white birth rates – DS https://www.anglinarchive.com Daily Stormer Historical Archive Thu, 12 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.0.17 https://www.anglinarchive.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/cropped-favicon-32x32.png white birth rates – DS https://www.anglinarchive.com 32 32 Millennial Women are Refusing to Have Kids https://www.anglinarchive.com/2023/01/12/millennial-women-are-refusing-to-have-kids/ Thu, 12 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000
I’ll nail you, you trollop

Millennials are now approaching middle age, and they are the single most worthless generation in all of human history.

This is what the boomers have wrought.

Boomers were peasants who came into extreme wealth due to the way history flows towards the United States. Because they were genetic peasants, they had not idea how to deal with wealth, and they just became utterly self-absorbed psychos.

Most of them got divorced, permanently crippling any ability their children would have to develop normal family relations. The ones who stayed married had weird, alienating relationships that most of their kids didn’t want to copy.

Basically, if you grow up with parents, you base your entire perception of what relationships are on your parents. (Unless of course something changes drastically, such as a situation that makes you an order of magnitude materially better off than your parents, which is what happened to the boomers, which is why they broke the line of normal sex relations.)

Millennials grew up in a situation where, for the first time, parents cared more about themselves and their “happiness” than their children’s wellbeing. Even pushing 40 and obese, millennials are still just broken little kids. So of course they’re not having kids.

New York Post:

The number of births in the US has continued to decline — repeating a decades-long trend — as nearly half of American women under 45 are childless, according to a new study.

About 52% of women between the ages of 15 to 44 gave birth between 2015 to 2019 — a drop from nearly 55% in the prior four-year period, according to the study published by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics Tuesday.

The number of biological fathers in the same age range also dipped. From 2015 to 2019, about 40% of men had fathered a child — compared to about 44% during 2011 to 2015.

The number of babies each woman is birthing decreased as well and more and more women are putting off childbearing to later in life.

On average, US women had only 1.3 children in 2019 — the latest year of data included in the report. For men, that number was just 0.9 kids.

The study’s authors credit several reasons for the trends, including women obtaining higher levels of education as well as greater and longer career paths. The authors cited changing family values, financial concerns, improved access to contraception and relationship instability as additional reasons.

The number of women who have their first child at age 35 or older increased in 2019 — continuing earlier trends. Between 1972 and 2021, the number rose nine-fold, according to the report.

It’s really pointless to blame boomers. It’s funny to talk about, but it’s not something a mature person could get mad about. They all did the exact same thing – lived like children, never really taking on adult responsibilities, and therefore being unable to actually care for their own children. But the fact that they all did the same thing means that they can’t all be personally responsible. Maybe they are responsible in the moral, Christian sense, but not in a practical sociological sense.

The average boomer peasant in America had more material wealth and comfort than European monarchs had had a couple centuries earlier. It’s understandable that it felt to them like life was just a big silly party, and that they then developed an ideology that said they had a “right to be happy” (something that does not exist in any religion, but was pushed by several religions the boomers created, including the new age, atheism, and evangelical Christianity, all of which actively promoted feminism and divorce).

This would have happened to any generation of peasants who happened to come into massive wealth. Their parents were really the ones who first acquired the wealth, but that World War II generation had grown up poor, and didn’t have the background on how to raise children alongside wealth.

Boomers didn’t have the background on how to live with wealth and they did exactly what you would expect peasants with a bunch of money to do. Instead of developing taste for fine things, they were just vulgar. The most obvious example of the boomer mind is the McMansion.

People from old money do not live in mansions. When the real mansion was a thing, it was a time before electronic communications and fast travel. Entire delegations would go on trips to different cities for months or years. Therefore, the rich had very big houses where they could host guests. The reality is that there is only so much living space a person can use, and if you have too much space, it actually decreases comfort.

But instead of going for finer things, the boomers said “I can build a really BIG house! It’ll be as big as a BARN!” The houses were mostly made of plastic, all of the walls were white, and they hung offensive abstract modern art on the very white walls.

This kind of infantile idiocy represents the entire boomer paradigm, and it extended fully to the way they made decisions about family. Feminism was embraced under the slogan “if it feels good, do it.” This was the creed of the boomer. Of course their relationships failed universally. I’ve never heard of a “successful boomer couple.” In the very best of cases, the boomer male submitted completely to the boomer female to avoid the hassle. In any boomer relationship that did not end in divorce, the woman had total power over the man. There might be some exception that someone knows of from their personal life, but I’ve never heard of it.

Basically, in the 1960s, men – probably understandably – thought that “free love” would lead to unlimited sex, so they encouraged these women to go totally off the reservation. It was then impossible to put that genie back in the bottle. The entire society became monomaniacally fixated on expanding female power.

Of course, we can talk about “millennials,” but what we’re really talking about is women, because it’s women’s choice whether to have children. Women can convince men to have children or they can just stop taking birth control and tell the man to ejaculate inside of them.

Millennial men didn’t go out of their way to have children, but it probably wouldn’t have mattered if they had. Millennial women are about six million times worse than their mothers when it comes to just totally unhinged hysteria. A woman’s life only has order equivalent to the amount of male authority in their lives. Boomer men never developed authority (that train left the station during Pussy Quest 1969), but boomer females still had the influence of their fathers.

Millennials didn’t ever even know the concept of male authority, so the women are wrecking balls that destroy everything around them. There is an ideology built up around this, but as with all ideologies, it’s just an explanation for something that is already happening due to material factors.

Women’s sole purpose is to breed. Obviously, if women are turned into an absolute mess, they are going to stop performing their primary function.

]]> The Science Says Christians Will be a Minority in US Within 50 Years https://www.anglinarchive.com/2022/09/20/the-science-says-christians-will-be-a-minority-in-us-within-50-years/ Tue, 20 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0000

Haha.

They told you it was just your race being replaced, and Ben Shapiro said he didn’t give a damn about the “browning of America.”

It turns out, Ben Shapiro also didn’t give a damn about the Islamification and atheistization of America. Because he’s Jewish.

The Guardian:

Christians in the US may become a minority group by 2070 if recent trends continue, according to data released by the Pew Research Center.

To predict how the US religious landscape will change over the next 50 years, the center posed several questions: “What if Christians keep leaving religion at the same rate observed in recent years? What if the pace of religious switching continues to accelerate? What if switching were to stop, but other demographic trends – such as migration, births and deaths – were to continue at current rates?”

The center modeled four hypothetical scenarios, based on trends including no switching, steady switching, rising disaffiliation with limits and rising disaffiliation without limits.

The scenario of no switching hypothesizes that Christians will keep their majority through 2070. But in that scenario the center predicts the share of Christians will still decrease by 10 percentage points over the next 50 years, “primarily as a result of Christians being older than other groups, on average, and the unaffiliated being younger, with a larger share of their population of childbearing age”.

The steady switching scenario predicts that Christians will lose their majority but will still be the biggest US religious group in 2070.

“If switching among young Americans continued at recent rates, Christians would decline as a share of the population by a few percentage points per decade”, the center said.

“In 2070, 46% of Americans would identify as Christian, making Christianity a plurality – the most common religious identity – but no longer a majority … the share of ‘nones’ [individuals who are not religiously affiliated] would not climb above 41%”.

The rising disaffiliation with limits scenario will see “nones” become the largest group in 2070 but not a majority, assuming “brakes are applied” to keep retention among Christians from decreasing below 50%.

“If the pace of switching before the age of 30 were to speed up initially but then hold steady, Christians would lose their majority status by 2050, when they would be 47% of the US population (versus 42% for the unaffiliated),” Pew said.

Last, for the scenario of rising disaffiliation without limits, Christians would no longer be a majority by 2045, assuming that switching rates before the age of 30 were to accelerate. As a result, by 2055, the unaffiliated would become the country’s largest group at 46%, ahead of Christians at 43%.

…

In each of the scenarios, non-Christian believers will double in proportion, to represent 12% to 13% of the US population.

This is one reason why I would never attack the Mormons. Maybe they believe in Space Jesus, but at least they believe in some kind of Jesus and they act normal in society.

I support any Christians breeding more, but evangelicals just don’t. Evangelical boomers failed to pass on their beliefs to their children, now you just have a gigantic gaping would in the soul of America.

We need to fix our religion, and fix feminism, and really start breeding a lot, frankly. But we need to breed within a religion that can be passed to the next generation, or it’s just a waste of time – our kids will join the Jews.

We need some kind of real religious revival. We need it as a basic practical matter. And that must come from a religion that is stable. “Bible Believing Christianity” and other forms of evangelicalism simply do not work. They have failed, miserably.

Meanwhile, the Catholic Church is gaining ground in a secularized society.

So, figure it out.

]]> Elon Musk Tweets About Unsustainable White Birthrates https://www.anglinarchive.com/2022/05/25/elon-musk-tweets-about-unsustainable-birthrates-in-america/ Wed, 25 May 2022 00:00:00 +0000

USA birth rate has been below min sustainable levels for ~50 years pic.twitter.com/v5PSLbvEAE

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 24, 2022

Elon Musk is touching the third rail and discussing the white birthrates.

He’s making a lot of people very mad.

I hope he has a good plan here. He’s going to need a good plan.

There’s no backing down now.

]]> Elon Musk Says Biggest Risk to Civilization is Declining Birthrates https://www.anglinarchive.com/2021/12/10/elon-musk-says-biggest-risk-to-civilization-is-declining-birthrates/ Fri, 10 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0000

Elon Musk, who has seven children, including a toddler, thinks there are 'not enough people' on Earth, and that could threaten human civilization.https://t.co/NuFnZLuvLU

— News18.com (@news18dotcom) December 9, 2021

It pains me to even say it after those unnatural acts he did with that gay dog: but I’m officially bullish on Elon Musk (please don’t confuse that with being bullish on Telsa stock, which in the long term, I’m not really – in the short term due to fed policy, I’m bullish on all assets, particularly anything involving the word “floki”).

Previously: 

Elon’s new haircut may have given him special powers.

How can you not be bullish on a guy saying stuff like this, regardless of what he might do with dogs?

I haven’t seen a powerful white man tell white people to have more babies since Vladimir Putin.

New York Post:

Tesla CEO Elon Musk believes the biggest threat to humanity is the declining birthrate, warning that civilization will “crumble” if people don’t start having more kids.

“I think one of the biggest risks to civilization is the low birthrate and the rapidly declining birthrate,” the father of six said at the Wall Street Journal’s annual CEO Council Monday evening.

“And yet, so many people, including smart people, think that there are too many people in the world and think that the population is growing out of control,” Musk continued.

“It’s completely the opposite. Please look at the numbers — if people don’t have more children, civilization is going to crumble, mark my words.”

…

In July of this year, analysts at Morgan Stanley attributed the declining birthrate to concerns related to climate change.

The “movement to not have children owing to fears over climate change is growing and impacting fertility rates quicker than any preceding trend in the field of fertility decline,” they said at the time.

I wish he would just come out and start posting real statistics about “climate change.”

He might.

I mean, the guy drunk tweets like no one else.

Of course, Tesla is apparently based around theories about the weather for most promoters of it, but he is obviously not stupid enough to actually believe this gibberish.

Musk with the child he refused to properly name.

]]> Making Babies is the “Grandest Act of Climate Destruction” https://www.anglinarchive.com/2021/10/18/making-babies-is-the-grandest-act-of-climate-destruction/ Mon, 18 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0000

The Science says: don’t have kids.

The most important thing is that you cease breeding, goy.

Spectator:

About four years ago, my wife and I, who are both in our thirties, briefly thought we were having a baby. For the next few nights my dreams were of nuclear flashes lighting up the sky, of the earth cracking open and of waves lapping at the front door.

Humans are swiftly making the planet uninhabitable. Why would we want to bring another human being into the world? I’ll admit that my climate anxiety is as melodramatic as it is severe. But polls show that I’m not alone and the figures of declining birth rates speak for themselves. For a population to sustain itself, the average woman has to have 2.1 children in her lifetime. In the US — thanks in part to fears about the future of the planet — that figure is now around 1.7.

This is quite something, given that procreation is hardwired into the human psyche. Passing on our genes is the biological reason we were born. It’s why we want sex, arguably why we ‘want’ at all. To choose not to have children is to prune oneself from the genetic tree — to defy human nature. It’s not much to help the planet by recycling or driving an electric car. But to not have children? That sounds extreme. Yet to me and many others, so too is the threat we all face.

Everything inside me says ‘have children’, but it’s everything outside that makes so many of my generation say ‘no’. The scientific consensus is clear: unless we all take drastic steps to limit our carbon emissions, the planet will become uninhabitable, and I don’t believe humanity will coordinate those steps in time. The choice for parenthood is based on hope for the future, so of course it’s affected when that future looks hopeless.

Yeah, if things are looking like humanity will go extinct, let’s just preemptively extinguish humanity, just in case. You know, to be really sure.

The only people capable of riding that stupid train of thought are white.

For me, there are two levels here. Let’s get the semi-altruistic one out of the way first because, to be honest, it’s the lesser half: the pitter-patter of each new pair of carbon footprints is disastrous for the world.

If you’re serious about reducing your climate footprint, there is nothing more powerful you can do than decide not to have kids. The facts are clear and brutal. One academic study set it out a few years ago: if you live car-free, you save 2.4 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e) per year. If you avoid airplane travel, it’s 1.6 tCO2e saved per round transatlantic flight. Eating a plant-based diet saves 0.8 tCO2e a year. But not having a child, in the developed world at least, saves 59 tonnes (tCO2e) emission reductions per year. So having a child inflicts far more harm on the planet than all the jet-setting and steak-eating you might do: it wipes out any climate good we can as individuals hope to achieve during our lifetimes.

If they’re really serious about reducing their climate footprint, there’s something even more powerful for them to do than not having kids: killing themselves.

But these climate cultists don’t love the planet that much.

It doesn’t really matter though, because these are the same people that took Bill’s mystery juice.

]]> US Expects 300,000 Fewer Babies to be Born This Year https://www.anglinarchive.com/2021/03/05/us-expects-300000-fewer-babies-to-be-born-this-year/ Fri, 05 Mar 2021 00:44:23 +0000

The New York Times published an opinion piece by two economics professors, Melissa S. Kearney and Phillip B. Levine, that looks into some of the causes and consequences of the declining birth rates.

New York Times:

The Covid-19 pandemic has thrown the country into an economic recession and an unprecedented restructuring of our work and social lives. Early on, some likened the public health crisis to a blizzard, imagining that people would stay home, cozy up with their romantic partners and make babies.

These playful visions have given way to a more sobering reality: The pandemic’s serious disruption of people’s lives is likely to cause “missing births” — potentially a lot of them. Add these missing births to the country’s decade-long downward trend in annual births and we can expect consequential changes to our economy and society in the years to come. Unfortunately, there are no easy fixes.

(“Unfortunately, there are no easy fixes”? What? The easy fix is to incentive marriage and children, and disincentivize divorce and infertility. The government is already printing trillions of dollars, why not give some to couples who have kids?)

Research we did last year showed that the Covid pandemic would lead to a decline in U.S. births of about 8 percent, as compared with the number of expected births without a pandemic, resulting in 300,000 fewer births this year than would otherwise be expected. This prediction was based largely on the fact that economic factors affect people’s decisions about whether and when to have a baby.

…

School closures, public-gathering limits and social-distancing mandates are also likely to have an effect. Millions of parents are dealing with the stress of combining their work responsibilities with the need to supervise and teach their children who no longer attend school five days a week. This raises the “cost” of rearing children and can be expected to lead to fewer siblings being conceived this year.

Moreover, restrictions on social activities also mean some relationships that would have started in 2020 (and might have led to babies someday) never took root. We have no precedent to estimate changes in birthrates from these disruptions, but they will undoubtedly also contribute to a large reduction in overall births.

Recent data confirms the likelihood of a sizable “baby bust.” Surveys conducted this summer revealed that couples were intentionally putting their pregnancy plans on hold and having sex less often. Google searches for pregnancy-related terms, such as pregnancy tests, were down. Averted conceptions starting with the pandemic’s arrival in March 2020 would show up as missing births starting in December 2020. Official birth data from the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics will not be available for many more months, but some states have already released provisional birth data. In January 2021, which would be the first month in which all full-term babies born were conceived after the lockdown began, births fell by 7.2 percent in Florida and 10.5 percent in California, after adjusting for secular trends, seasonal variation and the use of provisional birth data.

…

In the absence of effective policies to meaningfully increase births, the most reliable and immediate way to shore up the U.S. population is through immigration, which brings its own political and social challenges. To maintain economic growth without immigration to offset the decline in births, we would need an increase in the share of working-age individuals employed or an increase in the productivity of workers, or both. But both employment rates and productivity have also been falling. Turning things around will require a significant investment of public resources to improve our country’s economic competitiveness.

The declining birthrate has been an issue for years, and the pandemic has pushed it into overdrive. This is likely to have demographic, social and economic implications for many years to come.

Every incentive now is to push down the white birth rate, and replace whites with nonwhites.

Do you think nonwhites are not having kids because of a fake virus? Blacks and Mexicans?

Of course they are.

The people that are skipping having kids are the people who plan to have kids, which are overwhelmingly going to be white. This is 300,000 fewer white babies.

This is just another very convenient coincidental result of the “pandemic.”

]]>