Make Having Children Socially Desirable Again

by Frank Hilliard

(Traduit en français)

Feminism

White genocide is predicted by practically everyone based on the fact that Western women have essentially given up on having babies. Fertility rates in Europe are catastrophic, well below the 2.1 children per female needed to maintain the population. Germany, for example, is projected to drop in population from 80 million today to 68 million in 2060.

However, while everyone agrees population collapse is in our future, no one agrees on what’s causing the problem. Slate writer Jessica Grose quotes Wall Street Journal writer Manuela Mesco as suggesting the reason, in the case of Italian women, is that:

they’re spending more time getting educated, there aren’t enough jobs to go around, there’s a lack of day care options, and they are living with their parents well into adulthood.

There’s an assumption there that women need to get a university education, need to get a job, and need day care. Hold that thought.

A study by two academics, Matthias Doepke, Professor of Economics at Northwestern University and Fabian Kindermann, Assistant Professor at the University of Bonn, suggests the childcare workload is the issue:

We argue that disagreement (ed: over having children) is a consequence of an uneven distribution of the burden of childcare, coupled with a limited ability of spouses to make binding commitments. For example, if the woman anticipates that she would have to do most of the childrearing work, she will realize that this would impede her ability to pursue an independent career. As a consequence, if she had the child, her outside options would worsen and she would lose bargaining power within the marriage. The end result is that she may disagree with having a/another baby, even if the man would like to have one.

Here we see the same assumptions cropping up. It’s taken as given the woman is going to have a career; the issue for her is whether she will get help from her husband, or from a child care worker, in raising an additional child. There’s no suggestion the woman could consider raising the child as a career. Let’s have another look at Germany.

Spiegel Online questioned Karsten Hank, a demographic expert and sociologist at the University of Mannheim:

A well-known statistic that often gets bandied about in Germany is that 40-45 percent of women with university degrees are childless. I’m pretty sure most of these women planned to have children, but then didn’t, either because of their career or their advanced age when they started trying to get pregnant, Hank said. As a rule, university cities and urban centers have lower fertility rates than rural areas without higher education options. The closest Hank can come to a miracle formula for fertility is: don’t get an education, marry early and live on a farm. Hardly a tempting life plan.

Well, hardly tempting for Spiegel Online, but obviously a satisfying option for rural women in Germany (and elsewhere).

And so, here, we have three observers trying to solve a puzzle of why women are stressed and overworked when they try to manage two lifestyles who don’t ask the obvious question, why try? Why, exactly, are women struggling through university, the business world, the corporate ladder, the rush hour; why are they trying so desperately to beat men instead of letting men do the struggling while they bring up baby? Where, exactly, did they get the idea the work world was fun?

Oxydol - New Radiant Whiteness

This brings me back to the Oxydol advertisement at the top of the post. Young people today, even adults, don’t realize how ubiquitous soap commercials were on television, in magazines and newspapers back in the 1950’s. Oxydol, Cheer, Duz, Tide, Fab, Lux and many other brands inundated viewers and readers daily. It is obvious now, looking back at the copywriting, that impressing your husband, and your neighbours, on the quality of your washing had a very high social value for women in 1955. And I think that’s the key: social status.

Women are more social than men. They network more and have more friends than men. And within those networks they, naturally, seek acceptance, even praise. We’ve seen this in social media a lot, but it exists in society outside modern communication networks as well. In any group setting, women will exchange talking points that help them climb the social acceptance ladder. In the 1950s keeping a tidy house, having a family and hanging out a sparkling white wash was the way the game was played. In the 2000s it’s a university degree, a career and, bizarrely, getting tattoos.

Or to put that more simply, women aren’t having children because it no longer earns social brownie points in Western society to do so. Governments can hand out incentives, build day-care facilities, beg women to get pregnant; none of it will work. If it doesn’t advance a woman’s social standing, the wombs of the nation are going to stay empty.

Of course, this suggests a solution, doesn’t it?

It suggests that high status individuals in government, business and the media should start having large families and should parade them through the tabloids like the beautiful people they are. Of course, this would require them to be nationalists and unfortunately, most of them are globalists. What to do?

I would suggest we, the Alt-Right, should appeal to those prominent and wealthy conservatives on our side to start the ball rolling: have kids, make a great show of it, normalize large families. Where fashion leader lead, women will follow, whatever the cost. Status, after all, is everything.

What is the Point of Being a Liberal Anymore?

Roy Batty

Daily Stormer
February 26, 2018

I stumbled on a good talking point recently when trying to red pill some regular beta boy shmucks and thought I’d share.

They started rattling off their shitlib beliefs, but instead of fighting them head-on, I just asked them, “what are you getting out of all this?”

By “this” I meant modern shitlibbery and on the face of it, it’s a pretty simple question. Because what is politics in a democracy boiled down to its most basic level? It used to be that one interest group would organize and lobby the government to get what they wanted. If another interest group had different interests, these groups would then fight it out in the political arena.

It’s not ideal, I suppose. I don’t really even know what the difference is between lobbying and corruption except that one seems to be allowed for big corporations.

But I can understand people recognizing their material interests and just voting for them instead of fighting in the streets. As a system, it’s not the worst.

But most of the shit that we’re supposed to care about nowadays has no real bearing on our material well-being. I mean back in the day, politicians would at least break open a keg in the town square and throw a party to get people to vote for them.

Andrew Jackson literally gave his supporters massive amounts of cheese.

Pretty cool of him if you ask me.

But now people do shit to virtue-signal and they get no benefits out of it anymore. Take a typical beta soyboy. What does he even get for White Knighting or being a male feminist or pro-refugee or an anti-racist or whatever the fuck.

Nothing really. They get no girls, no extra money, nothing that benefits them materially in any way.

Take me for an example. Ideally, if I were to vote for a party, I would want to hear them offer me exactly what I want. It just makes more sense to me than advocating for shit that will hurt me but give me a moral tingling high.

If a politician came up and listed the following points on his platform, he’d have my vote. From the top in order of importance:

  • Make women hotter/thinner
  • Bring back low-waist jeans
  • Ban rap, hip-hop and hipster music from all bars, clubs, and public spaces
  • Ban Black people entirely
  • Ban old/fat/cat ladies from teaching at schools
  • Put ugly chicks in burkas
  • Gas the pit bulls
  • State-subsidized gym memberships
  • Free Thai massage on first Friday of every month
  • Lemonade-filled water fountains

It’s silly, but it should make sense.

If voting Liberal got me those things, maybe I would vote Liberal.

Speaking of my list of demands, I remember there was a time when girls tried to look like Britney Spears.

Now you can say whatever you want to say about Britney – she was never a very wholesome role model for young girls.

But she had a thin waistline that she showed off all the time. She single-handedly helped the low-waistline jeans trend take off.

And while it wasn’t very modest, it was admittedly pretty sexy and had good effects on women in America. There was no hiding your fat, you had to endure the shame or diet until you were sexy again.

Those were good times.

But now, the average girl tries to look like this.

Don’t be fooled. The return of high-waist mom pants coincides with the fatty epidemic. Hipster jeans became fashionable out of necessity as society had to collectively come to an agreement that it was better for the public good to just give up and mitigate the fat chick problem by hiding Millennials’ ugly hanging guts. Even if you got a new Britney Spears out there now to act as a thin role model or something, the Hipsters would launch a Freak Mafia hit job at her for conforming to toxic masculine standards of beauty or something. So better to just cover those fat folds up.

It’s sad to even think these things, but I believe that Britney was a symbol of a better time.

It was a time when the Liberals still offered something.

I guess the Jews still had to seduce the goyim and sweeten the deal to convince people to drop their standards. Things weren’t so ugly back then. As a result, people thought that life could be like a ((((((Seinfeld)))))) or Friends sitcom. It would just be about chilling with your good-looking friends in the big city, having fun and casual sex and everything would remain modern and civilized, only a bit more fun for everyone.

The people shouting about the end times coming soon were looked at as freaks. Everything was fine. Everything was getting more chill and there were few drawbacks.

I could see myself being a liberal back in the 90s if I wasn’t red-pilled.

I mean, if it meant having easy sex with thin girls wearing tight jeans that actively tried to look like Brittany Spears, that’d be one thing. You could probably sell me on that shit.

But now?

What does Liberalism offer anymore? Everything has become so ugly. People have no standards. Beauty is gone.

So I asked these blue-pilled “men” why they give so much of a shit about being proud Liberals. You don’t get easy sex with hot women, fast cars and fun times anymore. What does advocating for fag rights get you as a straight White man? For refugees? For Feminists? For nogunz?

Nothing.

And all around you, things have gotten much worse:

It’s Mad Max-tier shit for the prole Whites and ball crushing soyification for the SWPL-class huWhytes.

Just ask White men who are still Liberal, “what are you even getting out of this anymore?”

I think few of them could even answer you. Appealing to their selfishness cuts to the heart of the matter. It puts the thought in the normie’s mind that he is being taken for a ride, played for a chump somehow. And no one likes that feeling.

You don’t have to bring up the Jews, or all the red pill esoterica you’ve accumulated over the years.

Just imply that they’re getting screwed. Where’s their “Obama phone?” Where’s the hot big city gf? Where’s the cherry-red convertible? Where’s the steak dinner?

Watch them stutter and rethink their life decisions right before your eyes.

Blood-Sucking Kike Terrorist ((((((Adam Schiff)))))) Says Russians are Behind the Second Amendment!

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
February 19, 2018

If you’ve already accepted that the Russians were behind the election of Donald Trump – via shitposting on social media – then it shouldn’t be a major leap for you to accept that Russians on Twitter are responsible for the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

You see, initially the Founding Fathers said that no one should have guns. Then when they were browsing Groyper accounts on Twitter, they saw some lulzy memes and were like “LMFAOOOOO let’s give everyone guns so they can shoot up schools!”

That is the true factual history that goyim such as Donald Trump and other Nazis don’t want you to know.

Breitbart:

“The Russians are very big fans of our Second Amendment,” said Rep. ((((((Adam Schiff)))))) (D-CA) on Friday, during a discussion with MSNBC’s ((((((Andrea Mitchell)))))) as an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in Washington, DC.

Russians enjoy seeing Americans being murdered, said ((((((Schiff)))))), speaking within the context of Wednesday’s mass murder at a high school in Parkland, Florida.

“They don’t particularly want [a Second Amendment] of their own,” said ((((((Schiff)))))). “They don’t necessarily want lots of Russians running around with lots of guns, but they’re really happy we do. They would like nothing better than if we were shooting each other every day, which sadly, we are.”

Both Mitchell and ((((((Schiff)))))) linked unspecified “Russian interference” in American politics with allegations of “Russian bots” pushing political agitation online with respect to Wednesday’s mass shooting.

The shooter, Nikolas Cruz, was himself Jewish – which shows that not even the chosen ones themselves are immune to the power of Russian shitposting.

Russians actively seek to undermine “gun safety legislation,” alleged ((((((Schiff)))))), saying, “Looking at the Russian use of this horrible shooting in Florida, they would often combine pro-gun-control hashtags with anti-gun-control stories that were really designed to ridicule the movement in favor of gun safety legislation.”

Mitchell claimed, without evidence, that “Russian intermediaries” were both involved with and supporting the NRA across the 2016 presidential election cycles. She cited reporting from McClatchy based on anonymous sources alleging the existence of an FBI investigation into the matter. The claim was repeated by news media outlets such as CNNRolling Stone, and the New York Times.

If you are such a stupid goy that it is just dawning on you right now as you hear these interesting words from the chosen one ((((((Adam Schiff)))))) that the entire foundation of the United States is a Putinist conspiracy, then you are likely asking what it is you can do.

Well, the first thing you can do is support a law which makes it so no non-Jews are allowed to serve in the US government. God’s chosen people are the only ones who truly understand the depth of the Russian threat to our freedoms and our democracy, and are the only ones capable of grasping the fact that in order to stop them, we have to remove all of our freedoms.

You see, the Russians want us to have no freedoms, and in order to make that happen, they have to support our freedoms. Don’t worry if you can’t understand that. Only Jews can understand it, because they are superior. Which is why total control must be given to the Jews immediately.

Apple Publicly Admits The iPhone Is Designed Not To Last

By Arjun Walia

Not long ago, a study was published suggesting that Apple deliberately sabotages its old products. The study was performed by student Laura Trucco at Harvard University. By reviewing worldwide searches for “iPhone slow,” she found that this phrase was searched more, by a significant amount, whenever a new iPhone was about to be launched.

Trucco then compared her results to the findings of other searchers for Apple’s competitors’ phones,  such as “Samsung Galaxy slow,” and found that the phrase was not searched for more around the time that a new Samsung phone model was released.

The number of Google searches for “iPhone slow” spiked every time a new phone model was launched and made available to the public.

This isn’t uncommon, as most likely you’ve heard people complain about how their iPhones or Mac laptops continue to get slower over time. The point is, it’s fishy how it always coincides with the launch of Apple’s new products.

Over the past few years, this type of sentiment has been common across social media.

It’s also a common business practice. Goods are made to break, if they weren’t, corporations like Apple wouldn’t really experience much profit. Sure, new applications and features may be added, but a lot of money is probably going to be lost if people’s old iPhones are just as fast, and work just as well as the new ones.

Now, Apple has admitted to the correlation, but provided an explanation. Because older iPhones have aged batteries, the device slows down and doesn’t perform as well because it’s compensating for the poor battery and it spends more energy on trying to avoid forced and unexpected shutdowns, not because they want people to upgrade.

That being said, it’s quite clear that they do want people to upgrade, it’s the only way to sustain the company. They must keep releasing new products every single year, and the truth is, they probably already have a few years worth of products lined up so they can keep ahead of themselves.

In a statement to Buzzfeed, Apple said:

Our goal is to deliver the best experience for customers, which includes overall performance and prolonging the life of their devices. Lithium-ion batteries become less capable of supplying peak current demands when in cold conditions, have a low battery charge or as they age over time, which can result in the device unexpectedly shutting down to protect its electronic components.

Last year we released a feature for iPhone 6, iPhone 6s and iPhone SE to smooth out the instantaneous peaks only when needed to prevent the device from unexpectedly shutting down during these conditions. We’ve now extended that feature to iPhone 7 with iOS 11.2, and plan to add support for other products in the future.”

So what’s the solution to your slow iPhone? Get a new battery. That being said, they are purposefully designing their phones and providing you updates in accordance with planned obsolescence.


This article originally appeared on Collective Evolution.

News: Women Are Children Confirmed (TFM 42O)

THIS Is The Sick Reason Female Teachers Prey On Our Children!

The Sick Reason Teachers Continue To Have Sex With Students

… And sadly, the number is only growing at a disturbing rate.

There has been a series of news stories about female teachers having sex with their students over the decades, from Mary Kay Letourneau to the most recent (publicized case). Almost every state in the United States is reporting similar cases, and everyone is asking the same question: Why? The United States Department of Education’s most recent study (in 2004) on sexual predators, revealed that 40 percent of perpetrators of unwanted sexual attention toward children were women and that number has steadily risen over the past nine years. 

To understand why a female teacher would become sexually involved with one of her students, you have to understand what is going on in her head. Most of these women seem as though they’re vibrant, normal, healthy adult women, but they, themselves, may feel like teenagers inside. Many of them have arrested emotional development; they giggle and carry on very much as a teenager. What’s strange is that they choose one aspect of the student they focus on and they idealize that aspect into being one of honesty, integrity, and innocence — separate from the jaded views of the adult world.

Soon they see this teenager as being their age … like a peer. In psychology, this is frequently seen and typically referred to as “counter-transference.” The teacher focuses on one aspect of the child and idealizes it romantically; she then projects that onto her distorted reality. No one else realistically sees what the teacher has created in her mind. It becomes so bizarre that soon the teacher is planning her married life, with kids, after her student finishes high school.

One thing to consider is that we — as the public — tend to focus on the sex part of this relationship because that’s what ultimately leads to the arrest of the teacher. However, an emotional relationship usually develops long before sex take places. That is, the grooming, the meeting up, the numerous texts, the cute hand-written love letters, and the sleepless nights. If you create a safe environment for an intervention now, you can end the relationship before sex takes place — getting help for the child and taking legal action against the teacher.

The emotional part isn’t usually caught and the reasons are many. First of all, the child usually doesn’t say anything. Perhaps he’s afraid of a poor grade, he may like the extra attention or he may feel guilty and/or fearful. Secondly, parents aren’t usually immediately (if ever) alert to it, because they may brush it off with thoughts that the teacher’s extra attention is an effort to help their child. Lastly, if other kids do hear about it, they usually feel confused, concerned with who to tell and, often times, say they didn’t believe it.

Our teens’ lives revolve around school. For the most part, females working in the school are mentors for our children and help them become successful well-adjusted adults. When sexual abuse happens to any child the experience is a horrendous one, but when it happens at school with a teacher, the end result is sometimes tragic. As parents, there are signs that can alert you to something going on with your child. As with all things, it begins with open discussion, both, talking and listening to your child. You cannot begin a conversation about sexual boundaries if you aren’t engaged with your child on a day-to-day basis. Keep communication open and talk frequently to your child about their school life.

Most abuse begins with a process called “grooming.” If you notice your child engaged with any of these activities and you feel uncomfortable, it’s time to talk to your child:

  • Your child’s teacher wants a friendship with your child, including outings.
  • Your child’s teacher begins giving your child gifts that seem odd to you.
  • Your child’s teacher begins complimenting them on specific shirts or clothes.
  • Your child’s teacher begins to work at getting unusually close to you (the parent).
  • Your child’s teacher begins eroding boundaries, such as hugging, touching or rubbing your child’s back.
  • Your child’s teacher begins telling your child confidential, secretive or personal things.

As a parent, if you notice these behaviors, begin limiting your child’s time with their teacher. Talk to your child in a safe and supportive environment about their relationship with their teacher. Sexual abuse is a crime and if it is happening to your child, they are (without a doubt) being victimized.

You can expect them to feel afraid, evasive, and nervous. Reassuring them that it is NOT their fault and that you will help them is the most important thing to convey.

For more information or your free monthly relationship tips reach Mary Jo Rapini @ www.maryjorapini.com or join her weekday mornings for “Mind, Body, Soul with Mary Jo” on Fox 26 Houston at 9 A.M, by podcasts, Facebook, or Twitter  @ MaryJoRapini.

Clintons Self-Destruct In Glorious Corruption Scandal

After decades of putting up with these people, who were the poster children of the 1968 revolution as they gained power in the early 1990s, America may finally be free of the Clintons as the Uranium One scandal, ignored by the media, finally detonates in their faces.

The Clintons represented 1968 as it wanted to see itself: not a wild bacchanal of people attempting to avoid the sterile 1950s world by creating an even more selfish and manipulative one, but as an expression of “freedom” and “rights” — because what else is acceptable to express in a democracy? — guided by people who turned out to look relatively normal, suburban and middle class.

We were all creeped out by Bill. It was not that he had an affair in office, as surely he was not the first president to do so, but that he picked a Generation X kid who was obviously overweight and thus underconfident. When you are president, you cheat on your wife with supermodels. You do not use the vulnerable, essentially victimizing them. Yet the Left was silent on that issue.

We also felt some reservations about The Clinton Foundation, which seemed like the classic scam where the politician says he cannot help you, but if you make a donation to his brother, he will reconsider your case. It is just third-world corruption made genteel in appearance, but what else would we expect from the 1968ers, who made selfishness and lust into political values?

Then there were clear abuses of power like Benghazi, where either through incompetence or malignant neglect, Hillary Clinton left Americans in the field to die. That echoed the approach Bill Clinton had taken in Somalia, where he stranded American servicemen by refusing to give them the support they needed. For the Clintons, the rest of us are a means-to-the-end of the Clintons’ wealth, power and influence.

Clearly there were signs of Clinton fatigue in this last election cycle. Younger voters preferred Bernie Sanders because he simply admitted that the Democratic platform was socialism and was honest about it, where Hillary Clinton chose a feminist-based approach which attempted to incorporate other minorities as a series of footnotes. But she bullied her way in there, probably by threatening to release her files on the other Democratic operatives, who all appear to be corrupt as well.

We should face the fact that any ideology which promises Utopian absolutes is a license to steal. No one honest will claim to be able to “solve” poverty, for example, or end racial tension, since humans disliking other groups has been a cornerstone of human behavior since the dawn of time. Nor does anyone sane talk about equality as anything but equality of birth, which is what the founding fathers referred to, as a means of correcting the then already-prevalent idea that government should create equality. The founders argued instead that nature/God/gods created equality and rights, and that government should be restricted from attempting to alter that condition. No one sane talks about spreading democracy to a world that clearly does not want it. But insanity sells because it is easier than sanity and makes us have warm feelings, and for most people, when the group has warm feelings, they feel personally safe. Time after time, they elect charlatans who then steal everything they can.

And the Clintons, it seems, were more successful than most, ending up many times multimillionaires through the power they found in office.

But now, it seems, a life of crime has caught up with them:

On Tuesday, two House investigative committees announced they would start looking into the questionable Uranium One deal that Clinton approved while serving as the nation’s top diplomat — a deal that delivered effective control of 20% of the U.S.’ uranium mining assets to Russia’s state-owned Rosatom, and led to millions of dollars in “donations” to the family Clinton Foundation.

…Under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the State Department has processed some 32,000 pages of Hillary Clinton’s emails but, The Daily Caller reports, has “released a small fraction of those.” There are still some 40,000 other pages to be “processed,” which could take years.

…The FBI ultimately arrested and deported a 10-person Russian spy ring, including a “Cynthia Murphy” who, in 2010, had edged perilously close to Hillary’s State Department circles through a job she held with a leading Democratic financier.

Unlike the Trump dossier which the DNC purchased to use as a weapon in the 2016 presidential campaign, this shows us actual evidence with connections on both sides. If Russia intervened in the American election, and benefited Donald J. Trump, that is not evidence of corruption unless we can show the quid-pro-quo that is the hallmark of this kind of crime, essentially a trading of favors for money. But with the Clintons, we now have several instances of this.

It is only fitting that the hippies who brought us the horrors of 1968 go out in a blaze of corruption, perversion, incompetence and degradation as the Clintons are. There is a lesson here: whoever promises a world without consequences, and tells us that the obvious rules of reality do not exist, is not a saviour but a Satan, come to deceive us and take everything we have.