Did you watch the demographic winter videos, yes or no Gloominary?
Just because I’m a national socialist, doesn’t mean I think the Third Reich was a great idea (dictatorship, check, as much or more corporatism than socialism, check, Jews and other races exiled, check, women confined to the kitchen pumping out four and five kids, check).
I would only consider taking extreme masures like that if North America collapses and balkanizes, and while you’re certain it will happen in the 20s, I’m not, instead what might happen is a more gradual decline, due to the white working classes declining, and due to nature and the resources we’re dependent on declining.
I would rather see red (for socialism), white (for the white race) and green (for the environment) parties democratically come to power in the world we live in now.
I’m thinking as much or more about the world we live in today, than I’m depending on a sudden, largely unpredictable collapse.
I would like to see a racial policy like the one the US and Canada had before 1965, where there were a few others: Asians, Hispanics and so on, but the immigration policy was designed to keep the US and Canada majority white.
Rather than exiling races, I’d like to have a lot more immigrants from Eastern Europe: Poland, Russia, Ukraine and so on, and little-no immigration from other parts of the world.
Perhaps recent arrivals, who can’t even speak English, or who’re a criminal and economic liability, can be shipped back, and of course illegals have to be shipped back, but I wouldn’t purge Canada of every last Asian, black, Hispanic and Jew, so long as there is a Canada.
I watched part of it, perhaps I’ll watch the rest later today.
Watch the rest of it and then I’ll answer your points. I do not seriously believe you’ll have the same opinions on overpopulation after watching those videos. If you do we can debate those points later which I’ll happily oblige.
If you want to understand race better, this is a good graph to begin with:
From the work of renowned Italian geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza:
As you can see, the European branch is part of a larger branch called Caucasian, and Negroids or blacks are a large branch with many smaller branches such as Bushmen, Pygmies and Ethiopians.
Negroids are not a single entity, they comprise many, and each one is as divergent as Europeans are from Arabs and South Asians or more.
Yes, I am already familiar with all that. Thanks for posting the image all the same.
Look forward to your response on the videos but I have a feeling we’ll have a good debate also.
Are you guys sure that graph is correct? What about the Neanderthals and Denisovans?
The Neanderthals had the white skin, red hair, blue eyes, and big brains, so I figured they would be mentioned somewhere before the Caucasians in that chart.
I think it’s every 20k years that the earth wobbles which causes the desert to turn green, so I figured there were several waves of migration out of Africa peppered with periods of isolation as the earth wobbled back. I was guessing that the Neanderthals were one of the first waves out, then became trapped in the cold during an ice age or somehow isolated for 250k years or so before coming into contact with the southern hominids again. That cold isolation selected for bigger brains and white skin, which wasn’t favored in the heat of the south. The waves of migratory herds from the south bred the Neanderthals out of existence kinda like a prehistoric population dilution resulting in slightly smaller brains that everyone seems worried about today. 
Anyway, everyone but Africans have some Neanderthal dna so they seem essential and should be in that chart somewhere. The Vikings most likely had a lot of Neanderthal dna. White folks have the most, followed by Asians, and then Africans have none.
How is any of that relevant to this thread?
On pedophiles.
All pedophiles would be executed for public display and shown no quarter.
On Rapists.
All rapists would be punished with twenty years of hard labor in a prison labor camp.
Watch the rest of those videos yet Gloominary? I am waiting in anticipation of your response.
On Early Marriage
In order to facilitate the support of early marriage in pushing for a pro family agenda within a nation state consensual sexual relations between adults will be reduced from the age of eighteen to sixteen. What this means is sixteen year olds can get married to other sixteen year old individuals or people that are significantly older. The ideal within society is that women should be supported to have as many children that they possibly can. This sort of reproduction policy will be a part of the new national feminist ideal where women are celebrated as national progenitors.
While Demographic Winter was an interesting doc, and I actually agree with almost all of its claims, I just don’t think any of the problems of population decline are sufficiently great to warrant attempts to reverse it, or that reversing it is the only solution to these problems.
Problem one: economic decline as a result of population decline.
Good, I am all for the economy declining as a whole, because this helps protect the environment.
We don’t need to produce and consume half the stuff we do.
I am not concerned about economic decline for the upper classes, I am however concerned about it for the poorer classes.
My solution would be to rob the rich even more than I think we should already be robbing them, to compensate for economic decline.
If the economy grew for decades while the middle class shrunk and the working classes standard of living fell, I don’t see why the reverse can’t happen, that the economy can decline for decades while the middle class grows and the working classes standard of living rises.
Problem two: seniors equalling or perhaps outnumbering non-seniors.
Not as much of a problem as it sounds.
Japan has had an aging population for decades, and they haven’t compensated by importing millions of young foreigners, and while Japan has had to make adjustments, they manage.
Again most of the jobs people do today are superfluous, just fire some of those people, and hire them to take care of seniors, problem solved.
Problem three: immigration.
This is a problem, and politicians use population decline and resulting aging population and sluggish economy as another excuse why we need to import millions of foreigners a year, but again, we don’t, Japan is taking care of this problem on its own, and its economy, while perhaps not as robust and versatile as it used to be, for multiple reasons, not just population decline, is still growing, and they’re still one of the richest economies in the world, so it’s by no means an insurmountable challenge.
What I would do is put a stop to immigration, and pay millions of whites from Latin America and Eastern Europe to come here, free plane tickets and set them up nicely, give them as many incentives to come as reasonably possible, until the white population comprises 90% of the total population or more, which is where it needs to be.
Problem four: real estate.
Old age pensioners are dying, and many of them are not going to be able to sell their homes to young citizens, because there aren’t as many.
The solution these days it seems is to sell homes to rich foreigners, and that’s sad, if I were prime minister, I would make that illegal.
Sorry old age pensioners, but you don’t need the money, I want to see your housing prices come way the fuck down, and young people able to buy them for dirt cheap, fuck you bastards.
Don’t sell them to foreigners, you assholes, sell them to young working class people for working class money, or just give them to your kids, problem solved, stop whining.
That being said, the doc has made me rethink something.
Some countries are more overpopulated than others, and while Europe is definitely overpopulated, there’s hardly any wilderness there anymore, it’s almost all farmland and urban, the US I’m not as sure about, and Canada is definitely not overpopulated.
Perhaps it would actually be good for countries like Canada to maintain their population level, or even grow a little, I’ll have to reconsider this, but of course it should grow on its own, shouldn’t be importing people from abroad, unless they’re coming from places like Argentina and Poland.
I’ll have to think on this, but for Canada, perhaps government can give people socioeconomic incentives to have more kids so the white population is at replacement level, or slightly above.
Ultimately however, human population needs to decline as a whole, it’s just some countries need to decline much more than others, and additionally we need to consume a hell of a lot less, particularly rich people, the poor shouldn’t have to produce all this junk and waste to buy the necessities of life, the necessities of life should be cheap.
Here’s an interesting Article helping to illustrate why we are indeed overpopulated:
On Homeless Within The Population.
Homeless individuals will receive a monthly allowance by the government along with public housing within limits to get back on their feet financially. There will be programs made available by the state for job apprenticeships, attending college, or joining the military through conscription so that they don’t remain homeless for very long where they’re aided being productive members within society. Within every homeless outreach center there will be public safety and social welfare members of the national government to aid this project with homeless individuals.
On Nationalized Healthcare And Education
Within all working members of society there will be a mandatory tax to facilitate nationalized healthcare and education to be accessible to all. Never again will anybody be blocked from accessible education or healthcare. Education and healthcare will be considered a national public service to all individuals.
This article also helps illustrate why places like the UK are indeed overpopulated.
Most of the UK’s food comes from abroad, and I’m sure one of, if not the major reason for that is overpopulation.
You should be able to feed your country solely with your own food, nations should be self sufficient that way, they should be able to take care of all or at least most of their necessities themselves.
It costs trillions of more dollars to feed yourself with foreign food, and you need to pollute the air and water a lot more, burning oil and gas to do it than when you could instead produce food locally, which’s contributing to the deaths of thousands of species, in addition to farming and forestry.
If you’re dependent on nations for your food, than how can you claim to be a sovereign country?
No, eventually this will make you a slave of China, India, Brazil or some other country.
Food is what matters, not toys, not gadgets, whoever is feeding you, is your master.
And over 90% of the UK is cultivated land, less than 10% is wild, and most of that wilderness is in the highlands and mountains of Scotland, because its inhospitable, otherwise it’d be cultivated too.
I think that if anything that statistic should be reversed, a country should be 90% wilderness, and 10% cultivated.
Wilderness is beautiful, animals and trees are beautiful, I don’t want to live in a world that’s less than 1% wilderness, or the only wilderness left is in extremely remote, inhospitable regions.
And such a world is almost certainly unlivable, if not psychologically than biologically, we cannot survive without wilderness.
And we shouldn’t be dependent on others for lumber either, there should be large reserves of forests, and forests that are used for lumber, intermittently permitted to replenish themselves.
What that video alludes to is that white ethnic Europeans are already a global minority where through the global onslaught of immigration we are being consumed in population by all other ethnicities. We are on the road or perdition of extinction globally if current trends continue.
If current trends continue decline into extinction is all but guaranteed.
Once you understand that aging elderly people outnumber younger people of prime reproduction age added with the fertility crisis it becomes that much clearer the demographic crisis we face in the west. Concerning the birth, life, and death statistical ratio when more members of your own ethnic in group are dying than being born you have a serious problem that needs rectifying. Women shouldn’t be allowed to do whatever they want especially if it harms all of society as a whole. Yes, there are indeed environmental problems along with a global natural resource shortages where the sciences of the state needs to be more conscious of these things where more green technologies should be sought out. Minimal impact on the world’s ecology should be the goal.
In terms of collective biomass, humans are the largest species on planet earth, and thanks solely to humans, homindae is the fourth largest family (in the taxological sense, a family which includes both humans and the great apes) on earth, behind ants, cows (a taxological family which’s a mere extension of ourselves, since we keep them alive to eat) and termites.
How is that not overpopulated?
We won’t be able to survive a mass extinction event, and that is what is occurring, humans are going to generate another mass extinction event if we don’t get our numbers under control, we’re generating it through a combination of overpopulation, overconsumption and pollution.
World population needs to be something like a 10th of what it is, and we need to consume and pollute a hell of a lot less, that is where we need to be headed as a species.
An equilibrium can be reached with all points you’ve articulated if we put our minds together to reach such. All of those things you’ve mention need not be exclusive towards each other.
The birth rate is not fine nor is is sustainable which is where we’ll have to disagree. I’ve already previously mentioned my ideals to tackling this problem head on. As for women I’ve stated children, marriage, and reproduction comes first before enjoying the privileges of society on their part, that’s it. I don’t really view this conflicting at all but rather a necessity for society to exist.
While I am a national socialist I have no intention of reviving a 1930’s variation of national socialism. The goal of any ideology should be to evolve, adapt, and change with its environment that it finds itself in. No, the national socialism I envision will be much better and evolved where we will learn the mistakes of our past not to repeat them again. The kind of government I envision will last a thousand years into the future if possible. Also, while I think Adolf Hitler was certainly an important figure not to be trivially overlooked I myself am a Strasserite revolving around the socialist ideals of Strasserism. I have no problems with immigrants of European origin but from European origin only. There is no coexistence with Jews, I will not be moved on that issue or subject. They have their own nation now and they can all reside there. They cannot live or coexist amongst us. ( The only exception would be for European Jews to renounce publicly Judaism, zionism, and Jewishness but even then I would be suspicious of them until they can prove allegiance to our cause. They would have to prove their loyalty a lot harder than all others.)
As for other ethnicities I might be willing to partition some territories where they can exist independently to rule over themselves having their own states to exist as they see fit but the problem with this of course is none of them will agree to this in negotiations or concessions. I’ve tried to reach out to other ethnic groups in the past and they refuse to even discuss the subject.
This is problematic in that the question arises what to do with them all in our nations. I don’t fully have an answer for that and I wish that I did. It’s something that I think about quite often.
Yes, I believe in living within a completely segregated nation away from other ethnicities. It’s the way it has to be. 100% white European ethnically populated nations, that’s what I support.