you just needed some guidance on how to respond to misogynist sophistry, but I have provided that and still there is silence. I must conclude that it is either cowardice or callousness that keeps you from speaking.

If he (assuming not troll) is an immigrant with bourgeois financial resources, especially if it is by New York standards, and goes to live with middle class Israeli people – he will be fine in terms of his neighbours.

If he lives in some building in North Tel Aviv, he will probably have old neighbours who talk to him in the corridor, with perfect English grammar, about how they like to go vacation in London, or their opinion about German philosophy.

But most immigrants to Israel are young people (people 20-30 years old) without money, and really even living in ghetto housing will cost most of their income.

My friends in Israel (which is a recently graduated medical doctor now), live in ghetto housing in Bat Yam.

I was in Bat Yam last year for my vacation. I had an informative day with my luggage, waiting in Bat Yam mall.

If you want to know the Israeli “base population”, you need to spend a Friday in Bat Yam mall. My impression is that somehow all the “gopniks” of Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Syria, Ethiopia and Egypt, have been dropped onto Bat Yam mall on Friday.

decided where I am moving

If you want to live in the city, and have more financing, then I would go to live somewhere along the Northern part of Dizengoff Street.

Atmosphere is so nice there in the evening. It combines very social, and yet quiet and civilized.

Only problem in the area, is there is some kind of restriction to build new skyscrapers, and all the old buildings there are in very bad condition. (So it would be expensive, even for an apartment in a collapsing building, although the area itself is very nice).

settling in a small town in the green north or the Golan, or maybe the West Bank.

Settling in small town is not a bad idea. But why such periphery places, if you are not poor?

Anywhere along the coast from Kfar Shmaryahu to Caesarea and even a bit more North, is full of beautiful little villages and “moshavs”, with a very rural atmosphere.

When we were driving up this road, there are a lot of trackers and farmer all over the place.

Any of these little towns like Kfar Vitkin – it has a very agricultural atmosphere, while at the same time being convenient location and high quality road to the city.

• But if you drive a bit further North already to Pardes Hanna or Zikhron Yaakov – you will be living surrounded by more Arabs than you ever saw in your life though.

We stopped in mall in quite near around here, and everyone was Arab there (even all workers in mall).

So it depends on your view of living in areas with a lot Arabs, if you want to even so far North as even Caesarea.

Calm down. I don’t think this site is quite that important that its penetration by know-all blowhards like Thorfinnsson is going to doom the project of white political empowerment.

My guess is that Karlin, like me, long ago became inured to the kind of lunacies you routinely come across on ‘red pill’ sites. Some ideas are just so self-evidently nutty that they’re self-refuting, so no one bothers to censure or censor them.

I’m not sure the people advancing these nutty ideas are even all that nutty as people. I think it’s a symptom of the ‘conversion syndrome’ people often experience after taking the red pill. So much of what they previously accepted as gospel has now been shown to be illusory or fallacious that their minds are not quite sure of what to make of it all. Ideas that previously would have struck them as absurd all of a sudden seem at least plausible – and even attractive – and they feel like talking about it, hence they post.

So it sounds like you are conceding that neither men nor women are the problem, but rather the moral culture created by elites, and it is not necessarily true that educated women will avoid or postpone commitment. Good.

A lot of higher “education” today is just LARPing. That’s especially the case for young women who are practicing fundamentalist Christians and whose life goals are to get married and have children at a young age. They go to college, and many of these universities exist in the first place, because they’re conforming to a degree to the wider, mainstream secular society, which they’re not completely immune to. If higher education in general, and for women in particular, were not a social norm and expectation in the wider society, there’d be much less pressure and demand for young women primarily interested in getting married and having kids at a young age to go to college.

The “moral culture” we’re talking about here is one that you’ve regularly expressed opposition towards, so I’m not sure why you’re citing it as a positive or point in your favor here. These young women are indoctrinated to support and believe “sexist” and “patriarchal” ways under the threat of eternal hellfire. Sounds like misogyny to me, and psychological abuse and terrorism.

I lean toward the complementarian view: women are more empathetic than men, and men are more tough-minded than women. As the ideal household has both mother and father, the ideal polity has a balance of feminine and masculine influences. For example, with only women voting, you would arguably get a welfare state so indulgent that there would be no incentive to work. With only men voting, you would get an unforgiving, sink-or-swim dystopia with children selling their bodies in the street to feed their families.

This is a distortion of suffrage and politics in general. You’ve reduced politics to fighting over government spoils.

Suffrage is simply a peaceable substitute for force and war. The entire reason we vote is so we don’t have to go to war with each other every 4 years. Voting is a substitute – you count who outnumbers whom and has more group force and would hypothetically win a war and thus go through the vote instead of the trouble and mess of an actual war. Generally, women are not instruments of force and war, and in any serious conflict would prefer to sit on the sidelines and go with the winners anyway.

The reason property holding males could only vote originally was because in feudal times, property was land, and land was granted to men who could and would provide military power and force in war and lead men and arms into battle.

Suffrage is simply a peaceable substitute for force and war. The entire reason we vote is so we don’t have to go to war with each other every 4 years. Voting is a substitute – you count who outnumbers whom and has more group force and would hypothetically win a war and thus go through the vote instead of the trouble and mess of an actual war.

Fuck off, Jew. I don’t buy your pilpul and just-so semantics.

I didn’t even know what ‘pilpul’ means. Had to look it up.

You want to promote a fairy tale explanation for the origin and nature of voting and politics because your vision can’t be justified under a proper understanding of them.

the big city

Well, in Israel there is no big city.

In Dizengoff, you still feel like you are in a small university city – with a beach.

I am aiming for a more secluded and spiritual experience.

Yes, but all between Kfar Shmaryahu to Caesarea, it’s full of little villages that feel secluded.

But it’s also still a habitable place, with middle class neighbours, convenient highway, and access to both sides of the country.

If you go to live in periphery, it’s far less convenient to access other parts of periphery. But if you can live in e.g. Kfar Shmaryahu, you are right next to the highway to go to Negev. And you are right next to the highway if you drive the other direction, and arrive to the Sea of Galilee in an hour and a half. (The highway North is really fast and convenient).

I will answer for myself personally.

Firstly, this site and our comments here are in the larger sphere of things not really that important and appears to mostly function as a release valve for controversial or unpopular sentiments which would be impossible to state in public without reproach or worse consequences due to their political impotency (independently of how well or not people are doing in their social lives). Normies engage in the same type of whining as we do, the difference is that normie complaints and whining is socially acceptable.

Secondly, the most important peeve I have in terms of male-female relations (but, due to my young age, not really something I think very much about at the moment) is that women can retire earlier than men in many countries, since I expect men and women to be treated equally. This is the clearest example I can think of numerous minor but cumulative experiences where the previous social behavioural expectations of women have dissolved in modernity whereas there still exists to a degree the traditional expectation of male chivalry. Though this varies from country to country, it still annoys me.

Thirdly, for whatever reason American women do indeed seem to be more liberal than American men, as evidenced by their voting patterns. I don’t really think those kinds of unhealthy social dynamics are a problem in Europe (I remember posting a couple of polls on the lack of American-style gender gulfs in the UK and France), but it does mean your (American) opponents have at least one valid point (as well as American customs regarding property division and child custody upon divorce).

Fourthly, I long ago tired of listening to men complain about women or women complain about men. I also dislike threads filled with repetitive arguments where 80-90% of is just recycled. Most of the comments that turn into arguments about women and feminism seem like they would quietly burn out if you didn’t fan the flames. The commenter Toronto Russian, who seems to be a fellow woman and mother, once suggested just to ignore the commenters and this seems like it would be a better approach for you.

Lastly, you appear to be somewhat obsessed with this topic and the passive feminine chastising and shirking of responsibility in statements such as these:

This is direly important to your survival, as we wouldn’t be in this situation if you were capable of responding to the “racist” epithet with a full-throated “f*** you.” Please, do it for the (White) children.

is kind of annoying.

Of course, there may not really be any point in writing this reply and it may lack complete coherency, but I am sitting on a train right now and it kept me occupied for a short while.

You have frequently voiced your disapproval of this sort of traditional culture on feminist grounds.

Evangelical Christians do not support forced prostitution. They do not advocate exclusion of women from paid employment. They do not advocate for exclusion of women from higher education. They do not advocate legalized wife-beating.

The worst you can say about them is that they think a woman should “submit” to her husband, but then they also say that a man is to be a Christ-like “servant leader” of his family.

That is something entirely different from the outrageous misogyny regularly idealized on this site.

You are a liar.

We’re talking about fundamentalist and orthodox Protestant Christians, who are Biblical literalists and believe in things like hell.

Right, for failure to avail oneself of God’s saving Grace by believing in his Son’s substitutionary atonement. You keep pretending not to understand this.

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

Firstly, this site and our comments here are in the larger sphere of things not really that important and appears to mostly function as a release valve for controversial or unpopular sentiments which would be impossible to state in public

Group therapy? OK, when do we start doing something serious to secure the existence of our people and a future for Whte children?

passive feminine chastising and shirking of responsibility

But I’m told traditional men don’t want women to take the lead in politics.

Most of the comments that turn into arguments about women and feminism seem like they would quietly burn out if you didn’t fan the flames.

This is quite unfair. Any flame-fanning going on here is entirely on the part of my obnoxious interlocutors. I don’t know how long you’ve been following the dissident right, but I assure you, ignoring them does not make them go away. Rather, you end up with a horrifying purity spiral where men attempt to out-badass eachother, by, to wit:

posting images of women in scold’s bridles
Proposing gang rape for women caught out in public without a Male chaperone
Proposing the chaining of women to stoves

Driving off these sadistic psychopaths is your responsibility as men.

Surely you understand that it is very likely that our (((fellow White people))) egg this on deliberately to sabotage White advocacy.

That is what political parties and real-world organisations are for.

At least here in the US, you can’t have a political party until you have a constituency for them to represent. In order to develop a constituency, you need metapolitical outreach. I thought that was the point of alternative media, but apparently it’s just a big pointless circle jerk.

Obviously Andrew Anglin-style “White Sharia” is idiotic, but they are about as relevant as the Paul Kersey guy who fanatically (and only) blogs about black crime.

You’re clueless. Just a couple years ago, Anglin-type White Sharia bullshit almost completely took over the whole dissident right. But for yours truly, they would have destroyed it. I’m sick and fucking tired of carrying this whole burden by myself.

Jews come on these forums and push the boundaries of sanity while they snicker at the stupid goyim and their self-defeating free speech absolutism. I cannot save you people from your stupidity all by myself.

What I really need to do, in September or October, is go to Israel, rent a car, and thoroughly explore for a month.

Coastal towns in Israel can be very nice, but a bit too tropical for me. I think I want mountains and hills more, chilly rainy winters, and perhaps a less bourgeois feel.

There are some small artist colonies in the north that may for the bill.

What I do like about the coastal scenery are the often dramatic cliffs and bluffs.

Your remarks on Israeli gopniks are amusing and remind me of the shock and disappointment many Americans and Europeans feel when they visit for the first time.

Years ago I was hanging out with an American who could not get over the fact that there so many physically imposing Jews in Israel. The American Jews he had known were thin intellectuals, and he had romanticized Israel as this place filled with nerdy intellectuals who managed to win all their wars entirely through the power of nerdy intellectualism. He pointed at an Israel sitting at a table opposite us and exclaimed, “he could be a football player!”.

Another time, I was hanging out with Czechs who had studied Judaism in university and were interning in Israel for a year. They too were in shock. They had romanticized it as the land of refined intellectuals, when it is one of the most earthy and physical place.

I, however, appreciate precisely this about the place.

a less bourgeois feel.

Culture of all these little towns along highway 2 and between Tel Aviv and Caesarea (like Kfar Vitkin), is very agricultural and redneck.

But you have highway 2 next to there so you can escape from this nightmare in five minutes

This is Kfar Vitkin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b9fLuO9I2s

a bit further North, background at least does look more dramatic though
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUleFvgvEWY

about the coastal scenery are the often dramatic cliffs and bluffs.

Israel is not the worse place, if you want the terrible or frightening Kantian sublime, as well as to see the “noble savages”.

However, the best is to live somewhere in the centre, from where you can go to the alien desert landscape, or the hostile Arab villages, or the border with Syria – and then return in the afternoon on the convenient highway.

• Perhaps you like the sublime “desert” – for a time. But when you actually live there, it will seem less sublime to you.

Similarly, if you like living with Arab “noble savages” – the Arabs will be less exotic after a few weeks.

Or if you live to look at the exotic Hasidic Jews – well it’s better, if you can go home to a normal place after, or they will soon seem less exotic.

So, best for most people would be to live near the centre, and probably the corridor between Tel Aviv and Caesarea.

he had known were thin intellectuals, and he had romanticized Israel as this place filled with nerdy intellectuals

He will have some kind of mental collapse, or at least ask for a refund for his flight ticket there.

They had romanticized it as the land of refined intellectuals

Lol.

It’s something similar to shock of Japanese tourists who imagine the “civilized English gentlemen”, and they met real English people

No, it was decided by the English Civil War, by Cromwell and his New Model Army, against the King and his forces led by loyal feudal Royalists.

In France, it was decided by the revolutionary mob, then the Committee of Public Safety, and then the French Revolutionary Army against the coalition of monarchical powers.

I am amazed that I never heard of this site all the time I lived in Sweden. They really do seem to cover every topic possible.

Would you happen to know of anything else interesting in Swedish (or Danish or Norwegian)?

It depends on what you mean by interesting, but if you read Swedish and wish to keep up to date with Swedish society, the monthly magazine Axess is hard to beat. Its format is something between The Atlantic and New York Review of Books, but with a far more European outlook (many of its book reviews are of yet-to-be-translated books in German, French, Russian, and so on) and a more egghead roster of writers (academics rather than journalists and novelists). Like all great magazines, it’s also very well curated, so after that article you wanted to read — about economic reform in India, say — you will suddenly find yourself reading about forestry in 18th century Norway, or the the role of soap operas in modern Greek culture.

I will check it out. Thanks!