White Genocide

[Aryan]

I originally posted this thread on VF and it has proven to be popular so I thought I would share it on here.  It is basically a summary of my findings on how white people are being displaced across the globe.





The terms "white" and "European" are, in this context, synonymous. Though there is some disagreement amongst scholars and anthropologists about particulars, it's broadly agreed that "white" means all white-skinned, non-Jewish people native to Europe and their descendants throughout the world: in the Americas, Australasia, and southern Africa. Language and religion doesn't come into it. I've seen arguments from some people who say groups like the Finns, Hungarians and Basques are not racially European, because they don't speak an Indo-European language. I've seen people who say Bosnians aren't racially European, because they practice Islam. Linguistically and religiously, Finnish, Hungarian and Basque are not European languages, and Islam is not a European religion. By the same token, I've seen people claim Armenians, an Asiatic people, are racially European because they are Christians. All of these arguments don't hold much water with me; are English-speaking Christian Africans or Spanish-speaking Christian Amerindians racially European, because of their language and religion? Are Indians and Pakistanis, who do speak Indo-European languages, white? The answer to all of these questions is 'no'.



The best and most concise definition I can offer you, then, is this: people of exclusively native European ancestry. The white race does not include Jews, Turks, the Sami/Lapps, Roma gypsies, Armenians, Azeris, Kazakhs, Tatars, Chechens, or Latin American mestizos. I am undecided whether Cypriots or people from the Caucasus Mountains are white. It does, however, include Greeks, Italians, Spaniards, Portuguese, Maltese, and every other Euro-Mediterranean group - to say otherwise is divisive, baseless, nefarious nonsense, designed to disassociate Northern Europeans from the glorious civilisations of Greece and Rome, and thus to denigrate them as little more than barbarian savages.



Now that is out of the way without getting bogged down in too much technical detail, I'll present to you my evidence that white people are on the way to extinction, if current trends continue.

[Aryan]

Let's look specifically at some individual nations, and see how their white population is faring.



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA



White births now account for less than half of all births in the United States. As if that wasn't a bad enough indicator for the future of the white race, this next article illustrates that, for the first time ever in US history, the white death rates outnumber the white birth rates. These two facts, combined with increasing mass immigration from non-white countries, means that if present trends continue white Americans will soon be a minority.



UNITED KINGDOM



A 2013 article highlights that in 2011, 31% of children born in the UK were born to one foreign parent. In the same year, it was shown that 18% of children born were born to two foreign parents, meaning altogether 49% of children born in the UK that year had foreign ancestry. Professor David Coleman, of Oxford University, said: "On current trends European populations will become more ethnically diverse, with the possibility that today's majority ethnic groups will no longer comprise a numerical majority." What he means, then, without all the politically correct euphemisms that he has to use, is that whites will be a minority in Britain before long. How long? 2066. Already, white British people are a minority at 45% in London, with another 15% being non-British whites. So, only 60% of London is white, according to the 2011 Census. Is that acceptable? Would it be acceptable if Abuja was 45% Nigerian, or would it be labelled what it is - population replacement?



ITALY



According the Italian National Office of Statistics, the fertility rate of Italian women was 1.41 per head in 2009. This doesn't meet the 2.1 target needed just to replace the existing Italian population. Italy's fertility rate has been below replacements levels for over three decades now. By 2050, Italy will be a country with a birth rate that has been continuously below zero population growth for 75 years. Italy's birth rate in 1950 was almost twice its death rate. But the death rate equaled the birth rate in 1985, exceeds it today and will be approaching twice the birth rate by 2050. Italy is an aging country. Italians are dying out. By 2100, assuming present trends continue, Italy will no longer exist.



GREECE



Greece may seem an odd choice for this list, being relatively small, but seeing as European civilisation all traces back to Greece, and Greece has done more than any other to grow and defend that legacy, I thought it would be poignant to illustrate the Greek demographic crisis in a little depth. Greece has a dangerously low total fertility rate, well below replacement levels at 1.3. Greece also has a rapidly-aging population and a death rate that far outnumbers the birth rate (by 16,300) and because of the economic crisis Greeks are leaving in droves. This all means that in decades, Greece will cease to be a viable nation-state.



GERMANY



The 2011 fertility rate for Germany was just 1.36 per woman. Again, well below the 2.1 necessary just for replacement. Only 663,000 babies were born in Germany in 2011, the lowest in history - contrast this to the peak, in 1964 when German births (east and west) reached 1.4 million. That's over a 50% decrease in less than 50 years, and combined with mass immigration into Germany from Turkey, the wider Middle East and Africa, will mean that Germans will soon be a minority in Germany.



UKRAINE



The demographic decline in Ukraine is another tale of woe. Under the Soviets, the Ukrainian total fertility rate generally met the replacement target and at some points well exceeded it, resulting in a steady population boost, from very low levels post-Holodomor (a cold-blooded extermination attempt) in the 1940s to 1993, when the decline started. In 2001, Ukraine's fertility rate was the extremely low 1.1 child per woman. Deaths outnumbered births, resulting in an annual population decrease of of 373,000 and is now decreasing at around half a million every single year. In 1990, the total population of Ukraine was 52 million. Today, in 2014, it is 45 million - a population decrease of 7 million in 24 years. Ukraine's situation is very similar to the Italian one, but Ukrainian life expectancy is significantly lower. Ukrainians, too, are on the way to extinction unless things change.

[Aryan]

The motives for white genocide are manifold, ideological and pragmatic. For one thing, the European race has many qualities which are a threat to the consumerist, globalist NWO and their dream of a world filled with hedonistic slaves who care only about beer, porn, football and television. Europeans have always been innovators, inventors, explorers and pioneers. Europeans have always been warriors, diplomats, statesmen, traders and trailblazers. European genius invented electricity, the steam-engine, the motor car, the airplane, the radio, the television, the computer, the Internet, they were the first to go into space, and so on, they invented nearly everything of worth in the world today. This is not supremacism, or jingoism, just facts.



There is also, amongst many (but certainly not all) non-white people, a burning hatred of Europeans because of historical grievances and unsettled disputes, and because of desire for "revenge". Anti-racism never extends to white people, and why would it? The word "racist" was invented by Leon Trotsky, a Jewish communist with a pathological hatred of white people as exhibited by his role in the Red Holocaust, perpetrated by Bolsheviks against gentiles. If you thought Josef Stalin was bad, well how about Leon Trotsky who complained that Stalin wasn't "ruthless" enough? Racism against white people is permitted, and encouraged, because the controllers hate white people and are working around the clock to destroy them. How ironic, then, that "anti-racists" are the biggest racists of them all. With communism, though, this is always the way - things are always described as the opposite of what they really are.



Finally, and most crucially, I want to talk about the methods the NWO are using in their pursuit of their aim, white genocide.



Mass Immigration and Multiculturalism:



Mass immigration and multiculturalism have been forced upon the West, without any semblance of a mandate. No one voted on these policies, and yet here they are. So much for democracy. But then, democracy isn't about freedom and choice, and was never intended to be. It's designed to perpetuate the very opposite, to fool the people into thinking they control their own destinies.



Mass immigration is a virulent weapon against Western (and only Western) societies. It is designed to water down and confuse the tenets of national life. Multiculturalism is a crime, and cannot work. Why should invading cultures have a right to be treated the same as the indigenous one(s)? Why should they be recognised? I often hear from proponents of mass immigration and multiculturalism that we are "all one", and must learn to "tolerate" each other. In my view, this is just an appeal to emotion and attempt to guilt-trip Europeans into accepting alien systems of life, which have no relevance to and are usually incompatible with their own. What "tolerance" really means is "shut up white man, and accept your doom!" The whole dogma of "tolerance" really is farcical, if scrutinised with a critical eye - all cultures are not equal, all cultures are not interchangeable. Why should Europeans "tolerate" wholly alien lifestyles? There are far too many conflicts of interests and differences. To name but a few: language, national loyalty, morals, values, customs and interpretations of the family. Why should the natives adjust to suit foreigners, in the countries their ancestors built and bled for? How dare bleeding-heart liberals and politicians tell the people to "tolerate" it, and call them racist if they do not?

[Aryan]

Mass immigration also has the added effect of enabling corporations to scam both native and migrant alike - by flooding Europe with migrants from the Third World, who will willingly accept a lower wage and worse conditions, they force the indigenous people to either accept the worse conditions, or be unemployed. In a homogenous country there can be no such ultimatum, for there aren't armies of foreign workers ready to take jobs that should be given to indigenous people. It enables businesses to treat workers poorly, because they know they can just hire in workers from abroad who aren't anywhere near as fussy. This is where the absolutely ridiculous "immigrants do the jobs we won't do" fallacy comes from. These jobs were done before mass immigration, and would be done again without immigrants. It's insulting to suggest white people are somehow lazy, and the finger of blame is never pointed at greedy big businesses for thinking they can (and to be fair to them, they can; the government won't stop them!) treat the native population like they're doing them some sort of massive favour.



I'm no fan of David Icke, but the man speaks some truths and puts it rather well on page 430 of The Global Conspiracy (and how to end it):



"One major way of destroying a sense of nationhood over the generations and opening the way for world government is to have an influx of people from other cultures. The idea is that the native one loses its unchallenged status of the prime blueprint for what constitutes being "British", "German" or whatever. Gradually, what being "British" actually means becomes blurred in the melting pot of competing cultures until they pretty much merge into a cocktail that defies definition. Such an indefinable perception of "nation" is far more willing to concede power to the world government structure..."







Miscegenation:



In 1900, white people were 35% of the global population. Now, due to miscegenation and mass immigration, aswell as population booms in Asia and Africa, are less than half that - 17% to be precise. If this continues, what percentage of the world population will be European in 2100? 5%? Less? How about less than 2%?



With other organisms, hybridisation is the surest way to extinction of sub-species. In this case, the Europoid sub-species of the human race. This is because hybrids aren't as genetically strong as their purebred counterparts. For instance, white people almost certainly cannot get sickle cell anaemia - but those who are mixed can. It's also incredibly unlikely that a mixed-race individual will be able to get blood, organ or bone-marrow donations from either parent, should they need it - this is due to the difference in blood type, and it's much more likely that you will be able to find a blood match from your own race, and obviously mixed-race people don't share the race of either of their parents; not fully, anyway.



Mixed-race offspring cannot properly identify with any nation or culture. They are neither one nor the other, and are indigenous to nowhere. There are many accounts on the Internet of mixed-race people suffering a lifelong identity crisis, unable to find real belonging with anyone. This is cruel and unfair, but sadly it is the way of nature. The reality is that race is not just about skin colour. There are a whole host of other differences: physical, biological, cultural, mental, and psychological. If it were just about pigmentation, then one could not reasonably object to race-mixing, in the same way that one cannot reasonably object to people with brown hair breeding with people with blonde hair. But it is not just about pigmentation. There are 4 main pillars of identity - family, religion, race and nationality. How can someone who is mixed identify with the last two?

[Aryan]

Race-mixing leads to global homogenisation, for all races, and that's no doubt what the elites want - a grey, monotone, uniform world with people who have no real loyalties to anywhere so are much easier to control than ethnically pure societies, much like David Icke says in the quote I provided above. Why would someone who is not ethnically or at least racially English (or any white nation) care about that nation, when they have no deep-rooted ties to it?



Miscegenation is always promoted in the media (which is owned by the same people who own the government) for these reasons. It's ultimately destructive, and is the most vicious, spiteful and callous form of racism, for it dilutes two races with the goal of destroying the white race. I need not point out any particular examples to you of the MSM promotion of miscegenation, you need only turn on your television, or read a newspaper or a magazine, or watch a Hollywood film. It is everywhere, it is obviously being promoted for a reason; and do we think, just this once, that the NWO are doing it to be nice, because they want to help us, because it's for our own good? NO! They are doing it because they are power-hungry, and white people are the staunchest obstacle in the way to their liberal, cultural Marxist utopia. It erodes all national boundaries and variables that make countries distinct, having the intended effect of making the whole globe far easier to control.



Incidentally, Muhammad Ali has similar thoughts:

[Aryan]

Men and women alike have been attacked by social engineering to disassociate sex from fertility, and sexual liberalism is a sure sign of a decaying and dying society. Sex was once seen as a highly significant, intimate act to be done in a stable, loving and committed relationship with someone you love and care about deeply, and where the consequences were properly understood and accepted - now, it has been reduced to nothing more than "fun", where people will willingly jump into bed with strangers after a few drinks. When sex is regarded with such casuality and offhandedness, and not as the life-giving act it is, it leads to contraception and abortion - the two most effective ways of keeping the population down. Before, people knew exactly that with sex came a high risk of pregnancy and there was no way to reverse that, other than through illegal and highly dangerous abortions. Therefore, sex was something to be undertaken with the greatest care and only when one was in a situation to be able to deal with its natural consequences, and provide and commit to raising their offspring in a stable and healthy environment. It would certainly not be done in the careless, casual way it is today if abortion and contraception were not available, and consequences had to be dealt with properly - but today, abortion is a way of attempting to evade the unescapable law that actions have consequences. The committed eugenicist and founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, percieved all of this very well.



Men are also portrayed negatively in the media, generally. Think of the Homer Simpson archetype: a useless, bumbling oaf who puts his own selfish, fleeting desires above everyone else and can't be trusted with anything important. Realise how bad it is, when the Homer Simpson archetype is actually kinder than the other image promoted, which is that all men are liars who can't be trusted and are out for only one thing (sadly, this does apply to many men, but it is not an inherent part of their nature; it is taught by society, in the vacuum left by bad parenting). This isn't true, but it doesn't stop it being promoted. As a rebellion against this, women are encouraged to "put themselves first" by engaging in "liberating" activities such as promiscuity, heavy substance abuse and general narcissistic and hedonistic practice. In the words of Henry Makow, this is a "cruel hoax", because it alienates one half of the species from the other. It is most cruel to women, who are told their natural, biological urges are not real and are a construct, and should be resisted at all costs. On the flip side, the same derisive, negative messages are also aimed at men: that women just nag, hold men down, and bleed them dry; and that settling down to start, protect and provide for a family (again, the inherent desires of a male) is "boring".



There is also the matter of the liberalised divorce courts, where there is no protection for either party - the man can leave his wife with 2 kids and go with another woman, and vice-versa, the woman can leave her husband and disappear with the children. Where is the security? It's understandable that some people are reluctant, then, to start a family - as was the intention.



Because of all of this, a record number of women in England and Wales, 20%, are reaching 45 years of age without any children. Of course, I am NOT saying women should be chained to the kitchen - on the contrary. 45 is widely considered to be, roughly, the end of a woman's childbearing years. Consider that only 2 or 3 children per woman are needed to maintain steady population growth, there is no need for a woman to give up her own personal ambitions of a career or whatever else she may want to do in her personal life - they are not mutually exclusive. To maintain the 2.1 fertility rate, a woman doesn't even need to have her first child until she is at least 35, if she so desires. To increase and maintain a healthy birth rate across society is not to hold women back or crush their own personal goals and priorities, it's very much possible to do both. It's not necessary for women to immediately start having children at 18, and no one is asking for that.

[Aryan]

Ethnomasochism:



Ethnomasochism, or racial self-hatred, is a despicable phenomenon promoted with the sole intention of disarming any white resistance to their own eradication, and worse - converting them to approve of it (see: Stockholm Syndrome). Ethnomasochism manifests in a lot of ways. One is the bizarre behaviour of radical left "activists", who campaign for obscure causes in far-off lands whilst ignoring the grinding poverty occurring to their own people right under their noses. Such people often go out to Africa, Asia or Latin America and do charity work, while Western Europe has hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people starving and homeless right now. Of course, helping out your own people in your own country is not "glamorous", and doesn't attract the back-slapping from fellow concerned liberals or the artificial buzz of appearing to be totally non-racist and "tolerant". Another way this phenomenon manifests itself is the feeling that, just by being white, one has committed a greivous crime against humanity and that the only way to rectify such a transgression is not to inflict upon the world any more evil white babies, and instead procreate with members of other races (miscegenation) or adopt children from Third World countries and share with them your white privilege, thereby lessening the burdens inflicted upon them by the wickedness of your ancestors and absolve yourself of any blame. Both of these actions are extremely common amongst celebrities and the rich and famous, especially the latter. The media love nothing more than to report on Worthless Celebrity #1's latest adoptee from Africa, and such celebrities do it for their own image and public relations - which is infinitely cruel to the poor children involved.



Because of self-hatred, we see left-aligned white people rushing to denounce and condemn their own ancestors, their history, their culture, country and traditions. The same people rush to adopt and take on cultures totally alien to their natural one, and we see this manifest itself in many ways - white 'Rastafarians', young white people who behave as if they are black (known in the US and UK as "wiggers"), and white liberal types who extol the virtues of every single culture and civilisation around the world - apart from European culture and civilisation, which they view as inherently evil and oppressive. What is wrong with your own identity forged from the labour of your ancestors? Why not be proud of that, and exhibit this pride, rather than desperately try and cling onto someone else's? Deep down, white self-haters know that their outlook is completely abnormal and unhealthy, and this is why people on the far left generaly use extreme methods to cope, such as drugs, alcohol, promiscuous sex, self-harming, anti-depressants/prescription medication, and even suicide attempts. It is to dull the pain caused by the loss of their group identity (a natural human need; for we are pack animals, not lone wolves), inflicted upon them by social engineers.



"You're obliged to pretend respect for people and institutions you think absurd. You live attached in a cowardly fashion to moral and social conventions you despise, condemn and know lack all foundation. It is that permanent contradiction between your ideas and desires and all the dead formalities and vain pretenses of your civilisation which makes you sad, troubled and unbalanced. In that intolerable conflict you lose all joy of life and all feeling of personality, because at every moment they suppress and restrain and check the free play of your powers. That's the poisoned and mortal wound of the civilised world." - Octave Mirbeau

[Aryan]

Cultural Marxism:



Cultural Marxism is an amalgamation of Marxian and Freudian psychology. It is Marxism transformed from economics into culture and social politics, and over the last 60 years has gradually been seeping into every pore of Western society. Cultural Marxism exists to attack the glue that holds European society together, and has done so very successfully by pretending to act in the name of freedom. Liberalism, sexual liberalism, degenerate art, hedonism, mass immigration, feminism, promotion of drugs and alcohol, promotion of stupidity as "cool" and intelligence as undesirable and the encouragement aimed at youths to take up low-IQ and base activities rather than anything useful or meaningful, the ridiculing and attacking of nationalism, national identity and religion, and most crucially of all, the undermining of the family and local communities are all common themes promoted and advanced by cultural Marxism to isolate people in their own little bubbles and make their takeover of Western nations so much easier.



Cultural Marxism was used by a group of radical left intellectuals from the Frankfurt School, when they came up with a report on how to destroy nations. I have listed just 11 of the most important ways in which cultural Marxism attacks traditional, European, Christian society:



1. The creation of racism offences



2. Continual change to create confusion



3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children



4. The undermining of schools' and teachers' authority



5. Huge immigration to destroy identity



6. The promotion of excessive drinking



7. Emptying of churches



8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime



9. Dependency on the state or state benefits



10. Control and dumbing down of media



11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family.



Sound familiar? A more detailed overview of the history of the Frankfurt School can be found here. (Note - as with all the links I've shared, I haven't looked at everything on the websites and do not necessarily agree with or share the opinions of the authors of the material on other issues, so if you find something you don't like please don't hold it against me.)



I could write a huge, detailed analysis of cultural Marxism, but I want to restrict myself to keeping to the parts that are particularly relevant to the subject of white genocide, which I believe the above 11 points are. The first 10 points really all add up to the 11th, which is "encouraging the breakdown of the family". The family unit is the building block of any successful civilisation throughout history, all across the world and in all time periods. Family is the root of all identity and sense of companionship and unity. From family comes community, from community comes nation. To attack the family, by rubbishing it and portraying it as an oppressive relic of a bygone era dominated by the church, is to attack the fibre of the nation. This is the REAL reason for feminism and its male counterparts such as the MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way), to divide men from women and make the establishment of families as difficult as possible. And it's succeeding.

[Aryan]

Political Correctness:



Finally, and I don't need to be too verbose here because I'm sure most people know that political correctness is the manipulation of language in order to suppress any thoughts that are not in-line with the dominant and "accepted" majority - rather like George Orwell's Newspeak, where the vocabulary is so limited that it makes it almost impossible to speak out with any real meaning. Political correctness is, by and large, a product of the Frankfurt School. In brief and unapologetic terms, political correctness is the pandering to weak and sensitive souls who can't take the real, unadulterated truth and so need it watered down to make it acceptable to their blue pill, liberal mentalities. In the context of white demographic genocide, political correctness is used to smother discussion about the important topics I have raised by bludgeoning people with a volley of inanities like "racist!, "homophobe!", "sexist!", "anti-Semite!", "bigot!" and so on. White people who express concern about cultural Marxism or anything else covered within this thread, on forums generally or on the wider alternative media are immediately met with a hailstorm of names and slurs designed to instill in them a guilt complex and shame them into silence. Do not be fooled or disheartened by it, for it means they are losing and want you to shut up.

[Renee]

Sourced from?.....Did you do the "research", did you write that "article"?

If not, learn how to cite properly, it's common ethical courtesy...attempting to pass someone else's work off as your own is at the very least a violation of intellectual property and at worst fraud.



Maybe you should have included the final statement of the post so you don't look like too big of a scumbag bigot.....



"I don't hate anybody and certainly don't condone or support violence of any kind and am not advocating that in any shape or form. I support genuine diversity, I like having a planet full of life in all its natural, beautiful forms. It's necessary to make that absoutely clear, to avoid any accusations or ad hominem attacks."

https://truth-zone.net/forum/general-discussion/63692-white-genocide.html">https://truth-zone.net/forum/general-di ... ocide.html">https://truth-zone.net/forum/general-discussion/63692-white-genocide.html



Because unless you are "Seaic" on the alt-right Truth Zone forum, you cribed that faux intellectual diatribe from some one else.



Nice opinion piece though.....a little long, extremely controversial and tired but nonetheless a nice try in stormfronting up the place..... ac_lmfao

[Anonymous]

Let's look specifically at some individual nations, and see how their white population is faring.



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA



White births now account for less than half of all births in the United States. As if that wasn't a bad enough indicator for the future of the white race, this next article illustrates that, for the first time ever in US history, the white death rates outnumber the white birth rates. These two facts, combined with increasing mass immigration from non-white countries, means that if present trends continue white Americans will soon be a minority.



UNITED KINGDOM



A 2013 article highlights that in 2011, 31% of children born in the UK were born to one foreign parent. In the same year, it was shown that 18% of children born were born to two foreign parents, meaning altogether 49% of children born in the UK that year had foreign ancestry. Professor David Coleman, of Oxford University, said: "On current trends European populations will become more ethnically diverse, with the possibility that today's majority ethnic groups will no longer comprise a numerical majority." What he means, then, without all the politically correct euphemisms that he has to use, is that whites will be a minority in Britain before long. How long? 2066. Already, white British people are a minority at 45% in London, with another 15% being non-British whites. So, only 60% of London is white, according to the 2011 Census. Is that acceptable? Would it be acceptable if Abuja was 45% Nigerian, or would it be labelled what it is - population replacement?



ITALY



According the Italian National Office of Statistics, the fertility rate of Italian women was 1.41 per head in 2009. This doesn't meet the 2.1 target needed just to replace the existing Italian population. Italy's fertility rate has been below replacements levels for over three decades now. By 2050, Italy will be a country with a birth rate that has been continuously below zero population growth for 75 years. Italy's birth rate in 1950 was almost twice its death rate. But the death rate equaled the birth rate in 1985, exceeds it today and will be approaching twice the birth rate by 2050. Italy is an aging country. Italians are dying out. By 2100, assuming present trends continue, Italy will no longer exist.



GREECE



Greece may seem an odd choice for this list, being relatively small, but seeing as European civilisation all traces back to Greece, and Greece has done more than any other to grow and defend that legacy, I thought it would be poignant to illustrate the Greek demographic crisis in a little depth. Greece has a dangerously low total fertility rate, well below replacement levels at 1.3. Greece also has a rapidly-aging population and a death rate that far outnumbers the birth rate (by 16,300) and because of the economic crisis Greeks are leaving in droves. This all means that in decades, Greece will cease to be a viable nation-state.



GERMANY



The 2011 fertility rate for Germany was just 1.36 per woman. Again, well below the 2.1 necessary just for replacement. Only 663,000 babies were born in Germany in 2011, the lowest in history - contrast this to the peak, in 1964 when German births (east and west) reached 1.4 million. That's over a 50% decrease in less than 50 years, and combined with mass immigration into Germany from Turkey, the wider Middle East and Africa, will mean that Germans will soon be a minority in Germany.



UKRAINE



The demographic decline in Ukraine is another tale of woe. Under the Soviets, the Ukrainian total fertility rate generally met the replacement target and at some points well exceeded it, resulting in a steady population boost, from very low levels post-Holodomor (a cold-blooded extermination attempt) in the 1940s to 1993, when the decline started. In 2001, Ukraine's fertility rate was the extremely low 1.1 child per woman. Deaths outnumbered births, resulting in an annual population decrease of of 373,000 and is now decreasing at around half a million every single year. In 1990, the total population of Ukraine was 52 million. Today, in 2014, it is 45 million - a population decrease of 7 million in 24 years. Ukraine's situation is very similar to the Italian one, but Ukrainian life expectancy is significantly lower. Ukrainians, too, are on the way to extinction unless things change.

So, knock up a lot of white British women and convince as many of your low income mates to do the same and your problem is solved. The number of people on the dole will go through the roof, but they're  will be more whites.

[cc]

So, knock up a lot of white British women and convince as many of your low income mates to do the same and your problem is solved.

Do you think he & they are "up" to the job?

[Renee]

Let's look specifically at some individual nations, and see how their white population is faring.



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA



White births now account for less than half of all births in the United States. As if that wasn't a bad enough indicator for the future of the white race, this next article illustrates that, for the first time ever in US history, the white death rates outnumber the white birth rates. These two facts, combined with increasing mass immigration from non-white countries, means that if present trends continue white Americans will soon be a minority.



UNITED KINGDOM



A 2013 article highlights that in 2011, 31% of children born in the UK were born to one foreign parent. In the same year, it was shown that 18% of children born were born to two foreign parents, meaning altogether 49% of children born in the UK that year had foreign ancestry. Professor David Coleman, of Oxford University, said: "On current trends European populations will become more ethnically diverse, with the possibility that today's majority ethnic groups will no longer comprise a numerical majority." What he means, then, without all the politically correct euphemisms that he has to use, is that whites will be a minority in Britain before long. How long? 2066. Already, white British people are a minority at 45% in London, with another 15% being non-British whites. So, only 60% of London is white, according to the 2011 Census. Is that acceptable? Would it be acceptable if Abuja was 45% Nigerian, or would it be labelled what it is - population replacement?



ITALY



According the Italian National Office of Statistics, the fertility rate of Italian women was 1.41 per head in 2009. This doesn't meet the 2.1 target needed just to replace the existing Italian population. Italy's fertility rate has been below replacements levels for over three decades now. By 2050, Italy will be a country with a birth rate that has been continuously below zero population growth for 75 years. Italy's birth rate in 1950 was almost twice its death rate. But the death rate equaled the birth rate in 1985, exceeds it today and will be approaching twice the birth rate by 2050. Italy is an aging country. Italians are dying out. By 2100, assuming present trends continue, Italy will no longer exist.



GREECE



Greece may seem an odd choice for this list, being relatively small, but seeing as European civilisation all traces back to Greece, and Greece has done more than any other to grow and defend that legacy, I thought it would be poignant to illustrate the Greek demographic crisis in a little depth. Greece has a dangerously low total fertility rate, well below replacement levels at 1.3. Greece also has a rapidly-aging population and a death rate that far outnumbers the birth rate (by 16,300) and because of the economic crisis Greeks are leaving in droves. This all means that in decades, Greece will cease to be a viable nation-state.



GERMANY



The 2011 fertility rate for Germany was just 1.36 per woman. Again, well below the 2.1 necessary just for replacement. Only 663,000 babies were born in Germany in 2011, the lowest in history - contrast this to the peak, in 1964 when German births (east and west) reached 1.4 million. That's over a 50% decrease in less than 50 years, and combined with mass immigration into Germany from Turkey, the wider Middle East and Africa, will mean that Germans will soon be a minority in Germany.



UKRAINE



The demographic decline in Ukraine is another tale of woe. Under the Soviets, the Ukrainian total fertility rate generally met the replacement target and at some points well exceeded it, resulting in a steady population boost, from very low levels post-Holodomor (a cold-blooded extermination attempt) in the 1940s to 1993, when the decline started. In 2001, Ukraine's fertility rate was the extremely low 1.1 child per woman. Deaths outnumbered births, resulting in an annual population decrease of of 373,000 and is now decreasing at around half a million every single year. In 1990, the total population of Ukraine was 52 million. Today, in 2014, it is 45 million - a population decrease of 7 million in 24 years. Ukraine's situation is very similar to the Italian one, but Ukrainian life expectancy is significantly lower. Ukrainians, too, are on the way to extinction unless things change.

So, knock up a lot of white British women and convince as many of your low income mates to do the same and your problem is solved. The number of people on the dole will go through the roof, but they're  will be more whites.

The sale of tooth brushes, dental floss and toothpaste will go down the shitter too.

[Anonymous]

So, knock up a lot of white British women and convince as many of your low income mates to do the same and your problem is solved.

Do you think he & they are "up" to the job?

I doubt it, but I think that John Bo Duke Schneider guy is. He hasn't worked in while. Maybe, SCOUSE and co can talk him into accepting a new position.

[Renee]

"Greece may seem an odd choice for this list, being relatively small, but seeing as European civilisation all traces back to Greece"

Does anyone here that is a correct statement?



That's the popular concept but it's mostly wrong....Greek civilization expanded eastward (the known world) not westward into Europe. Even Rome which owed some of its early cultural roots to the greeks, only expanded its influence into what was then called Gaul (France) and parts of Spain and Britain and it's hold in those regions was tenuous at best. It's real expansion and influence was always eastward.



Eastward, where all the so-called non whites lived, bred and created advanced civilizations was always the jewel in the ancient world.



In fact even our ideas of democracy are as much a Nordic viking and germanic concept as it is greek.



Just one observation of a poorly researched alt-right fluff piece passed off as an intellectual discourse on white supremacy.