About a decade ago, I agreed with many of these same ideas. I was young, irreligious, and unattached in my twenties and didn’t have a reason to think about or care much about abortion. I was reading a lot of Nietzsche at the time and was fascinated with eugenics. Eventually, I outgrew what might be called the “pro-choice temptation” and changed my mind on the subject.
I will say at the outset that I won’t even bother to make a religious argument. I don’t think the people who have bought into this line of thinking will be swayed much by religious appeals. Instead, I will try to lay out a secular and nationalist case against abortion that I wish I had been exposed to while in college:
Wrong In Principle
Abortion is wrong in principle.
It is wrong to kill a defenseless human being. If our cause is about anything, it is supposed to be about “securing the existence of our people and a future for white children.” Yes, I know White Nationalists and Southern Nationalists quibble over the meaning of that, but the sentiment driving it is the same in both cases. At the end of the day, our cause is fundamentally about the world we leave behind for our descendants, not universal abstractions like “freedom” or “equality.”
How can you possibly square that with a White woman or a White couple killing their own kid? I don’t think you can. I don’t think you can tell a White couple they are supposed to care about the welfare of their descendants, but that they are free to abort them anyway if they are too inconvenient to their lifestyle. I don’t think it is “pro-White” to sacrifice a White child to kill two Black children. It is anti-black.
Wrong In Strategy
The mother-child bond is the strongest of all human bonds.
Eugenicists support severing that bond. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that leftists want to abolish that bond as they want to pervert natural instincts and unravel the “oppressive” social fabric in general. Why on earth though would someone who is willing to kill their own child – who favors a culture where the freedom to kill your own child whenever you feel like is an accepted principle – care about a bond as weak and abstract as White racial solidarity or descendants they no longer have?
It shouldn’t come as a surprise that cultures which have legalized abortion have simultaneously deadened their own racial instincts and are facing a demographic nightmare. Perhaps there is a correlation because legalized abortion is a symptom of permissiveness and indifference to the fate of future generations?
Wrong In Philosophy
The pro-choice movement is liberalism applied to the family.
Like other aspects of the Sexual Revolution, the results have been disastrous. It is 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, the freedom to be a moral degenerate, etc.
All these modern “freedoms” and “rights” are related. They all uncork the sexual impulse and channel it toward individual dissolution rather than reproduction and raising the next generation. Such a society will be full of blue-haired lesbians, angry feminists, and embittered MGTOWs. By definition, it will have a negative birthrate because future generations are such an afterthought in a me-obsessed world.
The nationalist worldview is starkly opposed to the liberal worldview. Liberals want to tear down the social order in order to build a new one on the basis of abstractions like “freedom” or “equality” or “social justice.” In contrast, a nationalist is someone who believes society should be based on natural organic bonds: racial and ethnic affinity, shared culture and values, meaningful blood ties that link the “individual” into web of generations that unites a person with his or her ancestors and descendants.
Abortion severs the mother-child bond which is the strongest of all organic bonds. Eugenicists would throw away the family in order to artificially breed a “superior race” that fits their vague Aryan Platonic ideal.
Eugenicists talk a lot about “identity” these days.
“Identity” is the big new thing, but sometimes eugenicists reveal their true feelings with statements like “the alt Right appreciates what is superior in man, in the Nietzschean sense” or “we should give positive incentives to raise the fertility of some and lower the fertility of others” or “for eugenic purposes, it might be very useful to fertilize a dozen eggs, sequence their genomes, choose only to implant the best, and wash the rest down the drain.”
Wow, it turns out that White identity isn’t that important after all. “White identity” is not good enough for Nietzschean supermen who contemplate aborting those who suffer from Down Syndrome with glee even when those highly infertile people obviously pose no “dysgenic” threat whatsoever to the community. Some eugenicists go even further and look forward to the day when human embryos can be sequenced and custom-made to order and all the inferior ones, not just those with Down Syndrome, but those who are afflicted with a potentially unlimited list of conditions defined by eugenicists (just imagine the potential for abuse here), can be diagnosed as unfit to live.
For all their talk about “identity,” the true passion of many eugenicists is “superiority.” They’re not white supremacists though. Whereas some conservatives believe White working class communities deserve to die, some eugenicists believe White working class children don’t even deserve to live.
I won’t linger too long on this sort of quackery. I will just note that genetic defects are a perfectly natural and inevitable consequence of mutations. Also, the many animal species that have been bred for qualities that humans find desirable have generally been rendered weak, docile, and inferior to their wild counterparts. Most wouldn’t survive if their human masters were to go extinct.
Eugenics and Abortion
How many times have you heard from eugenicists that we can’t afford to contest social issues like homosexuality or abortion?
Is this not interesting? The same people who say we can’t outlaw or restrict abortion are strongly in favor of even more implausible government mandated eugenics schemes. There is far more public support for restricting abortion than making dystopian science fiction movies a reality in the United States.
We’re Being Swamped
This is what America looked like in 1970 on the cusp of Roe v. Wade when abortion on demand was illegal in all but a handful of states:
Alabama – 74 percent White
Georgia – 74 percent White
South Carolina – 69 percent White
Mississippi – 63 percent White
Florida – 77 percent White
Louisiana – 66 percent White
Texas – 66 percent White
Oklahoma – 89 percent White
North Carolina – 77 percent White
Tennessee – 84 percent White
Arkansas – 81 percent White
Missouri – 89 percent White
Kentucky – 93 percent White
Virginia – 81 percent White
West Virginia – 95 percent White
California – 76 percent White
Hawaii – 37 percent White
Alaska – 77 percent White
Washington – 94 percent White
Oregon – 96 percent White
Idaho – 96 percent White
Nevada – 87 percent White
Arizona – 74 percent White
Utah – 94 percent White
New Mexico – 54 percent White
Colorado – 85 percent White
Wyoming – 92 percent White
Montana – 95 percent White
Illinois – 83 percent White
Indiana – 92 percent White
Ohio – 90 percent White
Michigan – 87 percent White
Wisconsin – 96 percent White
Minnesota – 98 percent White
Iowa – 98 percent White
Kansas – 93 percent White
Nebraska – 95 percent White
South Dakota – 95 percent White
North Dakota – 97 percent White
New York – 80 percent White
New Jersey – 85 percent White
Pennsylvania – 90 percent White
Maryland – 80 percent White
Delaware – 84 percent White
Connecticut – 91 percent White
Rhode Island – 96 percent White
Massachusetts – 95 percent White
Maine – 99 percent White
New Hampshire – 99 percent White
Vermont – 99 percent White
America has never in its entire history been whiter before or since.
Conservatives Are Pro-Life
It is true that conservatives are pro-life. It is also true that some of the most annoying people in the world and especially on the internet are pro-life conservatives.
Does that mean it is “cuckservative” to be pro-life? A cuckservative is a man who has been tricked by a woman into raising the offspring of another man. He is someone who “whether knowingly or unknowingly, loses control of his future” and who is “participating in the displacement of European Americans — their own children.” Basically, a cuckservative is a fool who loses control over his own genetic future.
If that is the case, what do you call a man or a woman who would kill their own child? Not just someone who is racially apathetic, who doesn’t get race, or doesn’t care about, say, White people in Poland, but someone who is willing to kill their own genetic offspring? If that it is not losing control over your own future, then nothing is. What about the people who applaud the death of 27.9 million European American children? If we ridicule cuckservatives for participating in the displacement of European-Americans, why should we be encouraging White people to abort millions of their own children?
Doesn’t that invite the inevitable comeback from conservatives: at least we aren’t the ones aborting the White race?
Leftists Are Aborting Their Children
This is one of the dumbest arguments out there: liberals are aborting their children, therefore conservatives are winning the demographic battle.
The people who are making this self-serving argument are just pro-abortion. They don’t really believe it themselves. Political ideology isn’t a heritable characteristic. Progressives aren’t genetically transmitting their ideology to their children. Even in the Deep South, most White people believe that miscegenation should be legal in 2016, the sight of which provoked lynch mobs two generations ago. Public opinion on gay marriage is also rapidly shifting here because of the power of the media.
Abortion Has Saved Us
This is an article of faith to many eugenicists: abortion has “postponed, perhaps by decades, the date that we will become a minority in this democracy.”
Here’s what the eugenicists don’t tell you: there were considerably more abortions in the 1980s and 1990s than there are today. The US abortion rate is now at its lowest rate since 1973. The eugenicists will happily point out that, today, White women have 36% of abortions. They don’t tell you that black and Hispanic abortions have surged in recent decades because so many fewer White women are getting them. When abortion was at its peak in the 1980s, it was White women who were getting 2/3rds of abortions.
A generation ago, the overwhelming majority of babies who were aborted were White. Abortion didn’t save us. If anything, it might have accelerated our decline by killing off so many White Millennials.
Down Syndrome and Genetic Defects
In the United States, every year around 5,300 babies are born with Down Syndrome and around 3,100 are aborted due to pre-natal testing. In 2011, an estimated 1,058,490 million abortions were performed, which means Down Syndrome abortions accounted for a whopping 0.29% of total abortions. What’s more, only 3% to 4% of Down Syndrome cases have a heritable component, and of those only 1% of Down Syndrome cases are hereditary. As of 2006, there have been 3 reported cases of men with Down Syndrome and 26 cases of women with Down Syndrome having children.
What about other genetic defects which loom large in the minds of eugenicists? Among women who have abortions, 3% cite a possible fetal health problem. It is also worth noting that less than 1% cite rape or incest as a reason to have an abortion.
Aren’t women who have abortions likely to be poor and therefore, as the eugenicists hold, inferior? In 2008, 42 percent of women who had an abortion fell below the federal poverty line. It is worth observing here though that among the women having abortions 17.2% are 15-19, 33.4% are 20-24, and 24.4% are 25-29.
The typical woman who has an abortion in the United States is likely to be in her twenties. Does it follow that a knocked up White 20-year-old co-ed at a state university working a minimum wage job is inferior? That makes no sense at all. The same survey from 2008 also breaks the numbers down by education: 12.3% of women who got an abortion in 2008 didn’t finish high school, 28.3% are high school graduates, 39.5% have some college education, and 19.9% are college graduates.
Over half the women who are getting abortions in the United States have attended college. Among unintended pregnancies, 32% of affluent women terminate their pregnancies versus 9% of low-income women. Poor women not trying to conceive are 3x more likely to get pregnant than affluent women, but also 5x more likely to give birth because they tend to keep the baby.
Colorado has been singled out and cited as an abortion success story.
Just so you know, the latest abortion numbers from Colorado in 2012 paint a very different story: Non-Hispanic White women are getting 60.8% of abortions in Colorado, Black women are getting 7.2%, Other accounts for 9% and Hispanic for 23%. The birthrate of low-income women that is plummeting in Colorado is likely that of White women.
Colorado was the first state to legalize abortion in 1967. Given that Hispanic abortions have only recently surged in the 1990s and 2000s, it is likely that White women in Colorado were an even greater share of total abortions in the past.
Culling The Black Horde
According to the CDC, 24% of all US abortions were performed on black women in the 1970s. That percentage rose to 30% in the 1980s, 34% in the 1990s, and 36% in the 2000s. From 1973 to 2013, there were 55.7 million abortions. If black women were responsible for 31% of abortions on average over a period of 40 years, then 17.2 million of the 55.7 million abortions since 1973 were black.
What about the other 38.5 million?
Culling The Hispanics
Determining the number of Hispanic abortions since 1973 is trickier. The CDC didn’t start collecting statistics on this until 1990. In 1990, Hispanic women accounted for 11.4% of abortions, 17.2% in 2000 and 21% in 2010. It is reasonable to assume the Hispanic abortion rate was around 7% in the 1980s and probably less than that in the 1970s. The Hispanic share of abortions has grown as their share of the population has increased due to immigration. If Hispanic women were responsible for 14% of abortions over the same time frame, then 7.8 million of the 55.7 million abortions since 1973 were Hispanic.
Culling “Other” Non-Whites
The “Other” category of abortions has ranged from 3.5% in 1985 to 6.5% in 2010. If the “Other” share of abortions has averaged 5 percent since 1973, then 2.8 million of the 55.7 million abortions were “Other” Non-White.
Non-Hispanic White Abortions
If we subtract the 17.2 million blacks, 7.8 million Hispanics, and 2.8 million “Other” Non-Whites from the 55.7 million, then we are left with 27.9 million Non-Hispanic White abortions, which means that 50.1% of abortions in the United States since 1973 have been Non-Hispanic Whites. To put this in perspective, if you killed every single person in Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Nebraska, you still wouldn’t have 27.9 million.
Eugenicists claim that abortion has been a win for White America because blacks are more likely than Whites to have abortions. What if abortion had been a 40-year-long race war? If 17 million blacks and 28 million Whites had died in the race war, and demographically the White side was still losing ground, would you describe the White side as the victor in the conflict? What if the conflict was still raging after 40 years and 28 million Whites and 28 million non-Whites had died in the race war?
It is worth noting that eugenicists like to decry the bloodbaths that were World War I and World War II. If you added up all the military deaths from France, Britain, and Germany in World War I and World War II combined, it wouldn’t amount to half the number of White children who have been aborted here since 1973.
Too Little Political Capital
When eugenicists are running out of arguments, one of the final cards they like to play is “we don’t have enough political capital” to worry about social issues. This is another self-serving argument. Eugenicists are pro-abortion and it has nothing to do with immigration restriction.
In the US and Europe, one of the primary arguments made by the pro-immigration lobby is that immigration is needed to replace an aging White workforce and to prop up the welfare state programs that aging Whites depend on. As it happens, the 45 million immigrants who have arrived since 1965 have replaced the 45 million Whites and blacks we have aborted since Roe v. Wade.
The Last Gasp
The final argument made by the eugenicists is that the black share of total abortions (31%) is greater than their current share of the American population. Thus, if the black children who were aborted had lived, the black share of the population would grow.
Let’s admit this is true. It is also true that this fundamentally reflects the abysmal White birthrate (1.76 per woman) and the slightly higher birthrate of blacks (1.90 per woman). It is also equally true that this racial disparity is reflected in all the babies who were not aborted. After 40 years of abortion, Non-Hispanic White births fell under 50% for the first time in American history in 2011. No amount of abortion is sufficient to change that.
White America is a sinking ship.
The proximate causes of our racial decline are not hard to figure out: the low birthrate, mass immigration, miscegenation and attrition. The ultimate cause, however, is spiritual exhaustion, an unwillingness to live and indifference toward the future.
The solution to this problem is unlikely to be found in abortion, gay marriage, anti-natalism, homosexuality, nihilism, eugenics, and männerbunds. A culture that celebrates homosexuality and miscegenation, passionately champions the causes of gender confusion and women’s liberation, which swipes right and hooks up, which engages in self-loathing, which aborts its own children and imports foreign races to replace them is inevitably going to be one that is dying.
These are all the many heads of the same liberal modernist snake. Oddly enough, eugenics is shot through with the same sort of self-defeating modernism. It is probably not a coincidence that so many of the original eugenicists – among them, Francis Galton, Harry Laughlin, Madison Grant – were childless men.
Charles Davenport, a founding father of American eugenics, believed that “having made our choice in marriage carefully, we, the married pair, should seek to have 4 to 6 children in order that our carefully selected germ plasm shall be reproduced in adequate degree and that this preferred stock shall not be swamped by that less carefully selected.” That was sound advice, the equivalent of the Bible’s “Go forth and multiply,” but it seems to have been rarely followed by his disciples who for all their fervor for better breeding and aborting the unfit are still strikingly more likely to be childless than just about any other group of Americans.
Many no doubt would have to give up homosexuality. Others would just have to give up their daydreaming. Some would have to have to accept Jesus Christ as their Savior or deal with the modern American woman. Still, it is best to lead by example, fellas.
Note: As a side note for pro-life conservatives who might be reading this, I wouldn’t be so quick to blame Hitler. In National Socialist Germany, providing an abortion to an Aryan woman was a capital offense.