The Alt-Right and Abortion

UPDATE: I’ve come across some new information.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, the abortion breakdown by race in 2008 was as follows: 36.1 percent Non-Hispanic White, 29.6 percent Black, 9.4 percent Other, and 24.9 percent Hispanic. In other words, more White women than Black women are getting abortions.

That’s not the most interesting thing though. In terms of education, the breakdown is as follows: 12.3 percent less than a high school education, 28.3 percent high school graduates, 39.5 percent some college, and 19.9 percent college graduate. Over half of women in the United States who get abortions either have a college education or have been to college.

Here is my response to “The Pro-Life Temptation” which was posted at Radix Journal this afternoon:

“I understand the pro-life temptation. The kinds of people who support abortion access most fervently are those who stand for the things we oppose: selfishness, atomization, the “liberation” of women, and leftist identity politics. In popular culture, legalized abortion is tied to “reproductive freedom,” which has liberated women from the horrible fate of being wives and mothers and allowed them to pursue more meaningful lives as cubicle drones.”

What is the “pro-choice movement”?

It is liberalism applied to the family: the freedom of a rights-bearing individualist to divorce your spouse, the freedom to discard your offspring for being inconvenient to your chosen lifestyle, the freedom of liberated women to go to college in their peak years of fertility, the freedom to engage in miscegenation and fornication, the freedom to dedicate your life to pursuing a career and material rewards without suffering the shame of social stigma, the freedom to engage in a homosexual relationship, etc.

None of these things, which were strongly taboo until a few decades ago, are conducive to racial flourishing. We shouldn’t be surprised that they are all strongly associated with racial and cultural degeneration. Previous generations thought the price paid by society was too high for that much individual freedom.

“First off, the alt Right appreciates what is superior in man, in the Nietzschean sense. Most members of the alt Right applaud countries like Japan and South Korea for having low out-of-wedlock birth rates and not taking in Muslim or African refugees. We don’t simply say “who cares what they do, they’re not my tribe.” Rather, we recognize that such people have built impressive civilizations, and we believe that it is in the interest of humanity that these nations continue to exist, and not adopt the suicidal policies of the West.”

Seriously, what parent actually thinks in these terms?

Aside from rare cases of detectable genetic diseases, who observes their unborn or newborn child, ponders whether it is going to be “superior” or “inferior,” and then decides whether or not it should live? I will hazard a guess: most likely a childless eugenicist of which there are far too many on the internet.

BTW, Nietszche died childless from syphillis in an insane asylum, so he is hardly any guide to the family.

“Second, we on the alt Right have an appreciation of tribalism and identity. We realize that people are not just autonomous individuals. Life gains its meaning through connections to other members of our families, tribes, and nations.

Being pro-life flies in the face both of these principles.”

Speaking for myself alone here, I care about the welfare of my descendants, and there is nothing that flies in the face of that more than abortion. If you are willing to kill your own genetic offspring, why would you care about the fate or welfare of more distantly related strangers? Can we reasonably expect a culture that sanctions killing off its own posterity to be anything other than indifferent to its own long term survival?

“First of all, the pro-life position is clearly dysgenic. A 2011 study showed that in 2008, while 16 percent of women aged 15-44 lived below the poverty line, among women who had abortions, the number was 42 percent. Hispanic and African-American women made up a combined 31 percent of this age group, but almost 55 percent of those who chose to terminate a pregnancy. The reasons behind these patterns aren’t hard to figure out. In a world with reliable birth control, it is quite easy to avoid an unwanted pregnancy; the only ones who can’t are the least intelligent and responsible members of society: women who are disproportionately Black, Hispanic, and poor.”

In 2012, White women accounted for 51 percent of abortions and non-White women the other 49 percent of abortions. So, for every non-White abortion, there was a corresponding White abortion; nationwide, it is a net racial wash.

“A natural experiment in Colorado shows what happens when a state makes contraception and abortion more freely available. Over the last decade, the state has moved to the Left, and in 2009 it began offering free or low-cost long-acting contraception to poorer women. The state provided intrauterine devices and implants that, unlike condoms or the pill, did not require that the user be responsible enough to plan ahead. Within a few years, the birth rate of low-income women plummeted. In states where Republican legislatures have enacted a pro-life agenda, the opposite has happened.”

FYI in 2012, White women accounted for 67 percent of abortions in Colorado.

“A study in Europe found that over 90 percent of mothers who were told that their babies were going to have Down’s syndrome did not continue the pregnancy. In 2011, it was estimated that there are now 30 percent fewer people with the disorder in the United States due to prenatal diagnosis. In the future, as such technologies improve, what the Left calls “reproductive freedom” will continue to be the justification for private-sector eugenics.”

This is ridiculous for two reasons:

1. First, only 1 out of every 691 babies born in the United States have Downs’ Syndrome, or about 5,000 a year. There are about 3,000 Downs’ Syndrome related abortions per year. That’s out of 699,202 abortions in 2012. In other words, DS accounts for less than 0.4% of abortions.

2. Second, the dysgenic threat posed by Downs’ Syndrome fecundity is … LOL.

“The idea that there are capable women out there who are aborting their babies as they delay marriage and climb the corporate ladder is a fantasy. When an intelligent, responsible woman does have an abortion, it is often because the baby has a disease or the pregnancy threatens her health, not because she or her boyfriend forget to use contraception.”

Except for the fact that this isn’t true:

“Poor women not trying to conceive are also three times more likely to get pregnant than their higher income counterparts (9 percent compared to 3 percent), and ultimately at 5 times more likely to give birth. In addition, abortion rates among the poor are lower, with 32 percent in the highest income bracket having an abortion compared to 9 percent of low-income terminations.

Among women who are not trying to conceive, 32 percent of pregnancies to affluent women end in abortion compared to only 9 percent of those to lower income women.

“Not only is the pro-life movement dysgenic, but its justifications rely on principles we generally reject.

Principles like … I don’t know, orienting our politics around leaving behind a better world for our own biological posterity, as opposed to abstract universal principles like “freedom.”

The alt Right is skeptical, to say the least, of concepts like “equality” and “human rights,” especially as bases for policy. The unborn fetus has no connection to anyone else in the community. If it is not even wanted by its own mother, criminalizing abortion means that the state must step in and say that the individual has rights as an individual, despite its lack of connection to any larger social group. This is no problem to those in the conservative movement, who decide right and wrong based on principles like “the right to life.”

For the record, outlawing abortion means that there isn’t an “individual right” or “freedom” of a woman to abort her own offspring, which in this case entails a rejection of liberalism. It also means asserting a state interest in protecting the welfare of unborn posterity.

It is no coincidence that some of the most pro-life politicians are those most excited about adopting children from Africa and those in their movement are among the conservatives most likely to denounce the “racism” of their political opponents.

This tells us nothing: abortion was illegal in the Jim Crow South, and the bizarre antics of modern evangelicals are hardly reflective of their predecessors just two or three generations ago.

“The mother-child bond is the strongest of human relationships, the one least subject to being altered by government policy or societal forces. While over the last decades, fathers have become more likely to walk out on their children and divorce rates have risen, there has been no similar rise in females abandoning their children.

There have been more sweeping changes in gender relations and the “mother-child bond” due to the Sexual Revolution over the last half century in this country – the most obvious being the 700,000 or so abortions a year – than there were in the previous 2,000 years of European history.

“When the parent-child bond does not exist for a pregnant woman, society has no business stepping in. Those who want to do so, by banning abortion because it’s “racist” or adopting children from Africa, are the ultimate cuckservatives.”

If there was ever a Trojan Horse, it is the “pro-choice movement.” A culture that believes in the right to abort its own offspring as a matter of principle, as a “choice,” will be apathetic or indifferent to its own racial survival, culturally degenerate, and likely aging and dying out. The last thing we need is to achieve an “ethnostate” like Japan only to throw it away by losing the will to perpetuate our own race like the Japanese.

“If there were to be a pro-life position that we could accept, it would be based on arguments about what is good for the community. The case would have to be made that abortion is what is decimating the White population and decreasing its quality.”

Abortion isn’t decimating the White population.

As we have seen, abortion is a net racial wash in the United States. For every non-White child that is aborted, a White child is also aborted. What is really decimating the White population is the principle behind the “pro-choice movement”: the notion that society is composed of rights-bearing individualists motivated by self-expression and fulfillment, each pursuing his or her own definition of the good, with no duty or obligation to any greater whole than satisfying their basest impulses.

DINKs celebrating the “childfree life” with their little dogs, fornication and family planning made possible by birth control, women pursuing careers and higher education in their twenties, rank materialism, rampant homosexuality and miscegenation, etc. That is having a much greater effect on overall White numbers than the number of White pregnancies which end in abortion.

“Yet the pro-life agenda would give us the worst of all worlds.

What could be worse than not having the freedom to abort your own child?

“Those whom we want to have children would continue to find a way to do what they wanted, while the birth rates among the worst members of society would explode. Childbearing among better classes would probably decrease even further under the strain of the inevitable increases in crime and redistributive policies that would follow.”

The better classes are already more likely to end an unwanted pregnancy in abortion than the lower classes. Childbearing among the better classes has been cut in half and sent into deeply negative territory in Europe mainly as a result of birth control and the erosion of sexual taboos.

“A better way is to make an honest case that feminism has been bad for women. There is no higher calling in life than continuing the species, and raising happy, healthy children who will be a benefit to society.”

The “pro-choice movement” is saying exactly the opposite of this: young women should have the “individual right” to kill their own offspring to pursue more worthwhile ends in life than giving birth to a child.

“Perhaps nothing is more important than advocating for a return to more natural relations between the sexes. But that does not mean we mindlessly oppose everything that the Left supports.”

Are there any real world examples of racially and culturally flourishing societies that have embraced the pro-choice movement?

“In reality, its positions lead to dysgenics and are justified through appeals to the same universalist principles that are allowing mass Third World immigration and other forms of suicidal liberalism.

The response to this is two-fold:

1. First, it is hardly “eugenic” when the better classes take advantage of birth control to become DINKs, or to have at most one child as they now do in much of Europe.

2. Second, the pro-choice movement is nothing but suicidal liberalism applied to the family. What could possibly be more suicidal than aborting your own genetic future and taking yourself out of having any genetic stake in the next generation?

“The alt Right, for both our own principles and the greater good, must oppose the pro-life agenda.”

Abortion is never about the “greater good.” Few women have abortions because they have weighed their options and decided it is what is best for society. Instead, they abort their children because they are convinced it is what is best for them. Among other things, this is why European countries like Spain, Greece, Italy and Russia are dying out because they have embraced a sick way of life – a culture of death – that is hostile to perpetuating their own existence.

165 Comments

  1. When you’re talking about the ideologues of Pro-Choice or Pro-Life movements, neither camp has done a damn thing to further a racial awakening. The point at which a non-racial view becomes a “movement” that divides two otherwise compatible individuals, it becomes a useless distraction and roadblock to success.

    I’m pro-Choice, but I think the notion of abortion being commonplace or emphasizing it as a “right” is a sign that society is in disarray and not giving its citizens enough of a positive culture or enough education, financial security and incentives to keep them from making dumb, irrational and harmful decisions. Abortion is really just one of many signs of atrophy. You can’t walk into a room full of women talking about how many abortions they’ve had and not come to the conclusion that you are in a room full of people whose lives are probably seriously fucked up. Walk into a room full of women talking about how many children they’ve had, you would come to the exact opposite conclusion.

    Having said that, I don’t believe that you fix society by micromanaging every aspect of that society. It just doesn’t work. The Sexual Revolution was created from a conservative movement that tried to stifle sexuality and keep it a dirty and completely taboo topic, instead of addressing it like rational adults and making it a positive aspect of our human existence. Many Conservatives understand topics about fiscal responsibility, but they absolutely don’t understand sociology and many aspects of human nature. If you’ve ever wondered why Conservatives always seem like they are having to play defense and never conserve much of anything anymore, well now you know why.

    Give people a true identity and a common culture, while giving them the right to protect that identity and culture, then you see issues like abortion slowly start to fix themselves. You will not “fix” the abortion issue until you first fix the racial issue.

    • German policy in the 30s might be a good guide. They tried to address demographic collapse during Weimar.

      • RamZPaul (the guy who hates 1488s) said, NSDAP lent people money to buy a house and every child they had, they deducted 25% from what was owed. Apparently the program paid for itself in 6 months, due to increased economic activity it caused.

        • I think you’d have to be doing liberal math to think it pays for itself in 6 months, but I do agree that incentives work. In the end we should have “both the carrot and the stick strategy” where desirable behavior is rewarded while undesirable behavior is penalized. A 2 pronged strategy is less likely to fail than a single pronged strategy.

  2. If we can just return abortion to Sanger’s stated vision of exterminating blacks I’ve no problem with abortion.

  3. Some good thought here. Lot of threads about this sensitive topic on the Internet. As most people I’d expect more responsibility from the women who’ve had 150 partners by 35 and aborted 37 times already, yet is going to be lonely and miserable by 45, when its not before that.

    Not trying to bash women here, I have mostly an open mind when it comes to dating, sex before marriage etc, this doesn’t bother me and as long as it’s kept private and legal (within age of conscent) is none of my business. Safe sex outside of marriage and relationship is probably still the way to go for hook-ups, aids and hepatitis have yet to be cured.

    Being pro-choice doesn’t necessarily mean pro-abortion. And you’re right, DS account for very few abortions. Aborting out of selfishness and personal convenience within a steady relationship or marriage bugs me a bit though.

    • All genetic defects likely account for less than 1 percent of abortions and have little bearing on the larger issue. And besides, even those who are born with serious genetic defects are already unlikely to reproduce.

      • How many abortion providers exist in Haiti or Congo? Most services appear to only be available in First World States.

        The Chinese are hot for Female Abortion as are the Indians. But that’s all I know about such practices in the rest of the world.

      • But having a child with a severe congenital defect likely limits the number of children some women will have. For instance, if the first child is a special needs child, then the mother will be less likely to have a large family. Also prenatal diagnostics is improving so I suspect that number will improve over time.

    • Removing a undeveloped wad of stem cells (which is what 99.9% of abortions amount to) isn’t killing a child.

      Hey, why don’t you alt-right faggots just go ahead an advocate for involuntary manslaughter charges against women who suffer miscarriages while you’re at it?

      • If you look at it from that vantagepoint, why isn’t the White race just a wad of cells with a pasty complexion? Why not kill children after they have been born? They are still developing and totally dependent on their parents.

        • Exactly. I mean, hey, we’re all just bags of DNA, right? We’re smarter than groids and more daring than Asians– Why not just replace ourselves with a pre-programmed AI? Fuck all this life and white society shit!

          • You write in mockery, but I think human extinction would actually be positive. Our lifes, even in the top countries, are constant pain and suffering. When you are not unemployed, you are sick, or you are robbed, or whatever.

            Christianity, like all religions, is a delusion. A mental trick to make us endure the endless drudgery life is.

            People ask “who are you to kill somebody?”… the right question is “who are you to beget somebody?” You can not answer it without either egoistic or religious arguments.

          • Anti-natalism is intellectualized melancholy. Earthly existence has always been struggle and suffering; the wise– who you assure yourself are deluded– have known this since antiquity.

            Atheism is a delusion, and anti-natalism is its logical conclusion.

            You are the result of a series of intellectual errors, building up since the Renaissance. Do the rest of us a favor and actualize your thirst for extinction, child.

          • Clever answer, but you concede my point when you say that earthly existence has always been struggle and suffering.

            In the end, why should we reproduce? Because we should, sayeth the Lord. We should because we should. It is impossible to give a rational answer.

            I did not say that Christianity was a bad delusion. Maybe we need it, after all. But as science evolves it will become increasingly difficult to be believe in God. How many intelligent, well-read people do really believe in God these days? And I mean actually and honestly believing, not just attending church on Sundays.

            I liked your final paragraph about the “intellectual errors”. Since I was a teenager I knew I did not want to marry or have kids (was raised on an intact and pretty normal family, so it wasn’t the result of any form of abuse). Maybe I have some sort of anomaly rather than a flawed reasoning.

          • As I said, it is not “your point” that earthly existence is primarily characterized by suffering. This has been known for ages.

            We should be fruitful and multiply upon the Earth because the suffering we encounter here is not of such a degree that there is no hope or love. In suffering, there is Truth. The suffering the damned souls of Hell inflict upon themselves and one another is worse. Giving into despair and convincing others not to have children only accelerates the culture of death brought about by modernity.

            You write as if “intelligent, well-read people” simply rationally arrive at the conclusion that God does not exist. This isn’t how it works. They are egged on by a hostile, thriving intellectual class in which the enemies of Christ are overrepresented. And they are egged on by their appetites and a decadent mainstream culture. Lust especially, which enslaves people and makes them more likely to reject God so they can enjoy their bodies and dodge the consequences. There is nothing edgy about being anti-Christian and catering to your libido instead; it’s just to be part of the moral mainstream, which doesn’t want you to feel regretful about anything.

            I would recommend you read Rene Guenon’s The Crisis of the Modern World, and look around at Western societies and their existing institutions. Western civilization has gone off the rails because it no longer has a spiritual foundation; its values have no substance without God. So its values have become relative, up to each individual to make their own. But if the lunatics run the asylum, the asylum will no longer be an asylum, and they will be seriously endangered. Some other force might simply enter the asylum and reorder things to its liking, which is precisely what is happening with Islam in Europe.

          • Great. I hope you enjoy it. I think you might find the critique of modernity by the Traditional School very compelling.

        • We’re developing for our lifetime, not to mention all those past 30 and still dependent on their parents. After the birth it’s still murder, says the Law. Child murder on top of that so…

        • As a matter of fact I am pro-infanticide. And as far as the “sacred” white race goes, I think 90% of it could stand to be exterminated right alongside everyone with a black or brown or yellow skin.

    • “If you would kill your own child, why would you care about the future of your race”

      This is why I take no interest in abortion, feminism, homosexuals, morality, transgender, etc. When you kick the anti-Whites out, the left wing lunacy goes with them.

    • I don’t care what Lakeishia is thinking when she chooses to abort the child. I only care that her fertility is suppressed.

      Your comment in the article above that abortion is a genetic wash is not valid for 2 reasons:

      1) the data only record the race of the mother, so we have to conclude that a *lot* of recorded white abortions are actually mulatto abortions.

      2) whites are still the majority so a 1:1 white:nonwhite abortion ratio would still be a net win for whites. Picture it this way; the uncivil war was about a 1:1 North:South mortality rate, but the yanks simply had more cannon fodder than we did, so they won, even though they were not more efficient fighters than we were.

      Regarding whether prochoice is good eugenics policy is very simple. Just answer this question:

      Who gets abortions at the highest rate? High quality women, or low quality women?

      Unless you are willing to argue that high quality women get abortions at the same rate as low quality women, then you have to concede that prochoice is an overall plus for eugenics.

      Just like muslims are laughing their heads off at the suicidal policies of the West, we should be laughing our heads off at this one suicidal policy of the Left. We should be secretly popping our corks and celebrating that on at least this one front, the Left is giving us the victory, then after a good celebration, we should focus our energy on other battlefronts, like discouraging mudsharking, increasing the (quality) white birth rate, secessionist activism, and many others.

      We can worry about the prochoice-prolife debate after we have secured an ethnostate with much better eugenics policies like sterilization in exchange for gibsmedats.

      • 1.) As far as I know, there is no data that suggests White abortions are due to multiracial pregnancies.

        2.) There are slightly more White abortions than non-White abortions, 51 to 49 percent.

        3.) Even if there were 100 more non-White abortions, the racial math wouldn’t justify aborting 350,000 or so White babies a year.

        4.) Affluent women are much more likely to end an unwanted pregnancy with an abortion.

        5.) Except there is no proof of any victory: general acceptance of abortion as a right is correlated with indifference and apathy toward changing racial demographics.

        6.) Japan is an example of an ethnostate whose people have lost the will to perpetuate their own existence.

        • Re Japan:
          To be expected when a country becomes wealthy and hi-tech. They spend too much time in school. Spend too much time paying school debt off and housing is unaffordable.

          Women need to marry when they are young. Leave it too late and they become overly fussy and infertile. Give a women a higher education and according to the statics, she may as well have been sterilized.

          • Women should be out of school by 12 and married by 16 that is the only way a healthy society should work. I told Crimson Tide this a couple years ago and she got so pissed at me she told me off. In the Antebellum South, the Aristocracy did school their daughters, but only in the female arts they didn’t make them into schoolteachers, that was a Yankee notion. In fact many female teachers in the South 1880 or so were Yankees for this very reason.

            Unfortunately, feminism cut both ways, many Southern Democrats believed in 1919 that Female Votes would prevent a Black Republican resurgance, yet they didn’t factor in generational change. Obviously our gr-grandmas who voted in the 20’s did so with their husband’s ticket but by the 1950s this was going away and by the 70s Feminism arrived. The fallacy of allowing women rights was our undoing

        • 1) To my knowledge the data isn’t being recorded, but we would be absolute fools not to accept that many of them (and I suspect a higher percentage than the general population) are mixed race babies.

          2) No problem. It’s still around 50:50 (You thought it was close enough to call it a wash earlier, so it makes no sense to make a big deal about a 2% split now.)

          3) If you count abortion as part of the race war where we still have the numerical advantage, and where lower quality white women are more likely to abort than high quality white women, then yes, it would be. This is much more eugenic, cost effective, and convenient warfare than sending intelligent and healthy men to die in combat.

          4a) Read: “Liberal women unwilling to sacrifice luxury for children are much more likely to end an unwanted pregnancy with an abortion.”

          4b) This statistic alone is meaningless. You have to consider also that affluent women are less likely to get an unwanted pregnancy than poor women, so the actual abortion rate per woman (or per child born) might still be lower for affluent than for poor women.

          5a) The proof of victory is in the data. Black women are around 4 times as likely to abort and Hispanics I think are around 2.5 times as likely to abort compared to white women.

          5b) It doesn’t matter what is correlated with what attitude. The end result is what matters. I am not making an argument based on “rights” or morality, but on the case that prochoice is working handily to our advantage. Libs are more likely to abort a given pregnancy than conservatives, and nonwhites are more likely to abort a given pregnancy than whites. Case closed.

          6) This is a meaningless statement with regard to the eugenics of prochoice vs prolife policy in America. You might as well say “Mexicans like hot peppers.” or “Many Russian men are alcoholics.”

          • 1.) Over at Radix, I used a different source and calculated 263,200 abortions to White mothers versus 256,900 abortions a year to Black mothers.

            2.) There is no evidence from either the KFF, CDC, or Guttmacher data to support the argument that abortion is anything but a racial wash.

            3.) It is just a big, bloody mess. Even if 100 more black babies were aborted than White babies, it wouldn’t justify killing 263,200 White babies a year.

          • 1) Don’t forget a disproportionate number of those 263,200 whites are going to be to degenerate white mothers, many of them carrying mulatto babies.

            2) The data you presented in #1 coupled with the knowledge that whites are still the majority of the population while blacks are about 13% is enough evidence to prove that pro-choice policy is a huge win for us. I hope you don’t expect KFF or CDC to put forth the argument and do the math to prove that abortion is a net win for conservative whites!

            3) We have every reason to believe that the majority of these white abortions are to less desirable whites, either the social underclass or very liberal. Very few quality white women are getting abortions. Even if you only look at the white abortions, you only need to ask yourself what kinds of women are most likely to abort: High quality white women, or low quality white women?

        • Intuitively, I would think, and through observation and anecdote, that at least a third of White women having abortions are due to multiracial pregnancies i.e. a White woman and a non-White man.
          I’ve often wondered why nice looking White women date rather unattractive, low value Black men and other non-Whites?

  4. As usual Hunter comes up with the actual numbers. Where he found them I don’t know, but, they sound real. Or close enough to be real.

  5. Solid piece overall. Minor point: “3,000 Downs’ Syndrome related abortions per year. That’s out of 699,202 abortions in 2012. In other words, DS accounts for less than 0.004% of abortions.”

    Couple of extra zeros there. Looks more like 0.43% of abortions. Doesn’t change the overall point, though.

  6. I am 100% against White abortions, of White babies, but I support Negro/Jew/Other Orc abortion at 110% – and think these sort of abortions must be mandated by law.

    • FYI, the official records always go by race of the mother, so a lot of the white women getting abortions are actually aborting mulatto babies. I bet someone with the time and the math skills could do a pretty good job of extrapolating the data based on the overall mudsharking rate.

      • Yes. Mudsharks need to have post-birth abortions. I am referring to the Mud sharks as well as their spawn.

          • Ms. Karns, it’s easy to call names when you are hiding behind a computer. You are an utter coward. I cannot believe that a school let’s you near children. You are a walking violation. Disgusting vile pig. Be careful, you granddaughter may grow up and marry a black man. May God have mercy on your hateful soul. I hope you have the mind to ask for for forgiveness before you burn in hell. May the Lord God in Heaven forgive you.

  7. The retards who oppose abortion (which includes alt-right faggots, christian scum, and white trashionalists in general) are just too weak and scared to physically fight back against the niggers and jews that are harming them, so they displace their cowardice and impotence by vilifying complete strangers who want to end an unwanted pregnancy.

    I would call you people pathetic, but it’s pretty self-explanatory on it’s own.

      • There ain’t anybody left here to race-war with anyway.

        I thought you guys were going to secede from the Union? Or are you just waiting to see how this Trump nonsense plays out? Odd that four years ago you couldn’t find enough bad things to say about the North and everyone in it, but now you’ve bandwagoned onto the yankeeist Yankee to ever come out of New York City. What gives with that?

        • Trump has been good for us:

          1.) He is highly unlikely to win.

          2.) He is running on and popularizing our core issues.

          3.) He is highly likely to do lasting damage to the Republicans.

          When this is all over, Trump will have done us a lot of good here.

          • I can’t get away from a “worse is better” outlook for our cause. I think that the best that could happen would be for Hillary to win so we could get the show on the road. If Trump wins, too many people will have renewed their (probably false) hope in America.
            Eastern European states didn’t get their freedom because USSR got a better president. They got their freedom because USSR fell apart due to mismanagement.

          • Eastern European states aren’t any more free today than they were during the time of the USSR. Today, they’re under the hegemony of either NATO or Russia.

          • There are cheap little raggedy packs of niggers here and there, but they just run away when you knock one of them down, so that hardly counts for anything. Detroit is just too desolate and depopulated for the scale of war that you’re imagining. The race war will happen in some other city, and probably where people least expect it.

          • You are so full of it. I guess Hunter is keeping you around just for the chuckles.

            Why don’t you spread your wisdom on amren if they haven’t already kicked you off.

          • Says the scared little punk who still lives in 1800’s. You say I’m full of it? I’m not the one who believes the blacker-than-ink American South will one day secede and all the niggers will happily go back to being second class citizens. Delusional moron. You wanna talk chuckles? How about you faggots going flaccid in front of a bunch illegal spics who showed up at one of your weak ass LOS rallies a couple years ago? Bunch of pussies. Can’t even stand your ground ON your ground. You Southerners are losers, same as you ever were.

  8. There are over five thousand nigger fetuses aborted daily in the US. That is a lot of niggers.

    It is a necessary evil, one that prevents future crime and the inevitable financial drain caused by negros.

      • So should abortions be outlawed for Whites but not for niggers? In a perfect world that would be great, but in reality that will not happen in our lifetime.

        Hence the “necessary evil” mentioned in my comment.

        • Final Solution for all of this? (Because abortion is murder of the most innocent)

          In America (a land founded by whites, for whites, and ‘our posterity’) abortions for whites should be illegal, punishable by death (eye for an eye, i.e., Theonomy).

          For non-whites, PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY DON’T BELONG HERE, we are left with two scenarios:
          Repatriation to Africa or the Levant (yes, including THOSE people); or

          Active Societal corralling: Especially for niggers (sorry, Negroes, sorry A’freakin Amurricans)

          -forced sterilization for those who are:
          below IQ of 90 (yes, eugenics is a moral choice for a society)
          rapists, murderers, violent criminals

          Death by stoning (cf. Theonomy, above – Rushdoony’s Institutes of Biblical Law) for:
          Prostitutes, sodomites, lesbians, and other perverts
          Pederasts, adulterationists, etc.

          Because you will either have God’s Law… or Satans’s. (which includes shari’a, make no mistake)

      • See my comment below. A 1:1 white:nonwhite ratio for abortions is *not* a wash because whites are still the majority of the population and because a lot of the “white” abortions are actually mulattoes.

  9. The favor of a full and close reading is requested:

    First, thanks for the website, and all your efforts beyond. Since I have been following along, and I can’t remember exactly when that was, it’s been so long, the seemingly impossible and distant liberation has moved dramatically closer! At first, there was a school of thought that the internet was an energy sink hurting our ability to change the Real World, but now we can see that our collective tapping away at our keyboards has been catalytic to events in the Real World ™. There would be no Trump without what Occidental Dissent, and the broader movement from the Mantra people to the “alt-right” to folks posting Pepe memes on various forums, and more. We have achieved Trump today, win or lose, and tomorrow IT WILL BE an explicitly white homeland and all the glory that entails!

    Second, this debate about abortion is part of a broader “moment of truth” / “Come to Jesus” moment we have to have on the white right. Victory has to be timely, or it won’t be at all. We need exponential, as opposed to arithmetic growth. I think it is pretty obvious that we have been experiencing that exponential growth as illustrated by the acquisition of the former Ron Paul types, the Infowar types, the Pick Up Artists, the Men’s Right’s types, the beta male R9K types, and a growing chunk of the “main stream” Republican party and whites as a whole courtesy of the Trump campaign.

    Our target? I’ve set it at 80% of whites, as such a coalition would have the electoral and practical power to actually pull off and sustain the tectonic political realignment that we hope for in the face of non-white and anti-white opposition.

    So what is the “moment of truth” about? Via the Trump candidacy, we have basically gobbled up all the “low hanging fruit” that is out there and now we face direct opposition from groups that we need to actually convert, which is a much harder process.

    The most obvious target for conversion are the white Christians who oppose Trump, and I’ll have more to say about that next phase, but before I do let’s talk about what comes next; converting “moderates” and even people on the left en route to the critical mass of whites needed for change to occur.

    This is what makes this a moment of truth: there is no traditional political platform or manifesto that would satisfy all of these politically and perhaps even neurologically diverse groups: the winning formula requires all of us to subordinate things we would like in order to survive. In other words, we can’t convert 80% of whites to a right-wing Christmas list, so let’s understand that now before we take another step.

    Abortion is a perfect example of an item from the right-wing Christmas list that must be abandoned in favor of the exponential growth / 80% paradigm. If we want to be historically minded, we can point to things like abortion as “wedge issues” that anti-whites used to fragment whites, and thus our unification project must seek to heal the damage. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the anti-white UniParty rules on a throne built out of such irrelevant “social issues” where they can divide whites into ideological factions as opposed to a united racial faction. This often manifests as the “aw shucks, we tried” that Hunter Wallace pointed out over the recent dust up over PayPal and gay marriage.

    We could extend that logic to religion, which also informs so much of the debate on social issues. I’m not a Christian. I don’t believe that a Bronze Age rabbi rose from the dead. But I would love to live in an all Christian society, provided it was all white! I am quite willing to subordinate my private religious views in pursuit of genetic survival! The calls for practicality vis-a-vis questions of religion, I am all for! But herein lies the rub. Right now, Christians as Christians are thwarting Trump in favor of a con man, Ted Cruz. We don’t have a lot of time and a lot of chances. Trump may actually be the last chance (I don’t think he is, but it is arguable). So from a purely practical standpoint, we either convert these Christians, or we die. Pussyfooting about actually is the LEAST PRACTICAL approach. The gloves must come off, or we die.

    So now you’re thinking, OK, let’s convert these people to our point of view. Let’s convince them that their racial interests should “Trump” their religious interests. Wouldn’t that mean that embracing their pro-life position would be a good tactic, to say nothing of the merits of the issue? No, my friend. That is what I mean by a “moment of truth”. We have to convert them to the perspective that their racial future is the foundation upon which their religious survival also rests, because it is true. We have to get them to subordinate religion to race, and that means that they have to be prepared to give up many many more things off of the Christian Christmas list or watch it and us swept away in a brown tide!

    I illustrated this using the recent Trump-Matthews interview. When asked about abortion, Trump should have just said “I’m here to build a wall and deport the illegals, nothing else will change.” And this mantra would be helpful on other issues as well. I call it the “shut up and build the wall” strategy. But you would argue that that would not help him gain the support of pro-life Christians who are supporting Cruz. That is EXACTLY what I am getting at. WE as the alt-right vanguard, or what ever you wish to call us, need to convert those people so that such impossible political acrobatics are no longer necessary! We need to have that “Come to Jesus” moment with them and explain the Big Picture. We need a STRATEGIC intervention, not a tactical intervention.

    This conversion is probably best done by Christians, and I am confident that white Christians who understand the Big Picture can and will take off the gloves and start mixing it up with their brethren. The soft underbelly is the all too fallible and corrupt “leaders” (most of whom are con men); sever the link between the rank-and-file who are probably incapable of detecting a con, and the leaders, perhaps by becoming the new leaders, a palace coup! Do for the Christian hierarchy what Trump is doing to the Cuckservatives, expose them while offering an alternative! Do to the Protestants, Evangelicals and Mormons what I as a former Catholic do to the Pope, point out that he is an enemy and a threat! The gloves HAVE come off vis-a-vis Francis and Catholicism, just extend that to Christianity as a whole. Do to the snake-handlers supporting Cruz what we have done to Francis!

    Thanks for a full and careful reading.

    • I’m a Christian that advocates for prochoice as a way to mitigate the brown tide, though it’s usually online. I’m also glad to hear a confessing nonChristian admit openly that he’d like to live in a Christian country.

    • @Afterthought:

      Here is a very simple way to get pro-life Christian conservatives to join Team Trump. Present them with the Affordable Family Formation meme.

      First of all, we need to stop allowing the Left to co-opt the language regarding reproductive decisions and relabel the sides correctly. On the left, we have the pro-aborters and on the right, we have the pro-birthers.

      Pro-life is a misnomer. There isn’t anybody out there who considers himself anti-life. That’s why pro-aborters promote the idea that the fetus is nothing more than a clump of cells, equivalent to a tumor, until it is born and draws its first independent breath.

      Pro-choice is also wrong. Women have always had a choice, regardless of the laws on the books. If abortion were outlawed in this country tomorrow, those determined to abort would simply go to Canada or Mexico where it is legal. Choice is now, was then and always will be there for women. All the sturm and drang is over the choices women make.

      IMO, neither side is a friend to a woman. The child she is carrying is less important to either side than controlling her choice. The pro-birthers want that child born no matter what but are loathe to pay for “welfare queens.” The pro-aborters seize on any excuse, however flimsy for women to abort,

      But I digress. Back to the subject of Affordable Family Formation. The underlying assumption of the so-called “pro-life” movement is that selfish, irresponsible women are carelessly getting knocked up and then aborting their children rather than being inconvenienced.

      Hunter notes that poor White women are less likely than “wealthy” White women to have abortions, but:

      Hunter totally overlooks the welfare safety net available to women below the poverty line. They will have access to free prenatal care, they will be eligible for WIC, foodstamps, housing, childcare, and Medicaid. Moreover, they will be able to obtain free educational grants and job training to get them off of welfare.

      Middle class women with a crisis pregnancy don’t have that safety net. If they lose their jobs tomorrow, they will be denied help because they can’t show that they have been destitute long enough to truly need it. Most middle and upper class people are living from paycheck to paycheck much like their lower working class counterparts. They just pay more in rent or property taxes, for transportation, clothing, etc.

      Moreover, there is an ingrained class snobbery among Whites that none of us want to talk about. We have an unconscious belief that where Whites are concerned, poverty is not only a moral failure, but a character defect. That’s why government provocateurs will stage any White Nationalist event with loud people who look very poor; toothless, obese, dressed like slobs, and are barely grammatical in their speech.

      If a woman has an abortion, it is assumed that she did it so that her great, freewheeling, fast-paced upper class lifestyle wouldn’t be inconvenienced. That’s understandable and acceptable to us. Wealth has its privileges and people expect you to use them.

      Likewise if a woman finds a way to carry the child to term, it is rare to never that she is going to give that child up for adoption. Single motherhood is not stigmatized the way it used to be for divorcees and unwed teens of yesteryear. There are too many movie stars who are single mothers. If an woman has a child out of wedlock, the assumption is that she chose to get pregnant on a whim and raise it alone.

      Carrying a child to term and giving it up for adoption is something only poor women who can’t afford an abortion do. As Sarah and Bristol Palin have proved, uptight religious conservatives no longer either arrange a shotgun wedding or send their pregnant teenaged daughter packing to an unwed mother’s home to hide her shame until the child can be adopted.

      Trump’s biggest mistake was allowing himself to be painted into a corner by the idea that only selfish, irresponsible dilletantes who aren’t disciplined enough to take the pill have abortions instead of positing that crisis pregnancies are driven by lack of money not moral failings. Believe it or not, women who abort think they are showing personal responsbility

      Abortion is going to look like the only responsible option to a pregnant college coed who is already up to her eyeballs in student loan debt before she has even netted her first job interview.

      Even if a woman is happily married to a man, if she finds out that
      either his or her job is on shaky ground thanks to the business being
      shipped overseas or his or her company is bringing in guest workers, the
      last thing they will want or need is a pregnancy. Times like this are
      going to produce a crisis pregnancy that will make abortion the only responsible thing to do.

      Where Chris Matthews was concerned, Trump made a big mistake by not positing the theory that women abort crisis pregnancy not, because they are irresponsible but because they fear they cannot afford a child. And thanks to this poor economy being driven by insourcing immigrant labor, to jobs that have not been outsourced to Mexico or China, this fear is well-founded.

      That way Trump would have redeemed himself from the insensitive, mysogynist sexist pig image the media have portrayed and emerged as a white knight champion of women who really understands the crisis pregnancy dilemma (financially driven) and is there to rescue them. by building the wall and creating jobs, jobs, jobs!

      By building the wall, enforcing e-verify and fining companies that use illegal labor or abuse the guest worker program as well as instituting an intelligent single payer healthcare system that provides not only free prenatal care but contraception, abortions would no longer look like the only logical option.

  10. Maybe someone already wrote this, but the stats at the top of HW’s essay (approx 36% of abortions are white, 30% are negro) show that in absolute numbers there are more white babies aborted, but the abortion RATE for negroes is at least 4-5 times higher.

      • Decades later the unaborted black babies will have produced more offspring than the whites and their children in turn.

        • Why aren’t Whites having children? I would say it has a lot to do so with the growing view that children are unnecessary to personal happiness. Less than half the population believes that now.

  11. It might be needless to say it. But back in the early eighties, my dad said that he supported abortion only in the case of a White woman being raped by a nigger. These were his exact words at the time. To put it in perspective, he was nearly sixty years old when I graduated from high
    screwel. Bear in mind, we didn’t have, and still don’t have, political correctness in North Texas. I’d never heard of it till 92′. Everybody knows what SJWs and Trendy Lefties are, but nobody ever saw one.
    Churches still plant rows of tiny crosses in the church yard every year as a protest against abortion. Anti-abortion signs and bumper stickers abound. So do Confederate and Southern/Texan symbols. I don’t know why it’s so, but they seem to leave Texas alone outside of Austin and a few other cities.

  12. I think everyone would agree that diverse societies cause abortion to become a weapon in inter-ethnic or inter-racial conflict.

    • I can’t disagree with that. If we had our independence, there are any number of superior strategies that we could replace abortion with–But we don’t have our independence and abortion is the only option on the table for now.

      We are in a race war. Humanity has been in race wars ever since the first tribe split into 2 tribes. In the grand scheme different races are, have always been and always will be biological competitors on this planet (or any other planet we someday inhabit.) It’s a fact of life that is never going to change. Infanticide is just one aspect of that war. We would never have achieved a white America if our ancestors had not been willing to kill Indian babies, just like the Israelites would have never acquired ancient Israel if they had not been willing to kill Canaanite babies. The need for population control of one’s racial enemies (whether by fertility control, infanticide, or killing adults young enough to bear children) is a fact of life whether we like it or not and if we are going to survive as a race we had better come to terms with it. Conversion may be an option when it comes to religion, but not when it comes to race.

      Our political adversaries seem to be beating us on every front with no opportunity for secession in sight (though it might get easier if Hillary wins). The least we can do is stand back and let nonwhites and libtard whites shoot themselves in the foot (feet?) while we keep attending to other matters, like having our own children, recruiting new people to our cause, growing, strengthening our intellectual foundation, etc.

      However there is a catch: It is possible that prolifism is so popular and prochoicism is so unpopular among our people that prochoice for the purpose of racial hygiene ends up being a nonstarter on political grounds alone. It may simply be politically expedient to toe the line on dogmatic prolifism whether we believe in it or not. I’m not in a position to make that call and I doubt anybody else is at this time either, so it may be best to simply play down the abortion issue while we focus on other fronts.

      It is probably a good idea for us to leave the abortion debate alone and invest more time, mental energy and open debate into trying to get our own fertility rate up while we are still subjects of the Empire. It’s good for us to think about how we would construct a pronatalist, eugenic society if we were independent, but we are not independent and our own low fertility is a problem NOW. We should be having threads on how we can raise our own fertility.

      Every child our enemies abort is a child we don’t have to bear and raise on our side just to keep up.

  13. Everyone and I mean everyone makes the abortion issue into a mountain when it really should be little but a blip.
    How about fewer abortions?
    When David Duke was useful he was elected as a La. legislator and his proposal was for birth control for welfare checks, the Left stole his idea and good for them.

  14. Over the past couple of years I have noticed the steady decline in moral values within the alt-right starting with counter currents and radix. I quit visiting their sites and referencing their articles. If the last NPI conference is any indication their brand is slowly dying. You can’t have liberal attitudes and think you are going to attract a large crowd of white support. They seem to think they will persuade a segment of the liberals to join them. They may get an occasional new voice but by and large they have jumped in with the death cult consuming the white race and will go down with it if they don’t make a change back to traditional family values.

  15. I’ll bet the number of pro-lifers who also object to White Genocide is dismally low.

      • Be prepared to be called racist and told to go away by these people. You will be treated like RamZPaul treats 1488ers. They and the pro gunners are bullied by the left and they in turn take it out on evil racists to virtue signal back to their oppressors.

  16. My view is the abortion issues strongly depends on the time and place. A position that works well in a healthy all White place (Oriana South Africa) doesn’t t work well or at all in the worst Black Underclass areas of Baltimore.

    It s the same with gun laws, gun rights.

    I was fine with New York City, Singapore gun laws and policies in the late 90s.

    All these issues and rights that are based on the idea that our country is only populated by healthy, free born White British men, that s out the window when our population goes third world, Muslim etc.

    Yeah I d fund Planned Parenthood in Africa, Pakistan.

    • I understand in South Africa black and white were even numbers around the
      1850s. The blacks without birth control, quickly out-bred the
      whites and the last I heard blacks are 10 times the white population and because of it whites are being purged out of the country.

  17. From the Trad Youth thread:

    http://www.tradyouth.org/2016/04/weird-science/

    Matt,

    A major attraction of styling yourself as a Nietzschean superman is identifying and killing off a group of people who are clearly “inferior” to you – like, say, the 5,000 or so babies born with Down Syndrome every year.

    Nevermind the fact that you are making a big fuss out of 5,000 out of 4 million total births and 1 million abortions. Nevermind the fact that a grand total of 3 men and 26 women with Down Syndrome have reproduced since 2006. Nevermind the fact that less than 1 percent of Down Syndrome cases are even heritable.

    It makes you feel like the Ubermensch!

  18. I support the overall argument and the pro-life movement, as abortion is clearly murder, recognized as such even for 2000 years by Christian texts like the Didache. However, if blacks and Hispanics are having 49 percent of the abortions, and they aren’t 50 percent of the population, then wouldn’t that mean that they– when considering their numbers– are having more abortions than whites? I was an English major, graduated summa cum laude, and not strong at math, so maybe I’m just clueless here.

  19. Patrick Le Brun answers the question what would America be like today if Roe v. Wade had not passed:

    According to the CDC, there have been 13 million abortions conducted for African American women since Roe v. Wade. There are more black fetuses aborted than are born, and every year about 5% of reproductive age black women have abortions.[3] There are no reliable statistics on how many White women who procure abortions are pregnant with Black babies. Currently about 2% of births issue from Black-White mixed parentage.[4] If we were to conservatively assume that 2% of abortions by White mothers in 1990 were of Black babies that would raise the Black abortions by over 20,000 and increase their total by 4%.

    A back of the envelope estimate shows 6 million black children would be of reproductive age had they not been aborted, not including mixed race births. They would almost certainly be raised in poverty. Whether analyzing impoverished communities in developed or undeveloped countries there is a direct trade-off between family size and exiting poverty. So these 6 million adults, with no abortion access and living in poverty, therefore reproducing at the rate of poor Blacks, would have contributed at least 18 million new children to the Creedal Nation by now. That is the equivalent of 40 more Detroits!

    When Catholic teachings on sex and reproduction take the lead in policy making, these are the results. It is not a question of Left or Right but the systematic results of the Vatican’s institutional imperative. In 2010, America had 42 million African-Americans, of whom 12 million were in poverty. The 200 million White Americans, who were and are hurtling toward minority status were unable to produce the political will that was necessary to reverse that trend with the demographic composition it had at the time. Avoiding minority status is, after all, the primary political project of White Nationalism.

    Ask yourself, White Nationalist, how far this project would have proceeded if there were 66 million African-Americans instead of 42 million. What would life be like if every ghetto was more than quadruple the size it is now?

    http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/10/white-nationalists-need-planned-parenthood-not-the-pope/

    • 1.) Even today, Non-Hispanic White women have 36 percent of abortions compared to Black women who have 30 percent of abortions. If we assume 2 percent of those abortions are multiracial (there is no data on this), it is still not even a 1 to 1 wash.

      2.) The Black hordes aren’t being kept at bay by abortion. For every Black pregnancy that ends in abortion, there is at least a corresponding White abortion, so it just ends up being a bloody mess where hundreds of thousands of White children are aborted the vast majority of whom are perfectly healthy.

      3.) Finally, the typical woman who has an abortion has changed dramatically in recent years. Poor women and non-White women have become more likely to have an abortion. I believe the number has doubled since around 2000. In the first few decades after Roe v. Wade, it was overwhelmingly White women who had abortions.

      • Basically, your argument here is as innumerate as the arguments of people who claim that there is no black crime problem, because most crimes are committed by whites. Comparing absolute numbers of abortions is meaningless when the underlying populations differ radically in size. Blacks are 12% of the population and get 36% of abortions. Whites are 63% of the population and get 36% of abortions. The problem that whites face is demographic decline. When 50% of black pregnancies and 25% of Hispanic pregnancies end in abortion but 13.8% of white pregnancies end in abortion (and some of those probably are of non-white children), then abortion is working to postpone the day when whites are an absolute minority in this country. Given that we all have limited time and political capital, it strikes me as nutty that White Nationalists would spend one scintilla on combating abortion as opposed to combating all the forces that are promoting white genocide.

        • 1.) It is true that black and Hispanic women are more likely to get abortions than White women – now, after the recent surge of poor women doubling their share of abortions since 2000. It hardly follows that was always the case or that the pattern which prevails today will hold indefinitely.

          2.) The effective result of abortion is to kill 1 White baby for every 1 Black baby and every 1 Hispanic baby. Repeat that experiment around 333,000 times a year and it is no net racial difference from a serial killer shooting and killing three people of different races on the street.

          3.) Certainly one of the leading causes that Whites are now in demographic decline is aborting roughly 1 out of 5 of their children a year. Such a practice is flatly inconsistent with “securing a future for White children.”

          4.) We shouldn’t be surprised that a culture which sanctions a mother killing her own child, or one that celebrates and promotes miscegenation, free love, homosexuality and gender dysphoia, is facing demographic decline which is the logical and inevitable result of such norms.

          5.) Instead of promoting homosexuality, nihilism, anti-natalism and abortion, it is probably a better idea to encourage Whites to have large families as traditional religion suggests.

          6.) A mother or father who would kill their own child is highly unlikely to care about the fate of total genetic strangers who happen to be White.

          7.) It is probably not a coincidence that some of the strongest advocates of abortion are childless eugenicists who have no personal stake in the next generation.

          8.) Whites reached their racial zenith in this country in the 1960s when abortion on demand was generally illegal.

          • In America, abortion kills 1 white for every 2 non-whites. If this were a battlefield, those would be considered excellent ratios. And it is a battlefield, because if politics is just war by other means, so is demographics.

            So Hunter, given that you have limited political capital, which would you spend it on: stopping abortion, which is working for us, or stopping immigration, which is working against us?

            Also, politically speaking, there is much more of a chance of stopping immigration than abortion.

          • 1.) Not really.

            Once again, if a serial killer were to kill 1 White man, 1 Hispanic man and 1 Black man in my community, it wouldn’t change the racial balance at all.

            2.) The “pro-choice movement” has produced an even bigger demographic disaster in Europe where there are few blacks but countries like Spain, Italy, and Greece are rapidly aging. Even if we had a homogenous ethnostate like the Japanese, we would be facing a serious demographic problem because of abortion and birth control and rampant careerism.

            3.) If abortion is working for us, then what are the countries where abortion is legal which you would characterize as racially successful or flourishing?

            4.) Abortion is linked at the hip with racial self hatred, mass immigration, free love, feminism, gender dysphoria, the celebration of homosexuality and miscegenation. It is no coincidence that all of the above triumphed around the same time because all of the above stem ultimately from the common root of indifference towards the next generation.

          • If you kill two nonwhites for every white long enough, there will be no non-whites in the US, since whites have a larger starting population. I don’t approve of mass murder to solve demographic problems, but liberals imposed and defend this form of mass murder, and since it is working for us demographically, I prefer to fight against immigration which is working against us.

          • 1.) Abortionists are essentially racially egalitarian murderers who kill Whites, blacks and Hispanics in roughly equal proportions.

            2.) Over 40 years and 58 million abortions later, this still isn’t close to being true because abortions are a fraction of total births.

            3.) Among other things, abortion and mass immigration both stem from the same core worldview that the “individual” is an autonomous free agent with the “right” to chose his or her own ends who owes nothing to either the dead or the unborn.

          • Look at it from the perspective of a murderer: a murderer goes into a neighborhood that is, say, 60% White, 15% Black and 25% Hispanic.

            It doesn’t matter whether the murderer kills 1 or 10 people of every race. If he kills exactly the same number of people from each race or roughly the same amount, the racial demographics of said neighborhood will remain unchanged. Since there are fewer Hispanics and Blacks in the neighborhood, you could even say the murderer is more likely to have targeted them.

            Anyway, we tell people that we are “pro-White,” not anti-black or anti-Hispanic. Then we have the chorus of eugenicists come on and say exactly the opposite: that we are perfectly willing to kill hundreds of thousands of perfectly healthy White children, precisely the future generations whose cause we are supposed to be championing, but if there is a chance that MORE Blacks and Hispanics might be killed in the process, then we are fine with it.

            I’m not fine with it. I’m also convinced that a culture which would strike such a blow at the mother-child bond which is the strongest of all human instincts will also deaden its own racial instincts. Such a culture will probably by the sort of racial apathy which is the precondition for mass immigration and other ills.

            Who aborts their own genetic offspring and cares about passionately about their race? If you would kill your own kid, why on earth would you care about a stranger in a foreign country who is White?

          • What would we call a Pro White who wants to stop abortion, so non-White population explodes like South Africa? Bad at Math?

            And we aren’t killing them. The White anti-Whites are killing their own children. Thus White anti-Whites are going extinct and to hell.

            Let Conservatives fight their issues and you take care of your issue – immigration. The Conservatives will call you racist and tell you to get lost, because you’re hurting their precious respectability.

          • 1.) What do you call a White man who would kill his own son or daughter? Certainly not “pro-White.” If you think so less of your own flesh and blood, I don’t want to know your opinion on racial survival at large.

            2.) The White population in the United States reached its peak in the 1960s when abortion was illegal.

            3.) “Progressivism” isn’t heritable and anyone who says otherwise and advocates killing children because of the fashionable opinions of their parents can’t be taken seriously.

            4.) Why are there so many battles on so many fronts? Whether it is abortion, immigration, gay marriage, gender dysphoria, refugee resettlement, it all stems from the same fundamental cause, which is not giving a damn about the interests of future generations and prioritizing shit like “freedom” or muh feelz over them.

          • Hunter, we’re talking about race in the US as a whole. But if you want to just arbitrarily change the context so that fools think that you are winning this argument, go whole hog. Why not Detroit or Burkina Faso? Because in those countries, abortion rates as practiced in the US would lead to white extinction. Your position on this is as dishonest and grandstanding as your average SJW signaling about Syrian refugees.

          • So, let me see if I understand you correctly: if more non-Whites are killed in the process, then White parents should be allowed to kill their own children. That’s the “pro-White” position.

            I’m not buying the math argument. The Deep South was never whiter than it was on the cusp of Roe v. Wade when abortion was illegal. The same is true of the rest of the country as well.

          • The Deep South was never whiter than it was on the cusp of Roe v. Wade when abortion was illegal.

            Add an abortion ban to black back-migration and the Deep South will never have been blacker.

          • Next time you’re in the Nashville area, I’m getting you a case of beer, or a case of wine, or I’ll pay for your hotel room, or all of the above. You have more patience than I do.

          • There have been about 58 million abortions since 1973. Around 17 million of those abortions were black. What’s wrong with that picture? Maybe the other 41 million?

          • And yet there are more White people alive today than 40 years ago. You could magically get rid of abortion today and it wouldn’t change a thing when it comes to forced integration and immigration quotas that are designed to flood White nations with black and brown people.

          • 2012 is the last year for which we have data.

            From 1973 to 2013, there were 55.7 million abortions. Of those, we know that 17 million were black since blacks accounted for 31 percent of abortions over that time frame. It is trickier to figure out how many of the abortions were Hispanic since records weren’t kept until 1990, but the Hispanic rate was 11.4% in 1990, 17.2% in 2000 and 21% in 2010, which means in 1980 it was probably around 7% and less than that in the 1970s.

            That means probably around 14.5 percent of the total abortions were Hispanic. So we are talking about 8 million out of the 55.7 million abortions were Hispanic. That accounts for 25 million of the 55.7 million.

            Who do you suppose were the 30.7 million? Well, the “Other” category has ranged from 3.5% in 1985 to 6.5% in 2010. Probably 5% of the 55.7 million were “Other.” That’s another 2.7 million.

            So, who were the 55.7 million abortions since 1973?

            Black – 17 million
            Hispanic – 8 million
            Other – 2.7 million
            Non-White – 27.7 million

            That leaves us with this number:

            White – 28 million

            Good thing we are aborting the black horde, right? We’ve aborted 17 million of them at the cost of 28 million Whites.

          • There have been about 58 million abortions since 1973. Around 17 million of those abortions were black. What’s wrong with that picture? Maybe the other 41 million?

            Lmao. You just shot yourself in the foot.

            Even if the USA consisted only of blacks and whites, a no-abortion scenario using precisely those numbers would have caused the proportion of blacks to increase.

            Today: 200 million whites, 42 million blacks. Whites: 82.6% Blacks: 17.3%

            No abortion: 200 + 41 million whites, 42 + 17 million blacks. Whites: 80.3% Blacks: 19.7%

          • Anyway, we tell people that we are “pro-White,” not anti-black or anti-Hispanic. Then we have the chorus of eugenicists come on and say exactly the opposite: that we are perfectly willing to kill hundreds of thousands of perfectly healthy White children

            You make it sound as though abortionists want to rip suckling babes from their mothers’ bosoms and cruelly butcher them in the name of demographic warfare. In reality, abortion is simply sensible social policy.

            The last decade has taught me there is a healthy market for vile political lies. I can see I’m not the only one to have absorbed this lesson.

          • Same story ever since he first opened his sperg mouth to voice a political opinion. People can think what they want of me, but no one can say I’ve ever evaded an argument.

        • Agreed and well said.

          Don’t write off the Liberals. Lots of Liberal Left policies work OK, good in areas that are not healthy, middle class White.

          Things like total freedom to own, carry guns – no, not on the West side of Chicago.

          NYC Bloomberg style stop and search is what is needed in such places.

  20. Prez Davis’s butthole is torn and bleeding
    “Ban 313Chris!” he’s begging and pleading
    Take it up with Disqus, ya rat punk snitch
    instead of crying like a turned out jailhouse bitch

    Trumpenfaggots in a panic, they’ll never learn
    But no one gives a shit, cuz Wyoming #FeelsTheBern

    Jaye Ellis got a thing for white male sports
    He likes young men in spandex and shorts
    Partner dancing with his WhiteHispanicCatholicGirlfriend cleaning lady
    while wishing he was in the shower with Tom Brady

    Abortion is here to stay, so ya better deal with it Cletus’s
    Can’t make a better world without suckin’ out a few fetuses

    Christian shitheads clingin’ tight to their Jeeboo
    all the while gettin laughed at and shitted on by the Hebrew

    Too blind to see that christians are slaves to jews
    No fuckin’ wonder the South was born to lose

    HOLLLLLAAAAAA

  21. Part VI of Roe versus Wade – which is posted in its entirety at https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113 — is a review of the history of abortion law. Section 3 of that part is headed “The common law” and begins as follows:

    “It is undisputed that, at common law, abortion performed before ‘quickening’ — the
    first recognizable movement of the fetus in utero, appearing usually from the 16th to the 18th week of pregnancy – was not an indictable offense.”

    Headed “The English statutory law” and “The American law,” Sections 4 and 5 of Part VI review Nineteenth Century English and American statutes that marked the beginning of abortion law of the kind that Roe versus Wade invalidated.

    A March 2016 Guttmacher Institute post at https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states provides data on abortion in the U.S. and includes the pie chart below.

    As you will see, that chart shows that 95% of U.S. abortions are performed within the first fifteen weeks of pregnancy. The breakdown is as follows:

    33.3% within first seven weeks
    29.9% weeks seven to eight
    25.7% weeks nine to twelve
    6.2% weeks thirteen to fifteen
    (Total = 95.1% within first fifteen weeks.)

    It would seem, in short — unless I’m completely misunderstanding this information — that 95% of present American abortions are of a kind that was legal in England, as well as in colonial and early America, up to the Nineteenth Century.

  22. This is a great article. Your have drawn a line in the sand that separates Southern Nationalism from the atheistic, Anti-Christain, Anti-God nonsense that passes for white nationalism. These misguided folks believe they can throw away thousands of years of European-Christian tradition to revitalize our people. Well, the European people have been doing that for centuries, and it has gotten us in the mess we’re in today. Yet, many on the left and the alt-right wish to continue to be spiritual lemmings going over the cliff of modernity. Sad, really sad.

    • This issue actually cuts against the core premise of White Nationalism which is supposed to be “securing our existence and a future for White children.” Instead of doing that, these people are saying that killing 1 out of 5 White children every year is justified. What they don’t seem to realize is that the principle of a mother killing her own child has chilling implications for racial awareness generally.

      • All right, you good Southron, Mr. W.: Keep listening to your country music, about white men whose women howl at them for coming home late from bars where they consort with loose women. Keep torturing your young daughters about their desperate efforts to end the pregnancies that result from their normal desire to mate, the same desire that all of those tiresome songs are about.

    • Of what European-Christian tradition are you speaking, Stephen? As I said in a post below, 95% of the abortions being carried out under present American law are of a kind that was permitted at common law. Not until the Nineteenth Century were there statutes that proscribed such abortions in England and, latterly, the United States. Accordingly, it is Roe versus Wade that was, in a way, a return to the traditions of Christian England.

      Periodically, as you probably know, I find myself, here, at Occidental Dissent, in the role of the troll, not enamored of Southern Nationalism. I must tell you that for a person like me, who grew up in rather a sheltered way, the South’s popular culture sure seems to involve a lot of singing or joking or whatever about gettin’ drunk and chasin’ women. Turn on your radio, as I said below, to Mr. W., our host, and listen to country music: That’s your Southern culture–and it’s not genteel. Evidently, Southerners don’t get serious about all of that behavior until it comes time to prevent their young women from ending the unwanted pregnancies that result from it.

      • Yes, you’re a troll alright, not as obnoxious as 313Chris, but with time and practise, you’ll get there.
        Your comment about the European-Christian tradition shows your willfull ignorance. Christianity has traditionally opposed abortion and infanticide. The early Christians were renowned for rescuing children that were left to die from exposure, and they opposed abortion without dissent. When they converted the various European nations, that teaching went with them. And since you admit being a troll, I think your remark about common law is just a typical tactic to stir up anger among the balanced commentators on this post. Instead of doing that, try to make some intelligent comments based on true knowledge and facts, instead of emotional biases and prejudices.

        • If I were to indulge my emotional biases and prejudices, Stephen, you’d be hearing sentiments–about abortion and many other things–of a Catholic schoolboy so naïve you’d find it hard to believe I’m above age twelve. Whatever Christianity has said about the morality of abortion, the English common law–in all of the high age of medieval Christendom–permitted it until the fetus’s “quickening,” the organism’s first recognizable movement. 95% of the abortions that take place under present American law are carried out before the fetus’s quickening. Whether you want to recognize it, Roe versus Wade, in that respect, restored an English tradition.

          • Not all laws in a nation conformed to Church teaching. But all Christian nations were opposed to abortion from anient times. And both you and 313Chris do behave in a extremely immature manner, because the last time I looked, trolling was childish. Grow up and learn to deal with facts, instead of hurling insults and curses.

          • I don’t recall that you thought I was acting in an immature manner a year or so ago, Stephen, when I defended the white notion of marriage as a Christian construct. I’m pretty sure it was you who applauded me here, for that. Where have I hurled insults and curses? Above, I used the vulgarism “screwin’,” but obviously only in imitation of what I was saying was a Southern way of thinking.

            As for your main point, that not all laws in ostensibly Christian nations conformed to Church teaching, well, yes, that’s true. My point is simply that most persons, I think, would be startled to learn that the vast majority of abortions carried out presently in America are of a kind that, basically, was traditionally legal. If those abortions constitute a “holocaust,” as one sometimes hears, well, then, it’s an old-fashioned one.

  23. What civilized people can approve the tearing out of a baby with Down Syndrome from its mothers womb while at the same time allowing the cell doors of death row to swing wide open and release a savage onto our streets?

  24. It appears to me that the abortion debate can not be won. The next best option is as Colorado did and Dr. Duke tried to do. Make long term contraception cheap or free. If all welfare mothers had to be on contraception then the problem would solve itself over time. This would at least lower the number of abortions.

    • Agreed. Also always take the time to understand who is your audience. Don’t lie to people, but make a concerted effort to tell people what they want to hear.

      Pro Life Christian White people in places like Iowa don’t want to hear that you favor abortion rights to cut the population of Blacks. Liberal/Left or even Black people don’t want to hear that either – instead, present arguments along the lines that poor inner city people, Black people should enjoy many, most of the rights of wealthy White women.

      With pro life people – present arguments that there are much safer forms of birth control besides abortion and that marriage and traditional morals is the best way to avoid unwanted pregnancies, VD etc.

      David Duke when he was being mainstream successful in Louisiana was/had to be pro life – just favored other forms of birth control for Welfare mothers on crack cocaine.

  25. I don’t think statistics will change many minds on abortion, but if you’re going to use them, use the right one, otherwise you appear innumerate. The issue is not what the proportion of total abortions is by race, but what proportion of pregnancies end in abortion by race.

    If some future world boiled down to 200 million Black pregnancies per year with fifty percent ending in abortion, then that would mean 100 million less Blacks would be born than otherwise. If in that same world there was only one pregnant White woman left, and she had an abortion, then that would mean White abortions were only 0.000001% of the total. But it would be 100% catastrophic for Whites.

    With the statistic you chose, it would seem like good news: White abortions would only be one in a hundred million!

    Right now, Black American women arrange to kill their fetuses at 3.5 times the rate of White American women. I acknowledge it’s a race to the bottom, but don’t misunderstand that this is at least one race that Blacks are losing.

  26. I’m going to add an additional caveat to all this that is often ignored. The implementation of the grade/age based Prussian education system, created, tightened, and hardened the idea of age group loyalty across the west. This was by design.

    An unintended consequence is that the tradition of a man establishing himself then procuring a (younger, ready to be wed) wife has fallen by the wayside. The consequences on the economic health of families is somewhat obvious, and even amplified in our current economy. As such, many young families are not in an economic position to have children (by their standards), and the ones with lower time preference (shown by education levels) are more likely to take the less risky path when faced with an unintended future cost.

    Ending this age loyalty, which has since boiled up to full fledged youth cultures and other anti-social nonsense would do us a world of good.

  27. Sterilization is the only humane way to regulate population growth, abortion is murder. This was one failing of the Southern governments in the Jim Crow Era is that they failed to formulate a concise Negro solution although they often did have state eugenics boards. In 1920 as I showed before North and South there was wide support for regulating the Negro population, yet it wasn’t done. I think this was a holdover idea from slavery, the more hands you have the more crops you can raise.

  28. What makes me cringe is how people seem to support abortion IE murder and then turn around and say sterilization is cruel? Excuse me? Why shouldn’t we pay 70 IQ Negroes to sterilize themselves so they don’t reproduce? I mean the last thing we need is 10 billion Kunta Kinte’s

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. On exoteric Southern Nationalism | Addendum
  2. The Top 10 Reasons the Secular Alt-Right Is Not the Answer at Faith and Heritage

Comments are closed.