/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>>87239
The most powerful weapon that a women has is her uterus, for a society to survive they need to use it to keep it alive and fresh with new blood. The moment they drop this and go for just fun and desires of the flesh a society starts to rot and go bad. Europe can fix itself, but it need to fix the women first.

>>87240
Money/pensions is a substitute for babies.

>>87243
In what sense? What kind of accomplishments gives you having a pension? Where is the challenge of changing a live in the money? That doesn't makes any sense, babies are Superior to money or pensions

>>87245
A rich society likes no effort life. Horde some money and keep working. Get free money from the gov when old (communism). No icky birth stuff. See quoted reply in OP.

Spending 9 months pregnant, giving birth and risking complications, loosing looks and free time. Risking cheating husbands, apparently. Why do all that when you can just save up and get a pension also? And keep having fun too?

Nature had this solved before, it make sex so irresistible that babies happened regardless of intent. But we go smart and fixed that.

>>87246
Ha, so the solution of that problem that other European countries have is importing savages who don't share the same principles and values, and women don't see the problem in that and just keep being hedonistic without contributing?
What has society turned into? I bet you're European, so good luck in that.

>>87247
My comments are role-playing sarcasm to get across the point of the average Western woman as I see it. An observation of the West's degeneracy shows that family is no longer considered a priority, sensation and fun is a priority.

>>87248
The family is the cell of society, if it stops working properly then society also stops working properly. Hard times ahead baby, but you guys always find a way.

>>87249
mlpol.net has since deleted a thread on this. A google cache version:

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Se0LwwjRTeMJ:https://mlpol.net/mlpol/archive/res/48239.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk

copy pasta:

When a problem occurs we look around for the immediate cause, we then blame the problem on that cause. This is a natural way of thinking but some problems have a cause which is significantly distant into the past and for this reason we fail to recognise it as the cause. This is even more true when in the modern information age we get real time information. What I want to discuss is how the West began destroying itself nearly 100 years ago, and it was not the Jews or immigration policies. These are only consequences of what the West did and I am going to try and prove that to you.

{{us_interest_rates_1790-2015.png}} {{us_interest_rates_1790-2015-colin.png}}

The 2nd image shows the history of US interest rates. I'll use this as a proxy for economic activity, the 3rd image has the US birth rate overlaid but offset by X years where a correlation seems to exist. There seems to be correlations at +10 years, +25 years and +34 years. If this correlation is also an explanation we should be able to explain it. I'll use the US birth rate as a proxy for the West in general.

At about the age of about 34 people get a home loan ( http://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/55433/zillow-average-first-time-homebuyer-33-years-age ) this would affect interests rates and economic activity.
At the age of 25 a person is likely to have started in the workforce, contributing to and buying from the economy, the extra productivity rases interest rates.
I am less certain about the age of 10, I specualate that this is when children require more sophisticated entertainment and education products. Perhaps parents have some answer to this?

What I hope this shows is that the effect of the baby rate has future impacts on the economy. Whilst we don't think, as individuals, that us having a child or not is very important to our culture or country, at scale it has a huge impact. This is probably not very surprising once you think about it. The bedrock of an economy is people existing to participate in it. For every child that does not exist about ~40-50 man-years of economy does not exist. (Assuming age 20/25-65/70 worklife.)

If any event occurs to reduce baby making, economic destruction begins to occur about 10 years later, is at maximum effect about 34 years latter and continues into the future non-stop. Knowing this we can now examine history and see how this plays out. I'll remind you that in the 24 hour news cycle age no one cares what happened yesterday (unless it pushes a narrative), and in 4chan no one cares about what happened an hour ago (unless it pushes a narrative) therefore no one cares at all about what happened a decade or more ago. So what I am sharing here is not going to be the typical description we know of history, even by normies or /pol/ perspectives.

The 4th image is US fertility rates and overlaid on it is the causes of the fertility decline. Since we have established that less economy, is caused by less babies, and now we can establish less babies is due to contraception, we can state more contraception equals less economy. Lets examine the 1920s. With the introduction of family planning and there being now no real opposition ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_control_movement_in_the_United_States ), baby making rates begin to plummet. This creates in society an excess of wealth because the economy had naturally evolved to include a higher rate of spending on raising children. When this money has no children to raise it gets used in other ways. We end up with the Roaring '20s and the stock market boom. You can see how such a small change in society (condoms) has enormous effects on its economics and culture. This richness of society allows all sorts of decadence to become affordable, but not only that, sex itself has no consequences. Sex itself no longer carries the risk of 20 years of raising a child. What a great time to be alive! How liberating (shoutout to Liberals). Does this not show that a liberal philosophy is correct? Well, no because in 1929 the stock market has no more of this excess cash, plus all the bank loans added on to it, to hold it in bubble territory. Any selling is met with no buyer who has not already bought in. The stock market crashes and all the wealth that was historically reserved to raise children evaporates into nothing. Now there is no children and no confidence in the economy resulting in the Great Depression.


One of the strange things about humanity is that when times are hard we have more children, and when times are easy we have less children. At first this seems illogical but when you examine the mindset of people in a third world country the answer becomes clear. Every adult has the concern about making sure their old age is secure. There are two ways to secure your old age; 1) money 2) children. If we have enough money (and that does not just mean your bank account, it could be a government pension, or a expensive house you can sell) you have less pressure to guarantee your future old age with family/children. A rich society has a tendency to favour money for old age security, and a poor society has no choice but to depend on children who will grow up to look after them. And the more desperate a person's situation is the more children they will have in the hopes that some survive into the future to look after them. This is why dysfunctional societies breed and functional societies do not breed. Contraception makes the 'not breeding' option even easier to achieve.

part 1/

>>87253

The 1920s introduced family planning, that is the unimpeded distribution of condoms allow the rich West to destroy their future economy. This begins about 10 years after the introduction (as discussed above) and so in the 1930s we have the Great Depression. This desperate time creates a lot of unemployed men. These men are feeling "emaculated" they cannot provide for their families as they wish, their days are long, boring and depressing. One of the cheap ways for those men to feel masculine and uplifted and pass time, and achieve this at no cost with the energy they have from not working, is to have sex with their wife. This, coupled with condoms now being unaffordable or unobtainable stops the collapse in the birth rates as shown by the chart. Bad times = babies.

At the economic level everything is in a destroyed state, people are agitated all over the world, finger pointing is continuous, tempers are rising. When a government is experiencing threats from its population governments need to deflect blame to someone else. This deflection has to be someone who is not them and not the majority of the population (Shout out to Hillary Clinton and the "Russians"). The ideal scape-goat is someone over the border but it can be immigrants in the community also. But as you should realise by now it is at its core a birth rate problem caused by contraception and not by nations or races. It is true that these groups can add on to the problem, but they couldn't add on to the problem if the problem was not there to begin with. It is these stresses caused by contraception that causes the rise of international conflict and racism as everybody tries to deflect blame at the same time.

This takes us to World War II, and the blaming of the Jews, which I hope now you can see as misplaced and the massive chimp out as the world goes full retard …. all because of a condom. Seriously! This massive war needs massive amount of rubber for tyres, this makes condoms less available and the birth rate rises dramatically so that by the end of the war the birth rate is approaching pre-condom levels. But the West is so "smart" it has a plan to make sure, even more, that it can stop babies from being born! We go through the cold war, the rise of the military-industrial complex, government secrecy, and then in 1960 we get The Pill! The next saviour of Western civilisation from the scourge of raising children and securing its future! And so the birth rate plummets again, and 10 years later we have the OPEC oil crisis. But wait how can a lack of oil be such a big issue if the economy should be slowing down because of The Pill. To answer this we need to look at the effects of birth rates beyond 10 years.

The last of the high birth rates was the 1910s, this means those people became 25 around 1935 this explains the bottom of the Great Depression, as well, and the uptick in the economy and also the birth rate because condoms are still unavailable (condoms were made in Germany! Shoutout to Weimar Republic and hedonistic Berlin! Condoms = degeracy!) at 34 they are wanting to buy houses and have families. Because this is occurring during the Great Depression and the War there is a baby making recovery, and those children are a boom in the economy, meanwhile these 1910s babies are also still participating in the economy at a reasonable level in the 1970s because they have not retired yet. This double whammy economic uplift causes economic strain on the infrastructure and the result is OPEC can use the situation to blackmail the West.

These adult booms cause the rise of interest rates to counter inflation because of the rise of demand from so many workers/consumers in the system. Meanwhile The Pill is "solving" the problem by decimating the birth rates again. However the West has an additional trick up it's sleeve to make triply sure children don't get born. In 1970 we also add the right to abort for any reason. Ha ha now we can be rid of these stinking kids all together! And so the baby boom of the recent past is the last boost given to the future of Western civilisation. And as these people die out so does the West. Lets take a look at that.

Looking at the birth rate graph, lets use the year 1960 as the centre of the baby boom. Now lets add on a retirement age of 65 years old. Add them together and we get the year 2025. Since the rate of upcoming babies is very low, once these people leave the economy the economy collapses, its fundamental support is going to retire en mass. But that is not all, they don't simply leave, they become "gibmedats", they want a pension. They don't vacate the economy (which is bad enough), they accelerate the consumption of the remaining parts of the wealth in the economy. This is the death blow given to an already sick animal. This is the West's near term future.

This is why immigration is occurring. Someone has to pay for the retirees, someone has to pay taxes for the governments debts + interest. You can't protect a culture and a way of life which has decided to not breed AND afford to pay for old age people and interest payments. A Government's primary duty is the keep the economy afloat, preserving culture is necessarily secondary to financial collapse. Immigration is a symptom of the problem we face, not the cause.

part 2/3

part 3/3

The West is completely fucked, and we started this complete disaster in the 1920s, and in the 2020s we will (not) reap what we (did not) sew. Literally. The US and the West will collapse over the coming decades, the only choice we have is deciding which way we fall over but we will still fall over. We will be invaded one way or another, because nature abhors a vacuum, by war or by governments supporting it as policy. We can do this disaster with a WWII chimp out and still loose, or we can surrender to those who do breed peacefully. And remember it is dysfunctional societies that breed more, and functional societies that breed less.

I can go into more details if you have questions and I am very interested in having my hypothesis challenged. I like being wrong because it gives me the opportunity to be even more correct in the future.

I am making this post because I want anyone considering that harming others as a solution to understand that we did this to ourselves, it is not a conspiracy placed upon us by others. It is possible for others to kick us on the way down, just as we kick CNN on their way down. But just as the meme war won't be the primary cause of CNNs continuing failure, no other group is the primary cause of the West's failure. CNN shot itself in the foot, and so did the West.

Prepare for things to get worse.

– end quote –

I'll also add a new pic here.

>>87253
>>87254
>>87256
That's an effective and informative cache-post Vrilanon. Unfortunately, it fails to consider the profluence of industry and technology which allowed mass production of condoms in the first place. It also fails to account for the large-scale owners of industry, which were in fact largely jews. In Britain especially, factories (not to mention the city its self) was owned by jews, particularly culminating with the Rothschilds. These factories were 'manned' largely by orphans which were plentiful, cheap, and easy to replace, but which were brought about in the first place by a high birthrate.
Tl;dr Birth rates are important and should not be discounted, but there are far more elements to consider, and one should never rule out the jews.

>>87273
The bottom rung is baby rates. Everything else is a consequence. For example technology has a boom when there is a worker/brain boom coming from the prior baby boom. It is always babies first.

>>87273
Lion's catch and eat the sick and old of the animal kingdom. If you kill all the lions no one will get sick or old.

So the main cause for the downfall of the ethnic population of the west and it's economy for the last century are solely based on condoms, pregnancy pills, legal abortion and the fact that people with good living conditions for some reason don't raise children.

Is it possible to change this for these better somehow or are WE doomed because woman's rights have collectively killed our children?

>>87281
Again, I am not contesting the validity and significance of birth-rates, but mortality rates have as much to do with economic stability and function as birth-rates do, and mortality rates are dependent on an enormous number of smaller factors. My point is that likewise birth-rates are contributed to an enormous number of factors. You've asserted quite well that birth-rates are significant, but one has to understand the contextual etymology of those birth-rates to get a clearer picture.

>>87289
Mortality rates are shifted birth rates by +AVERAGE_LENGTH_OF_LIFE. I am suggesting everything is rooted in babies, except cosmic level events.

>>87291
Conceded, but in the beginning of the 3-part its asserted that [how] 100 years ago the west began destroying its self was not caused by jews or immigration policies but by birthrate. My point is that jews have very much to do with western birthrates and that this began well before the last 100 years.

>>87295
The archetypal Jew is AnCap. If you are buying he is selling. If you don't buy it, he is out of business. We have to take responsibility for our half of the transaction.

>>87297
But again, that is far too much of a simplification. The jew is largely ancap, except with an observable bias and agenda in favor of jews and against non-jews. One could then blame education and even laziness on the 'goy' for allowing it to happen, except that jews do and have had their hands in the manipulation of education, all the while they have been largely in control of economics for centuries.
Tl;dr Ultimately I agree with your position, I'm just objecting to the simplification.

>>87303
Thanks, and I am saying that all jungles will evolve a predator. Killing the predator does not remove the space for the next predator to occupy. Better that we learn to evolve an immunity to the effects, because a power vacuum always gets filled by something.

>>87306
Agreed, but allow me to suggest that simply raising the birthrate alone will not immediately address the issues that Poland and others are now facing. High birthrates among low-income, low-education, low-achievement demographics are relatively consistent regardless of the economic success of a nation. The trick then is/would-be to cultivate higher birthrates amongst families and communities that have and maintain a greater degree of individual and collective responsibility to themselves and others. In short, eugenics espoused with traditionalist values and a nationalistic emphasis. Carrying over from comments in the /sg/ thread
Tl;dr What IF jews and nazis were to realize that friendship is magic?

>>87295
"1870s England saw the founding of the first major condom manufacturing company, E. Lambert and Son of Dalston.[2]:165 In 1882, German immigrant Julius Schmidt founded one of the largest and longest-lasting condom businesses, Julius Schmid, Inc. (he dropped the 't' from his name in an effort to appear less Jewish)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_condoms#World_War_I_to_the_1920s

>>87313
Thank you for that.

>>87312
>>87313
>>87365

So what do you suggest would be the best course of action to take? Outlaw condoms?

>>87367
This is the big conundrum. Nature has not had a chance to adjust to easy and pervasive access to contraception. It looks like what happens is the system destabilizes into a baby bust = economic bust = depression = baby boom because confidence in money to look after old age has failed. Basically natures "plan" is to make a 3rd world like situation, which is where breeding then ramps up again.

How do we stop this cycle of wealth = fun > raising kids??

How do you tell free people they can't have contraceptives??

Artificial wombs? Government benefits for mothers? Professional breeders?

>>87367
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_of_Honour_of_the_German_Mother

??

>>87371
>cycle of wealth = fun > raising kids
It's more insidious than that. 'Lower' (income, education, intelligence, etc.) demographics never really stop breeding, its the more able and affluent demos that experience the bull/bear 'market' of birthrates. This is why elites are always concocting wars to keep the populations in check.

>>87422
Epona checked. And interesting.