Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Is Religion Necessary for Sustaining White Birth Rates?

  1. #1
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Nachtengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    6,403
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    201
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,185
    Thanked in
    686 Posts

    Is Religion Necessary for Sustaining White Birth Rates?

    {snip}

    It’s no secret that Western man has given up breeding. A society needs to have 2.1 births per women in a lifetime if it’s going to maintain a steady population. Besides the U.S. and Iceland, no western nation is even close.

    {snip}

    It can be projected that the total number of white people lost from the EU, Canada, Switzerland, the Balkans, Norway and the ex-Soviet states including Russia will be around 279,000,000. To put that in perspective, that’s more than the losses due to World War I, World War II, the Nazi regime and all communist governments in history combined. Of course, deciding against having children is not equivalent to starving people in gulags. Still, whatever the causes of the birth slump, the result is hundreds of millions of lives not existing that otherwise would have.

    Perhaps low birth rates are not a cultural phenomenon and the number of children people have is based more on economic considerations. Looking at birth rates for the world as a whole casts doubt on that possibility. The top five countries are Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Niger and Afghanistan. Not exactly places known for their prosperous middle-classes. Even within first-world countries, if there’s a correlation between wealth and fertility, it’s negative. In the U.S., black and Hispanic households are worth about one tenth of what white household are. But according to estimates, Hispanic women have 3.0 children each, blacks 2.2, and whites 2.0. Ukraine’s nominal GDP per capita is less than $4,000 a year while its TFR is indistinguishable from that of Italy ($39,000), Spain ($35,000) or the Czech Republic ($21,000).

    We must conclude that there is something besides economics that is going on here. If you find a white population somewhere, it’s almost certain that it’s not going to be reproducing itself enough to survive.

    There is one major exception.

    After the 2004 presidential election, Steve Sailer famously analyzed Caucasian fertility rates in Red (those that voted for the Republican candidate) and Blue (those that voted Democratic) states. He found that the top 19 states in fertility (and 25 out of the top 26) voted for George W. Bush. Amongst the 50 states and Washington, DC, the correlation between white fertility rate and the Republican share of the white vote was 0.86 (0.84 in 2000).

    Sailer hypothesizes that the lower cost of living in Red States makes child bearing more feasible.

    {snip}

    While this kind of thinking is on the right track, it doesn’t address why some women choose carriers and others families as much as it does why those with particular characteristics end up in one place rather than another. After all, those from New York are free to move to Idaho and vice versa. But it does show that we’re dealing with a cultural issue—one of the soul, not the pocketbook. Utah, the only majority Mormon state in the Union, has a 2.45 TFR. That’s pretty impressive, especially considering Utahans watch the same TV and listen to the same music (both of which encourage libertinism and nihilism) as the rest of America. While cost of living considerations may explain some of the difference in TFR between New York and Utah, they do less to shed light on the disparity between Utah and the rest on the socially conservative and sparsely populated heartland.

    Taking an international perspective, there seems to be two ways to have a replacement fertility rate in the modern world.

    A) Be really religious.

    B) Be really r-selected.

    Since Europeans aren’t Africans, that leaves option (A) as the only proven method for replacement Caucasian fertility. The potential success in this area of any secular philosophical system is speculative. Remember that next time you see Bill Maher on TV foaming at the mouth about those stupid Christians who won’t bow before the god of evolution. The ultimate irony is that championing Darwinism has, as Katarina Runske wrote of feminism, been a Darwinian dead end.

    Put bluntly, liberal secular humanists are on the verge of extinction.

    To get an idea of the cluelessness of the evangelical Darwinians, look not further than Richard Dawkins’s recent article “What Use is Religion?” {snip}

    {snip}

    Dawkins’ answer to “what use is religion?” has something to do with children, but nothing to do with the likelihood of having them.

    {snip}

    Dawkins compares religion to an Internet virus in this way. A good computer does what you tell it. That makes it a wonderful machine capable of doing spreadsheets, but also likely to follow harmful instructions. To Dawkins, religion is a late arriver like the artificial light which kills the moth that is behaving in ways that in other conditions were evolutionarily adaptive.

    The problem with using that explanation for religion is that spirituality has been around for too long. There has been plenty of time for evolution to preserve the positive results of blind obedience and do away with what’s harmful and wasteful. For similar reasons, Harpending and Cochran theorize in The 10,000 Year Explosion that Jewish intelligence was a recent adaptation. The Jews have unusually high intelligence and a susceptibility to a group of similar diseases. The genes for disease may have not had time to be selected against. They are around because they are part of the package that includes traits which are adaptive and make up for the fact that the carrier is more likely to die from a particular group of illnesses. Had Jewish intelligence been around for much longer—Harpending and Cochran say it reached its abnormal level in the Middle Ages—then evolution would’ve had time to create a healthier high-IQ race. If man’s spiritual side goes back tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years, it’s unlikely that he couldn’t have evolved to both obey elders as a child and as an adult only believe things that he has empirical evidence for, if such a thing was adaptive. After all, evolution does produce secular, empirical-minded men (Dawkins and I among them). We simply haven’t been able to outbreed believers.

    Since man’s been talking a lot longer than he’s been writing, it’s hard to date the birth spirituality or belief in life after death. As good a guess as any for the start of religion is when humans started taking the trouble to ceremoniously bury their dead. That’s been happening for at least 100,000 years. We may trace spirituality even further. OriginsNet.org has put together the evidence for religiosity in the great apes in their “Appendices for Chimp Spirituality.” As the article recounts, after a 10-year old female bonobo was killed by a leopard, the tribal elders encircled the body almost immediately, some making loud displays and calls, others sitting in solemn silence. The body was eventually groomed and cared for, and the high-status apes wouldn’t allow any other apes access to the body. Surely if these alpha apes could talk, they would’ve declared themselves a priesthood and said they were praying for the poor child’s soul!

    {snip}

    Religion may have evolved to protect us from slipping into hedonism, or to instill a sense of duty in order to go bear the difficulties of childbearing. It may simply be that those who thought God was on their side exterminated the prissy atheist cavemen (who probably also believed their women should be “liberated” and hunt for themselves.) The issues of the evolution of religion and exactly why it’s good for the fertility rate in the modern world are outside the scope of the article. There isn’t even an established theory on the evolution of the brain yet. (I’m partial to Geoffrey Miller’s belief that it has something to do with sexual selection, but I wouldn’t bet a week’s salary on it.)

    What we can say with certainty is that Dawkins’s idea that religion brings nothing to man, or, indeed, harms him, is patently false, whether we see things from the perspective of how long faith has been around or what’s happening today to people without it. A quick look at the CIA Factbook proves that Dawkins is very wrong when he claims, “religion has no survival value for individual human beings, or for the benefit of their genes.” If, in the end, all evolution cares about is survival, it’s liberalism that must be considered the virus. Our ancestors who had religion survived while those of us without it might not.

    The two most evolutionarily successful men in written history were probably Genghis Khan and the Prophet Muhammad. But only the latter invented a religious justification for his conquests. Now his ethny (loosely defined) continues to claim land while the Mongolians are a measly five million and dwindling. Among whites, the two most fertile groups are by far the mentioned Mormons and the Anabaptists. Though the Old Testament ignores the afterlife, the Hebrews’ great reward for pleasing God was that the they could spread their genes. Millennia later, God’s chosen are still around, while the Canaanites exist only in word.

    There may be nothing we can do to stop the current trends. Whites may simply not be fit for the world they created. Perhaps the few that are have already become religious fanatics and simply need time to expand their numbers. We won’t know until there’s a white elite that doesn’t declare war on the traditional beliefs of their people. Russia may be providing a test case (albeit not a perfect one. The government may have started to encourage nationalism and religion, but there’s still the poisonous effects of the Western-American media).

    Even if it was granted that the modern world, with its feminism and secularism, produced all the happiness one can imagine, it cannot last. A baby born today may live to see the extinction of the Lithuanians (projected to be a population of 760,000 by 2100, possibly all assimilated into other ethnicities). Any philosophy that guarantees that those that adopt it will be gone within a few generations can only be embraced by nihilists. The patriarchal and god-fearing will inherit the earth, one way or another.
    http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives...ght_of_the.php

  2. #2
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 14th, 2009 @ 06:33 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    72
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    To live means to suffer.

    To be freed from suffering means to resign.

    So... since we have to suffer, if we want to live, it is somehow plausible that something like religion, which aims at making us endure more, will help us living.

    That would be the general argumentation.

    The special argumentation would be something like this:

    "Ne, echt jetzt, das schreit nur die ganze Zeit und ich kann überhaupt nirgends wo mehr hin... warum zur Hölle soll ich mir das antun?"

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    rainman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 28th, 2010 @ 06:34 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Scotch-Irish, Welsh, English, Dutch, German, French
    Subrace
    Alpine-Nordic mix
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Ohio Ohio
    Location
    ohio
    Gender
    Family
    Single, looking
    Politics
    Libertarian/Tribalist
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    Yes of course. So long as government and media tell us not to have children, or so long as we don't value family, blood, race etc. we will die. There must be some ideology, some belief to keep it living. Low birth rates aren't bad so long as we have a stable population. The main problem is whites aren't breeding while others are. Within the white race the poor out breed the wealthy. Frankly in many ways I'm glad society does all it can to push down birth rates. Those of us with a will to survive thus have less competition. Though the dysgenic effects are frightening.

    Asatru tells us to have children to save our race. Christianity tells people to have children because god wants it. I think most of the future babies born will come from religious families obviously because most non religious people have few children unless they are welfare mothers or something.

  4. #4
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 14th, 2009 @ 06:33 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    72
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Frankly in many ways I'm glad society does all it can to push down birth rates. Those of us with a will to survive thus have less competition. Though the dysgenic effects are frightening.
    That's the heart of the issue.

    There are people (I do not consider myself one of them, but they have a point) who say: "The best lack all conviction."

    I would formulate it like this: "Superiority of social instinct comes at the prize of making individual sacrifices."

    Because of this those superior individuals will go not as ardently after their own individual interest as others.

    I mean, it's quite simple. There are simply those who would (almost) never steal, lie, betray etc. and there are those who have few problems with it ("Ah, come on... an idiot deserves to be betrayed.") So... the dysgenic effects ought to be frightening.

  5. #5
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Athalwulf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Online
    Saturday, January 7th, 2012 @ 09:59 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Celtogermanic
    Ancestry
    Heruskoz
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    California California
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Aspiring Author
    Politics
    Tycho Brahe Party
    Religion
    Psychonautics and Cosmic Law
    Posts
    259
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    One of my good female friends wants to have 6 children, and she's completely atheist. I don't know if it has to do with racial views or not, though.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    rainman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 28th, 2010 @ 06:34 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Scotch-Irish, Welsh, English, Dutch, German, French
    Subrace
    Alpine-Nordic mix
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Ohio Ohio
    Location
    ohio
    Gender
    Family
    Single, looking
    Politics
    Libertarian/Tribalist
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jspas View Post
    That's the heart of the issue.

    There are people (I do not consider myself one of them, but they have a point) who say: "The best lack all conviction."

    I would formulate it like this: "Superiority of social instinct comes at the prize of making individual sacrifices."

    Because of this those superior individuals will go not as ardently after their own individual interest as others.

    I mean, it's quite simple. There are simply those who would (almost) never steal, lie, betray etc. and there are those who have few problems with it ("Ah, come on... an idiot deserves to be betrayed.") So... the dysgenic effects ought to be frightening.
    You'd have to read my book to start to get into my head and understand my views. Start with reading Nietzsche's book about good and evil. Civilized people should be compelled to act good based on their own social instinct (which is inherent- in the genes) rather than needing to be trained through religion. Secondly, a healthy religion of the superior puts ones own interests first. the religion of the slave (as Nietzsche puts it) worships stupidity, welfare, generosity, and the group. Asatru, my version of it anyway is based on Nietzsches ethics of a superior person (I based it on this before I even read Nietzsche which was quite recently and I'm updating my book on several points). It's just like something I read about Asatru not long ago: to us a person who sacrificing his own family to help others is morally wrong. To a Christian its morally right.

    We do not belive in betraying people. We are honest generally but we will return a lie for a lie and lie to our enemies when it is needed. We also believe in letting failures destroy themselves on their own accord. That will not harm society as a whole, in fact it will improve it. The religion of the slave/weak is inherently contradicting. They must struggle to follow their own ethics, because out of self preservation they must make compromises (just like the liberal race mixer who lives in an all white neighborhood). They will tell others to be generous, yet hoard for themselves. Tell others to be honest, yet lie themselves when they have to etc. We can see that this is unhealthy for society. But I look at religious ethics from a whole different viewpoint.

    Eugenics (known as good breeding to our ancestors) is embedded in my moral belief system.

    I think non religious people can have children and behave morally but they lack culture. Asatru to me is less about belief in an afterlife or god and more about a cultural system. For us we desire to view the world in a Germanic way and live in a Germanic way in correct accordance to what benefits our community and ourselves. That is our religion. People who lack guidance, unless they are incrdibly intelligent and strong individuals will get sucked up in the mainstream beliefs and practices which at this time are against child birth.

  7. #7
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 14th, 2009 @ 06:33 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    72
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Rainman, I did read Nietzsche already. And I never said that religion should train people. We agree on the instinct issue.

    But you're evading the crucial point, namely what's good for you.

    Do you consider yourself as part of a group that works together or do you consider yourself as an individual that works only as much together with other people as is in the mutual best interest?

    You see, Nietzsche is no problem, Ayn Rand is.

    If you believe in what Ayn Rand said, then I have to stop here and just say: For heavens sake, try again to establish a country for your kind of person, only this time with a marine bigger than that of Tahiti, and see where it gets you.

    You will fail just as sure as the GDR failed.

  8. #8
    Anachronism
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Huginn ok Muninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Germany, Norway, England
    Subrace
    Nordeby
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Farther right than you.
    Posts
    3,146
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    812
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    932
    Thanked in
    464 Posts
    I think they almost understand the situation, but they do not understand (or perhaps are too afraid to admit they understand) the dynamic that is truly at work which promotes a higher birthrate. They mentioned Iceland for a minute, but never again.. why? Because they were getting too close to the truth, that's why. I remember reading an article where an Icelandic man was describing Icelandic society, he put his hands together and gripped them tightly. "We are like this" he said.. a cohesive homogeneous community. That is what religion offers (at least some religions) which make having children a priority. When there are friends who care about you and are almost like family there is support there which makes people feel safe to have children. These leftist fools who are so depressed about the state of the world don't realize that they are themselves sowing the seeds of their depression. They "don't want to bring kids into this awful world" yet it is themselves making the world awful, not the religious conservatives they hate with such a passion. Destroying cohesiveness within communities through social leftist meddling, whether it is by bringing in foreign elements or proselytizing against the religious community, or calling everyone a racist for being part of the cohesive community, or encouraging women to leave the community, go to college to be indoctrinated into marxism and move to a big city and marry a jew, whatever.. all of this happens and it all destroys the ability for normal people to grow up in peace, find a like-minded mate from their own community, and settle down to raise a family.

    On the topic of religion, one of the things that is happening now that I think is most damaging is the deconstruction of traditional religious groups. The Episcopalians are proudly electing more and more gay bishops while their crypto-jew female presiding bishop apologizes for slavery and offers reparations. That community is pretty much toast now. Then there are the Lutherans, who purposely bring boatloads of somalians and other utterly alien elements into homogeneous midwestern towns in the US and dump them there. When this happens, the cohesiveness is gone. The Germanic community of these towns are immediately split into the bleeding hearts who care about the "poor downtrodden" and the few who actually still care about their own families and don't want their daughters being pumped full of sperm by some coal black alien savage who couldn't care less about anything but his own base desires. The community has been divided against itself, and those who wish to remedy the situation are slandered as racists and haters. These Lutheran do-gooders might as well have dumped an atomic bomb on the place.

    The Anabaptists have the right idea. Happiness and large families come from cohesive communities. That is the only source of hope.

  9. #9
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Æmeric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Britain, Ulster, Germany, America
    Subrace
    Dalofaelid+Baltid/Borreby
    Y-DNA
    R-Z19
    mtDNA
    U5a2c
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Indiana Indiana
    Gender
    Age
    58
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Obama
    Religion
    Conservative Protestantism
    Posts
    6,334
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    627
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    772
    Thanked in
    394 Posts
    I think what it comes down to is that persons (Christians) who are more religious are more family oriented. Meaning that they are welling to make personal sacrifices for the benefit of the family, including time & money. Persons who are secular are more self absorbed & are more interested in their own self-gratification. People who are not tied down with children can travel more, go out more often without the concerns of providing childcare, spend more money on stuff for themselves.

    As for sects such as the Espicopalians & the Lutherans (ELCA) they are Chrisitan only in name being in reality a new-age progressive secularist social club.

Similar Threads

  1. Birth Rates: How to Boost Them?
    By Northern Paladin in forum Parenthood & Family
    Replies: 142
    Last Post: Tuesday, March 24th, 2020, 05:00 AM
  2. Gay Male Only-Children: Evidence for Low Birth Weight and High Maternal Miscarriage Rates
    By Catterick in forum Psychology, Behavior, & Neuroscience
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, August 22nd, 2016, 10:53 PM
  3. Why Immigration Decreases the Birth Rates in Indigenous Populations
    By Fiona in forum Immigration & Multiculturalism
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Friday, August 26th, 2011, 01:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •