Globalisation tanked Western wages, birth rates

Duh? Nothing to do with women, who always worked. That was a false flag by Peterson, who curiously didn’t show any data (because that data does not exist). Women always worked, even in pre-industry, except the royalty and certain aristocrats. That is nowhere near most women, let alone all.
Contrary to Peterson’s nagging, Western incomes are still high internationally, so what would explain the 60s-00s replacement of the working class, but globalisation broadly and international competition from mass immigration locally? Naturally his lefty politics won’t allow him to finger the true culprit because that raises uncomfortable questions for his age group.

keep up the white guilt, clearly!
For example, how the World we bred will be fed as white people die out.

Missionaries violated the Bible by giving gibs to heathens, as in ‘those who will not work, shall not eat’.
https://www.worlddata.info/average-income.php
But y’know, that’s just actually looking for the DATA.

UK average income $42k.
Meanwhile places with an intact culture (relatively) and plausibly more K-family units (read: high marriage rates) have super low incomes and larger families as the norm still.
e.g.
Poland $15.2k
Croatia $14.9k
Russia $11.2k
Serbia $16.1k
Hungary $7k
since you all have such a hard-on for the EE nations

so it’s a blatant FALLACY to conflate income with family formation in white people

with ONGOING data to prove it decisively (no muh 21st century is different)

losers: “it’s all about the money! that’s why women don’t want me!” sure

and population has gone up steadily e.g. Russia.
https://www.worlddata.info/europe/russia/populationgrowth.php
The data is out there but the fake redpill refuse to admit immigration is the problem and always has been (because literally most of them are immigrants, Magic Dirt men playing hello fellow white man). They wish to foment mutual white hatred (r-select impulse, the spiteful mutant) and what are the two biggest demographics in any race? Men v. women. Men stop protecting the women, women are easy prey. Divide, conquer. Cowardly but dysgenic.

The rise of the East has killed the West and the traditional breeding stock of the working class.
Globalisation kills.
Blaming the in-group is what the Globalists want, it produces further sterility and prevents you from questioning them (political triangulation), see: SJWs salivating over causing a gender war and larping as white women when they aren’t (religiously).

Did women get the vote in 1995, ya morons?

FFS pay attention

example of this all with EE nations again:

this took me five minutes to research, what is Peterson’s excuse?

Poland has one of the lowest birth rates in the EU (as covered before, the r-women don’t want kids when asked)
but even their population has been holding steady despite emigration and low incomes
.
https://www.worlddata.info/europe/poland/populationgrowth.php
Blaming ‘women’ for working is plain ignorant of history! Did they think their grandmothers all twiddled their thumbs?
What would they prefer? Living on welfare? Starving? Working until their eggs are all gone? Those are the only options, all demographic death. Women cannot fix this and shouldn’t be blamed for it. At some point they need to man up and admit men need to correct the ‘mistakes’ of their forefathers i.e. globalisation, immigration, multiculturalism.

There was data going round, mentioned by Academic Agent, that if only women voted in the UK since WW2, no left wing government would’ve ever gotten into power since. I’d like a video on that. Shan’t hold my breath but if enough people pester him he could trigger some broflakes because the sloth of r-men votes socialism due to lower T, r-women want to work. Americans need to look at data before complaining. Why are no major MGTOW/MRA channels removed from youtube? The plan is anti-white family, duh.

Besides, adopting pure r, we physically could not outnumber them by over-breeding, they’re generations ahead of us. The baby cult cannot flatten r-numbers.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/continents-of-the-world-by-total-fertility-rates.html

“The global fertility rate fell from 5.25 children per woman in 1900, to 2.44 children per woman in 2018. The steepest drop in this shift happened in a single decade, from 1970 to 1980.”
When Boomers gave the Pill to unmarried couples
and factories moved overseas.

“The overall decline in fertility rates isn’t expected to end anytime soon, and it’s even expected to fall past 2.1 children per woman, which is known as the “replacement rate”. Any fertility below this rate signals fewer new babies than parents, leading to an eventual population decline.
Experts predict that world fertility will further drop from 2.5 to 1.9 children per woman by 2100. This means that global population growth will slow down or possibly even go negative.”
All socialist/Marx models rely on rising population, that’s why all their policies e.g. Sex Ed, single parent gibs, no criminal punishment for adultery, all have the same outcome. They’re breeding chattel for their pension pot.
Socialists oversee the breeding of their own slaves. Dark, huh?

As Darwin suggested, evolution is a race for life, and until the overseas threats are dealt with, local solutions are null and void. The ship is sinking, stop your enemies from blowing more holes in the boat. K-selection requires a fair i.e. closed system for operation. Globalists hate this because one such system would easily outcompete them. R-types pouring into the same territory exploiting shared resources will starve all Ks.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/third-world-countries

Going by the historical definition, nations such as Finland, Sweden, Ireland, and Switzerland were Third World countries. Based on today’s definition, these would not be considered Third World countries. Instead, what many now interpret “Third World” to mean encompasses economically poor and non-industrialized countries, as well as newly industrialized countries.

Peterson is a globalist liar.

Just read the basic DATA, enclosed:

https://oecdobserver.org/news/archivestory.php/aid/884/The_West_and_the_Rest_in_the_International_Economic_Order.html

Pasted for completion, ho ho ho.

The international economic order has changed in the last 40 years and will no doubt go on changing, as leading economist, Angus Maddison, explains.*

In 1962, we usually divided the world into three regions. The advanced capitalist group was then known as the developed world. The second was the “Sino-Soviet bloc”. Countries “in course of development” were the third world. The China-USSR split occurred in the early 1960s; most of the communist regimes collapsed around 1990, and the hostility of the cold war has largely faded away. The income gap between the former communist countries and the advanced capitalist group has become very much wider than it was. For this reason, a tripartite division of the world economy is no longer appropriate.

For rough comparisons, it is now useful to divide the world in two and compare developments in the advanced capitalist group with the aggregate for lower-income countries – designated as the “West” and the “Rest” in our tables. On average, the West increased its income per head fourfold from 1950 to 2001 – a growth rate of 2.8% a year. In the rest of the world there was a threefold increase – a growth rate of 2.2%. In both cases this was much better than earlier performance. From 1820 to 1950, income grew 1.3% a year in the West and 0.6% in the Rest. Though the gap in income level was still increasing, the acceleration in performance was bigger in the Rest.

Population of the West rose by half from 1950 to 2001 (0.8% a year), about the same pace as in 1820-1950. In the Rest, the situation was very different. Population grew by 2.0%, compared with 0.6% in the earlier period. This reflected a major improvement in welfare as mortality declined and life expectation rose from 44 to 65 years in 2001 – much faster than in the West. In the past two decades birth rates have fallen rapidly – a demographic transition which happened earlier in the West.

The West is now a relatively homogeneous group in terms of living standards, growth performance, economic institutions and modes of governance. Over the past five decades there has also been significant convergence in most of these respects. This is not true of the Rest. There are more than 180 countries in this group. They have nearly all increased their income levels significantly since 1950, but the degree of success has varied enormously. Most of Asia is experiencing fast per capita income growth. Most African countries are fairly stagnant. Most Latin American countries found it very difficult to keep a steady trajectory of advance in the 1980s and 1990s. Population growth is fastest in Africa, a good deal slower in Latin America and slower still in Asia. Life expectation and levels of education are lowest in Africa, better in Latin America, and better still in Asia.

Between 1950 and 2001, the Asian group increased per capita income fivefold and narrowed the relative gap between their incomes and the West. In other regions there was no convergence. Latin American income rose more than twofold, in the former command economies of Eastern Europe and the USSR less than twofold and in Africa about two thirds.

The divergence was even more striking in 1990-2001. In this period the Western group increased their income by a fifth, the Asian group by half, Latin America by a sixth, Africa stagnated and in the former communist countries per capita income fell by a quarter. [DS: WHYYYYYYY]

American policy since 1973 has been much more successful than that of Western Europe and Japan in realising potential for income growth. The incidence of unemployment is now about half of that in Western Europe, whereas in 1950–1973 it was usually double the European rate. Labour force participation increased, with employment expanding from 41% of the population in 1973 to 49% in 1998, compared with an average European rise from 42 to 44%. The percentage drop in working hours per person was half of that in Western Europe. These high levels of activity were achieved with a rate of inflation which was generally more modest than in Western Europe.

US policymakers have been less inhibited in operating at high levels of demand than their European counterparts. Having the world’s major reserve currency, and long used to freedom of international capital movements, they generally treated exchange rate fluctuations with benign neglect. The Reagan administration made major tax cuts, and carried out significant measures of deregulation in the expectation that they would provoke a positive supply response that would outweigh potential inflationary consequences. The US operated with more flexible labour markets. Its capital market was better equipped to supply venture funds to innovators. Its economy was as big as Western Europe but much more closely integrated. Demand buoyancy was sustained by a stock market boom in the 1990s.

The United States was a major gainer from the globalisation of international capital markets. In the postwar period until 1988, US foreign assets always exceeded liabilities, but thereafter its net foreign asset position moved from around zero to minus $1.5 trillion (more than 20% of GDP). Thus the rest of the world helped to sustain the long American boom and financed the large US payments deficit.

Future prospects

The table provides a quantification of growth performance of eight major regions of the world economy and some very tentative projections for development up to the year 2015.

The demographic projections are those of the United Nations Population Division, and indicate a continuing decline in the rate of population growth in virtually all parts of the world. Nevertheless there will still be a very striking difference between the advanced capitalist group and Africa. At 0.33% a year it would take 210 years to double population in the first group. In Africa it is likely to happen within 32 years. [forcing all white people to marry would not work]

In making per capita GDP projections, I assumed a continuance of 1990-2001 rates of performance in Western Europe and Japan and a mild slowdown in the USA, where the information technology bubble of the 1990s has burst, and where the capital inflow which financed its trade deficit seems likely to slacken substantially. Aggregate per capita growth in the “West” seems unlikely to slow down very significantly, but combined with the demographic slowdown, it means that aggregate GDP growth would be about 2% a year. This pace would be similar to that in 1913-1950. Growth momentum transmitted by the “West” is likely to be more modest than in 1870-1913 and 1973-2001.

Asia (excluding Japan)

The most buoyant part of the world economy since the early 1970s has been Asia (excluding Japan). These economies have grown faster than those of the West and their buoyancy has been sustained in great part by their own policies. Their weight in the world economy is much larger than any other non-Western region. I assumed that their per capita growth 2001-2015 will be at the same pace as in 1990-2001.

These economies are catching up with the West and are still at a level of development where “opportunities of backwardness” are unlikely to erode. The combination of high investment rates and rapid GDP growth means that their physical capital stock has been growing more rapidly than in other parts of the world. The East Asian economies also have a high ratio of employment to population. This is due to falling fertility and a rising share of population of working age, but also reflects the traditionally high labour mobilisation of multi-cropping rice economies. In all cases which are documented they had high rates of improvement in education and the quality of human capital. Equally striking were the rapid growth of exports, the high ratio of exports to GDP, and a willingness to attract foreign direct investment as a vehicle for assimilation of foreign technology. These characteristics of China, South Korea and Chinese-Taipei have made for super-growth, but there is a second tier of countries whose growth is accelerating rapidly. The most notable case is India which has the potential to join the super-growth club. There are other economies where prospects are more problematic, but these are only a sixth of the Asian total. The projections assume no substantial change in their performance.

Latin America

Latin America is the second largest non-Western region with about 8% of world product and a slightly bigger share of world population. Until the 1970s, economic policy was different from that in the advanced capitalist group. Most countries never seriously tried to observe the fixed rate discipline of Bretton Woods. National currencies were repeatedly devalued, IMF advocacy of fiscal and monetary rectitude was frequently rebuffed, high rates of inflation became endemic. Most countries reacted with insouciance to the worldwide explosion of prices, and governments felt that they could accommodate high rates of inflation. They were able to borrow on a large scale at negative real interest rates to cover external deficits incurred as a result of expansionary policies.

However, the basic parameters had changed by the early 1980s. By then, the OECD countries were pushing anti–inflationary policy very vigorously. The change to restrictive monetary policy initiated by the US Federal Reserve pushed up interest rates suddenly and sharply. Between 1973 and 1982, external debt increased sevenfold and the credit worthiness of Latin America as a whole was grievously damaged by Mexico’s debt delinquency in 1982. The flow of voluntary private lending stopped abruptly, and created a massive need for retrenchment in economies teetering on the edge of hyperinflation and fiscal crisis. In most countries resource allocation was distorted by subsidies, controls, widespread commitments to government enterprise and detailed interventionism. Most of them also had serious social tension, and several had unsavoury political regimes.

In the 1930s, most Latin American countries resorted to debt default, but it was not a very attractive option in the 1980s. World trade had not collapsed, international private lending continued on a large scale. The IMF and World Bank had substantial facilities to mitigate the situation, and leverage to pressure Western banks to make involuntary loans and legitimate a substantial degree of delinquency.

In the 1980s, the attempts to resolve these problems brought major changes in economic policy. But in most countries, changes were made reluctantly. After experiments with heterodox policy options in Argentina and Brazil, most countries eventually embraced the neoliberal policy mix pioneered by Chile. They moved towards greater openness to international markets, reduced government intervention, trade liberalisation, less distorted exchange rates, better fiscal equilibrium and establishment of more democratic political systems.

The cost of this transition was a decade of falling per capita income in the 1980s. After 1990, economic growth revived substantially but the process was interrupted by contagious episodes of capital flight.

My projections for Latin America assume some modest improvement in per capita performance in 2001-2015.

Africa

Africa has nearly 13% of world population, but only 3% of world GDP. It is the world’s poorest region. Its population is growing seven times as fast as in Western Europe. Per capita income in 2001 was below its 1980 peak. African economies are more volatile than most others because export earnings are concentrated on a few primary commodities, and extremes of weather (droughts and floods) are more severe and have a heavy impact.

As a result of rapid growth, little more than half the population is of working age. Almost half are illiterate. They have had a high incidence of infectious and parasitic disease (malaria, sleeping sickness, hookworm, river blindness, yellow fever). Over two thirds of HIV-infected people live in Africa. As a result the quantity and quality of labour input per head of population is much lower than in other parts of the world.

European powers became interested in grabbing Africa in the 1880s. Twenty-two countries eventually emerged from French colonisation, 21 from British, 5 from Portuguese, 3 from Belgian, 2 from Spanish. Germany lost its colonies after the First World War, Italy after the Second. The colonialists created boundaries to suit their own convenience, with little regard to local traditions or ethnicity. European law and property rights were introduced with little regard to traditional forms of land allocation. Hence European colonists often got the best land and most of the benefits from exploitation of mineral rights and plantation agriculture. African incomes were kept low by forced labour or apartheid practices. Little was done to build a transport infrastructure or to cater for popular education.

Colonisation ended between 1956 and 1974. In South Africa, the mass of the population did not get political rights until 1994. Independence brought many serious challenges. The political leadership had to try to create elements of national solidarity and stability more or less from scratch. The new national entities were in most cases a creation of colonial rule. There was great ethnic diversity with no tradition or indigenous institutions of nationhood. The linguistic vehicle of administration and education was generally French, English or Portuguese rather than the languages most used by the mass of the population. Africa became a focus of international rivalry during the cold war. China, the USSR, Cuba and East European countries supplied economic and military aid to new countries viewed as proxies in a worldwide conflict of interest. Western countries, Israel and Chinese-Taipei were more generous in supplying aid and less fastidious in its allocation than they might otherwise have been. As a result, Africa accumulated large external debts which had a meagre developmental pay-off.

There was a great scarcity of people with education or administrative experience. Suddenly these countries had to create a political elite, staff a national bureaucracy, establish a judiciary, create a police force and armed forces, send out dozens of diplomats. The first big wave of job opportunities strengthened the role of patronage and rent-seeking, and reduced the attractions of entrepreneurship. The existing stock of graduates was too thin to meet the demands and there was heavy dependence on foreign personnel.

The process of state creation involved armed struggle in many cases. Many countries have suffered from civil wars and bloody dictators. These wars were a major impediment to development.

In many African states, rulers have sought to keep their positions for life. In most states, rulers relied for support on a narrow group who shared the spoils of office. Corruption became widespread, property rights insecure, business decisions risky.

A major factor in the slowdown since 1980 has been external debt. As the cold war faded from the mid-1980s, foreign aid levelled off, and net lending to Africa fell. Although the flow of foreign direct investment has risen it has not offset the fall in other financial flows

The challenges to development in Africa are greater than in any other continent, the deficiencies in health, education and nutrition the most extreme. It is the continent with the greatest need for financial aid and technical assistance. The per capita GDP projections assume that these kinds of aid will be increased and that per capita growth will be positive. However, it is unlikely that African countries will, by 2015, be able to establish a trajectory of rapid catch-up such as Asian economies have achieved.

Eastern Europe

In Eastern Europe, the economic system was similar to that in the USSR from 1948 to the end of the 1980s, and so was economic performance. In 1950-1973, per capita growth more or less kept pace with that of Western Europe, but faltered badly as the economic and political system began to crumble. From 1973-1990, it grew at 0.5% a year compared with 1.9% in Western Europe.

The transition from a command to a market economy was difficult in all of the countries. The easiest part was freeing prices and opening of trade with the West. This ended shortages and queuing, improved the quality of goods and services and increased consumer welfare. However, much of the old capital stock became junk; the labour force needed to acquire new skills and work habits; the legal and administrative systems and the tax/social benefit structure had to be transformed; the distributive and banking networks to be rebuilt from scratch. The travails of transition led to a fall in average per capita income for the group from 1990 to 1993, but it rose by over 3% a year from then to 2001. My projection assumes that this pace of advance can be maintained at least until 2015. In fact, these countries can probably do better than this if they can be integrated into the European Union with better access to its goods, labour, and capital markets, its regional and other subsidies, than they have thus far enjoyed. Present real income levels are only a third of those in Western Europe. Wages are also much lower, but the disparity in skills is much less. The Eastern economies are therefore capable of mounting a catch-up dynamic similar to that of Asia if the integration takes place.

Successor states of former USSR

Fifteen successor states emerged from the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In all of them, there was already a very marked deceleration of economic growth in 1973-1990. There was colossal inefficiency in resource allocation, a very heavy burden of military expenditure and associated spending, depletion and destruction of natural resources.

Capital/output ratios were higher than in capitalist countries. Materials were used wastefully. Shortages created a chronic tendency to hoard inventories. The steel consumption/GDP ratio was four times as high as in the US. The average industrial firm had 814 workers in 1987 compared with 30 in Germany and the UK. Transfer of technology from the West was hindered by trade restrictions, lack of foreign direct investment and very restricted access to foreign technicians and scholars. Work incentives were meagre, malingering on the job was commonplace. [but UBI and pensions will make it better /s]

The quality of consumer goods was poor. Retail outlets and service industries were few. Prices bore little relation to cost. Consumers wasted time queuing, bartering or sometimes bribing their way to the goods and services they wanted. There was an active black market, and special shops for the nomenklatura. There was increasing cynicism, frustration, growing alcoholism and a decline in life expectation. [so like America now?]

Soviet spending on its military and space effort was around 15% of GDP in the 1970s and 1980s, nearly three times the US ratio and five times as high as in Western Europe. There were significant associated commitments to Afghanistan, Cuba, Mongolia, North Korea, Vietnam and Soviet client states in Africa.

In the 1950s a good deal of agricultural expansion was in virgin soil areas, whose fertility was quickly exhausted. Most of the Aral sea was transformed into a salty desert. Exploitation of mineral and energy resources in Siberia and Central Asia required bigger infrastructure costs than in European Russia. The Chernobyl nuclear accident had a disastrously polluting effect on a large area of the Ukraine.

In 1985-1991 Gorbachev established a remarkable degree of political freedom and liberated Eastern Europe but had no coherent economic policy. From then to end 1999, Yeltsin broke up the Soviet Union, destroyed its economic and political system and moved towards a “market” economy. The economic outcome was a downward spiral of real income for the mass of the population. On average, GDP was nearly 30% lower in 2002 in the 15 republics than in 1990. Fixed investment and military spending fell dramatically, so the drop in private consumption was milder. There were very big changes in income distribution. Under the old system, basic necessities (bread, housing, education, health, crèches and social services) had been highly subsidised by the government or provided free by state enterprises to their workers. These all became relatively more expensive, the real value of wages and pensions was reduced by hyperinflation, and the value of popular savings was destroyed. There were major gains in the income of a new oligarchy. [i.e. cancelling Marxism cannot be overnight]

The new “market” economy is grossly inefficient and unfair in allocating resources. There has been legislation to establish Western style property rights, but in practice accountancy is opaque and government interpretation of property rights is arbitrary. Many businesses are subject to criminal pressure. Property owners such as shareholders or investors are uncertain whether their rights will be honoured. Workers are not sure their wages will be paid.

*This article is an adapted extract from Angus Maddison’s chapter, “The West and the Rest in the International Economic Order”, in Development is Back, OECD Development Centre, 2002.

sound familiar?

so why does Peterson hide this info?

The manosphere’s delusion

https://nypost.com/2017/09/02/cheap-sex-is-making-men-give-up-on-marriage/

The wages of sin, the fruits of the Sexual Revolution. Death.

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/15/723518379/u-s-births-fell-to-a-32-year-low-in-2018-cdc-says-birthrate-is-at-record-level

Immigration won’t save you.

Keep telling yourself you’re not responsible.

For pushing the very anti-natal propaganda you recognise ruined the Boomers generally.

No “muh birth rate” kvetching. Especially when many men are 50% responsible for chemical abortions by conceiving with a woman on the Pill. Gametes fuse into a zygote, that’s conception, genetically. A new being conceived.

https://www.diffen.com/difference/Gamete_vs_Zygote

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/conception

. 1. a. Formation of a viable zygote by the union of the male sperm and female ovum; fertilization.

The manosphere is in hard bluepill denial about this. You’ve aborted your own kids if a condom wasn’t used.

https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-04-29/us-marriage-rate-drops-to-record-low

it’s like a bad joke, how do you make white men genocide themselves?

you make sterility a virtue signal

Social and economic shifts in the U.S. are visible through the lens of the country’s marriage rate, measured as the number of marriages per 1,000 people. That rate has fluctuated since the early 1900s, most notably around times of great historical significance, according to the report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For example, the marriage rate reached 12 per 1,000 in 1929 – the advent of the Great Depression – before falling to 7.9 in 1932. It then began a sporadic but upward climb, reaching an all-time high of 16.4 as the country emerged from World War II in 1946. The marriage rate fluctuated for the most part until the early 1980s, the data shows.

From 1982 to 2009, marriage rates fell fairly steadily, and then hovered around 6.8 to 7 per 1,000 through 2017.

Your anti-natal propaganda is worse than the Great Depression.

and other white men laugh at you, behind your back

from a vasectomy story:

solipsism, it has a name

Should add genetic suicide.

Make corrupting the youth a crime again. It causes literally most of our demographic problems.

re UK, repost for SEO

fertility is economic, including the social/female requirement of marriage first

most births are still best predicted by marriage

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/characteristics-of-mother-2-in-england-and-wales-2013

UK 2013 data, table 1:

live births WITHIN wedlock, all ages: 

367,618

live births OUT of wedlock, all ages:

330,894

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/marriage-rate-uk-latest-figures-lowest-record-ons-a9464706.html

More America:

https://ifstudies.org/blog/no-ring-no-baby

A large part of the decline in birth rates can be directly accounted for by a factor unlikely to be influenced by those birth-targeted incentives: marriage. That is, most long-run change in fertility can be accounted for by changes in the marital composition of society.

DIRECTLY.

Memorise this chart and imagine me slapping you every time you blame something else.

Essentially all of the decline in fertility since 2001 can be explained by changes in the marital composition of the population.

Married, single, and divorced women are all about as likely, controlling for age and marital status, to have kids now as they were in 2001.

But today, a smaller proportion of women are married during those peak-fertility years.

You all disgust me.

Five minutes of basic research, you basic bitches of redpill.

And the guys who pushed it, you knew about them too. You knew what they were about. No blaming the out-group.

This is amusing.

Yes Roosh, White Nationalists Want to Control Sexual Behavior

Population data

“You’re not being replaced!”

https://countrydigest.org/uk-population/

The rate of population growth in the UK has increased in recent years. In 2015 the population increased by 513,000 people (0.8%).

Population increases come from immigration and natural growth (the number of births minus the number of deaths. The total number of immigrants coming into the UK is offset by the number of people who emigrate from the United Kingdom each year (see British people abroad below) to reach a final population growth total for the year.

No, total immigration doesn’t minus, net is minus. Why not report total?

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

2018: net immigration 258

TOTAL 2018: 602

Boomers should be exit taxed heavily for escaping the mess they created.

back to top

About one third of the UK population increase in recent years is a result of natural population growth – where the number of people being born in the UK is higher than the number of people dying every year. The remaining two thirds of the population increase is the result of net immigration into the United Kingdom.

About half of the people coming to the UK in 2015 were from the European Union. Recent data indicates that there are approximately 3 million EU citizens living and working in the UK. This equates to 5% of the UK population. The other half came from non-EU countries.

That’s …6 million.

+10%-ish.

If you have another country’s passport, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

And that’s just official, not illegal.

And new, not second+ generations in the multicultural colonies.

Immigration is a contentious topic in the UK, with many people believing that it is too high.

Natives.

Because of this immigration was one of the most important topics during the recent referendum about whether the UK should remain in or leave the European Union (often referred to as the Brexit referendum.

8 years ago:

The office for National statistics records data on ethnicity in each census. In 2011 it reported that the largest ethnic group in the UK was White (87.17%), followed by Asian or Asian British (6.92%) and Black (3.01%).

There’s no such thing as “Asian British”, like there’s no such thing as a hyphenated American. You’re either American or not. Asia is not in Britain. Race/ethnicity is not citizenship.

2.0% Mixed

0.9% Other

Most white people in Britain are descended from a number of different ethnic groups, not all of which are indigenous to the British Isles.

non sequitur but nice way of saying ‘invaders’

and they’re not from different forensic groups at all, same race, same subrace/s

They were all THE SAME RACE.

This heritage reflects the history of the British Isles, which has been invaded on a number of occasions.

The black population in Britain has roots going back to the 15th and 16th centuries.

No, it doesn’t. That isn’t a root. Africa is a root.

Phylogenetic tree root of blacks is Africa.

The British Asian population also has a long history which began in the 17th century.

No. It began in Asia, where they belong.

Plus, that isn’t a long history, that’s a blip.

Diversity + Proximity = War

The 2011 census showed that Christianity remains the dominant religion in the UK. The number of people who reported that they were Christians in the UK was 37,583,962, which is 59.49% of the total population. The number of people who report that they are Christian fell by more than 12% between 2001 and 2011, from 71.58% in 2001.

Shame.

The next most common responses were either no religion (25.67%) or religion not stated (7.17%). The number of people who gave one of these answers increased from 23.18% in 2001 to 32.84% in 2011.

92.33% combined.

Jews 0.43%

Muslim 4.41%

Well, guess it was nice knowing them.

And this is outdated.

Islam is the second most commonly reported religion in the UK with 4.41% of the population.

49,808,000 English 1st language speakers.

546,000 Polish locusts.

273,000 Punjabi 3rd place.

Arab 7, French 8, Chinese 9.

Note: Indigenous languages such as Welsh and Scots do not feature on this list as they were more commonly reported as second languages.

As this chart from the ONS shows, the proportion of people in London whose first language is not English is far higher (around 20%) in London than it is in the rest of the country.

According to the 2011 census, the most commonly spoken non-indigenous language in the UK was Polish, with 546,000 native speakers in England and Wales – approximately 1% of the population.

From one nation, the locusts of Europe. The chavvy breeder scum of the white race.

And that’s just speakers, not other Poles. Because they’re all such nationalists and Poland is so great, right?

They hate immigrant invasion the MOST.

source: Americans who never lived with them.

If they’re so proud of Poland, could they fuck off back there?

If they’re defending the West, can they do it from Poland?

But diversity is our strength! At least low IQ places like Poland aren’t fucking over the country permanently…

A recent study by the OECD reported that the UK had the lowest literacy rate of any developed nation. It reported that around 20% of English 16-19 year olds have low literacy skills.

This is backed up by a report from the UK’s Literacy Trust, which explains that 16% of adults in England are “functionally illiterate”. This means that their literacy is below what is expected of the average 11 year old.

And they can vote. 1 in 6 illiterates.

Millions of them.

We call them Labour voters, the name is ironic.

They should be forced into a school for adults until up to speed. As long as it takes.

87 billion per year down the shitter. Because education works on genetic IQ…. right?

According to Eurostat, the United Kingdom is the fourth most densely populated country in the EU

At the time of the last census, in 2011, the population of Greater London was 8,173,941.

By 2015, Greater London’s population had increased to 8,673,713.

An extra half a million on record, (probably including emigrants, which it shouldn’t).

The UK’s ageing population puts increasing pressure on the country’s public services and economy.

MYTH Dead people don’t strain services.

Fertility rate in the UK has also fallen over the past 50 years, from 2.95 children per woman in 1965 to 1.82 children per woman in 2014.

Good, pre-WW levels. Sustainable, among ourselves.

This is below the replacement rate (2.33 children per woman across the world, but 2.0 children per woman in industrialised countries) but higher than the EU average fertility rate which in 2014 was just 1.58 children per woman.

If you don’t force men to marry, no kids.

We live in the marriage-free world.

But yes, EU and other socialism is literally dying.

And, finally, at the bottom of the pyramid we can see the effects of a dip in the UK’s birth rate during the early 21st century, followed by an boost in recent years.

Non-native births, discounted.

Race is not citizenship. A passport entitles you to nothing from the outgroup.

Post-war population recovery genes

Men are literally replaceable and that makes them better as a sex.

Exhibit A in the scientific “Men ain’t shit” series.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081211121835.htm

In many of the countries that fought in the World Wars, there was a sudden increase in the number of boys born afterwards. The year after World War I ended, an extra two boys were born for every 100 girls in the UK, compared to the year before the war started. The gene, which Mr Gellatly has described in his research, could explain why this happened.

As the odds were in favour of men with more sons seeing a son return from the war, those sons were more likely to father boys themselves because they inherited that tendency from their fathers. In contrast, men with more daughters may have lost their only sons in the war and those sons would have been more likely to father girls. This would explain why the men that survived the war were more likely to have male children, which resulted in the boy-baby boom.

In most countries, for as long as records have been kept, more boys than girls have been born. In the UK and US, for example, there are currently about 105 males born for every 100 females.

It is well-documented that more males die in childhood and before they are old enough to have children.

That is prior to competition, crime, psychiatric issues including self-loathing and desire to never reproduce, as well as the sexual selection of women for a suitable man.

Externalities like the economy, racial wars, anti-natal culture notwithstanding.

The female genome is more stable, two Xs will do that. It contains more data too, the Y is smaller.

Women must be more stable biologically as the (genetic) carrier sex, another reason against female drafting. If some men die, they clearly recover (and as proven here, come back better) but when a race loses its women, it goes extinct.

So in the same way that the gene may cause more boys to be born after wars, it may also cause more boys to be born each year.

The fitter male lines are self-replacing.  This is why all adult men should have been drafted. The reward of winning a war should be reproducing into your society’s future, to reward the cowards who remained behind is an insult to the brave K-types of the sex.

This is the red-pill. Men evolved to be expendable to one another in the protection of their shared racial germline.

Cowards know they’re cannon fodder. They betray their fellow man (intra-racial Brotherhood is the only acceptable collectivism). It reminds me of the Little Red Hen, and what man would want a coward in their ranks, that’s treason waiting to happen?

Or as we call them, cucks.

Behold, the back-up genetic programme: the self-culling cannon fodder.
Remarkable that genetic dead-ends appreciate the importance of marriage enough to insult all married couples as inferior (rationalization).

Also, demographic decline virtue signalling (- you can’t out-breed Asia, war is inevitable).

Asia*: highest population density, territorial expansive, fastest growing religion (Islam).

Inevitable.

Trump could shit gold and it’s still inevitable.

Why?

More than r-selection, perhaps a feature of it.

If you’re stupid like Asians and murder your girls (glaring at India and China) then you cull the female-preferred genes among men, slowly killing your racial future because there won’t be enough carrier women to go around and the ‘problem’ will only get worse. There is no culling effect equivalent to war in women except socialist policy.

There’s your ‘war against women’. Affirmative Action for unfit male genes collapses both their group and the fit men of their race who were weak enough to allow it to happen. If every man is entitled to 1 waifu thanks to socialist compulsion (and all men, all women forced to marry by law**) but five infant boys survive due to medical technology…. 100-105=-5

Socialism’s birth policies are as dysgenic as their economics that punish effort.
This is why men shouldn’t decide who gets to breed with laws, women evolved for that task.

Socialism cannot replace sexual selection. What the internet considers it is not, reproduction is required.

A war will be mandatory if the leftover men have any hope of reproduction, by conquest and rape  …..and ‘immigration’. The neocolonialism as BPS explained, of buying up properties in another homeland (r-migration for resources).

*As previously covered, most money to purchase is loaned by the Chinese Communist government. They are the true buyers overseas. Ban foreigners from literally buying your country. It’s a matter of national security. That includes the Putin-banished Russians’ blood money in London keeping the gasping death rattle of a real estate bubble alive. I’d extend this to the compulsory purchase of properties made by shell corps overseas, with unexplained funds (anti-corruption law) or belonging to dual passport holders who refuse to drop the other one (loyalty to another nation).

The concrete used in protected property basements is doomed to collapse. Like the postmodern glass monstrosities, they all crumble eventually, that’s why huge basements aren’t built in English soil. Rainy, flood-prone soil. Next to the biggest river incoming to the landmass.

And we get frequent earthquakes, of the sort that causes cracks in… concrete.

It’s a capital city so traffic causes tremors too – including planes.

Every heinous skyscraper you ever see will be self-destructing. Rich tower or council estate.

Click to access is536-types-and-causes-of-concrete-deterioration.pdf

I’m literally the first person to look this up. Engineers study ENTROPY.

This error is old as Babel. We don’t need to lift a finger, ugly postmodern structures are already crumbling.

They’ll go the way of wooden castles.

Shad viewers? Anyone?

If only the Nazis had simply purchased American land, we’d be speaking German.

They’re still going to shoot you by the way. They need to outnumber you, fill University places then government positions first. If they have the land, all that’s needed are executions.

**Reducing citizens to breeding sows for the government, thanks, socialism!

Socialism is hence r-select and among other issues, assumes all men can be provider husbands, all women are fertile and all citizens are heterosexual. Socialism is doomed to fail by virtue of mathematics and basic biology.

Global IQ drops

The pride of Christians replacing Natural Selection. You know better than God, right?

Fuck “mysterious ways”, sometimes you need to over-rule God’s will for feels!

And going into debt and producing unborn debt slaves to finance it, totally kosher!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_rob_Peter_to_pay_Paul

CHINOs hate Darwin because it shows their signalling is selfish, real Christians don’t really care. They aren’t pathological in their altruism so that theory is seen as obvious too.

If you look closely Jesus only fed believers who went on to be good people.

Now we don’t even have the Red Cross because they refused to take it bearing the symbol, it was changed locally to Red Crescent. If a beggar spat at your works, what would Jesus do?

People who hate the cross and all it stands for? BROTHER!

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/06/world_iq_going_down.html

h/t Anonymous Conservative

But dysgenics isn’t real, where’s the evidence?

Maybe one of the Horsemen is Bill Gates.

Don’t make the easy mistake. Don’t blame smart people for the decisions of stupid ones, place the blame where it belongs. As for blaming the women, well, how many are married? Who proposes? It takes two.

Europe is only responsible for Europe and we’re quite sustainable unlike – oh, literally EVERYONE ELSE.

Asia is a bigger pox on global IQ than Africa, if you crunch some numbers.

“My personal theory is that the drop in I.Q. is real and viral; that is, it is caused by an infection that is highly communicable through proximity.” HPV?

Genetic load would make sense if responsive to STDs.

This won’t end well, idiots

MRAs are stupid as the SJWs, they’re a form of SJW.

You cut off the vital support for the natalism (healthy courtship and family structures) every society needs.

Most men in the world hate you because of your race! For historical reasons, no negotiation out of this one.

How many is that? Let’s visualize!

Consider soil erosion and the dwindling arable land. Lotta people gonna starve.

And “white” is a very small number of genes swirling around, all recessive!

No Singapore brides for you! (Debt/GDP is also higher than America, idiots).

 

Where all the white people at?

Consider the IQ implications too.

That’s incredibly optimistic. I know plenty of non-whites claiming white on the census.
And Russians are technically not white, based on genetic distance. Neither European nor Asian. That’s a quarter or so down instantly.

And half these figures for the men you seek to cooperate with, who still might want to kill you.

National interests, which you might not care about, but many do!

Ah, America, deluded as usual.

https://www.reference.com/world-view/ratio-men-women-world-population-5afd68eb596fbafb

“The world ratio of men to women is estimated to be 1.017:1. As of today, the world’s male population was 3,776,294,273, while the female population was 3,710,295,643.”

Race > Sex for identity politics.

Statistically, if you are being intellectually honest. Your common culture has nothing to do with the average male of Saudi Arabia or Sub-Saharan Africa. Your WEIRD culture is decidedly racial, not even all white, WASP! The decidedly North-Western European genome! Your work ethic has little in common with an Italian, male or female!

You are already a minority. The world minority, by race.

850k/2 = 425, minus 100 or so for the elderly or infant. (conservatively)

325 million white men of fighting age worldwide.

To say nothing of willing. Most modern men are cowards.

And you think the women are your problem?

Not the almost 7 billion strong racial outgroup and growing??

Sure, they won’t try to steal the women either, where’s the precedent? I’m sure they’ll leave you alone, especially as they starve and you’re so successful and they outnumber you!

The Spartans did so well! You can totally take billions of angry hungry people that build the defense technologies you rely on, to sit around keyboard warrioring about middle-class Gender Studies majors!

(Nobody mentions their bachelor tax and subhuman status of unmarried men, treated like children).

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

7.6 billion – 850k white = total N white people.

Then there are class factions, you don’t see upper-class white men having any problems getting work, no middle-class men wanna change this system or present with a strong impetus for Brotherhood collectivism! Which goes so well in China and India btw! No nepotism, totally meritocratic! No men left on the shelf in marriage markets there! And since when has a pan-White male union ever existed? Bloody warfare for millennia.

Oh but feminists are the only deluded ones, O.K.

You can never be questioned or wrong, but you aren’t stupid!

Your assumptions magically prove themselves, look at all your imaginary data and cherry-picked “studies” with no replication or concrete methodology!

All men R smart and all girls R dumb, treehouse cooties ew.

Just ignore the left side of the bell curve, one whole full side of the IQ bell curve.

That’s so smart of you, like the SJWs, if you ignore a problem, it’ll disappear!

Because when you look at homelessness, mental illness and crime rates, it was all magically the fault of women! SOMEHOW.

But women deny responsibility for themselves, don’t they guys?

Men would never do that….

Men would never have the hypoagency to deny the murder, rape and theft rates among their sex, would they? They’d never say NAMALT!

They’re red pill! They’re STRONG.

SATIRE INCOMING:

Men would never cry victim. Like in child support cases. It just doesn’t happen. They don’t deny their gender role to provide as patriarchs. They aren’t postmodernist hippies.

Men deserve respect for breathing, even if they act like children. How dare you shame a Peter Pan into growing up! Magical Freudian penis rules. Europe must respect every African male that treads on this soil, right? Don’t be sexist, like Sweden! Open borders because men never do evil or dishonest things?

Let alone the mathematical majority of them!

Men are more capable than women, so should be held to a fitting, higher standard, right?
No?

And men never rape other men, that’s absurd!

Men cannot be victims. Either that or their super-secret “body language” meant they really wanted it because men are the world’s whores, don’t you know? Always willing with anyone at anytime for anything. Because body language is a science, like palmistry. Even a baby can consent if it gives you special body language like crawling on you or SMILING – Saint Epstein will argue in his legal defence. All rape accusations against a man are false, the stats be damned! We demand to be taken seriously, we aren’t blinkered and ridiculous at all. It’s against the laws of physics for men to be victims of stalking, harassment or “real” rape and if you say any different or hold men to any adult standard of behaviour in the First World, well, you’re a misandrist (but misogyny is just, like, science, duh).

And in the olden days, men never died without reproducing, it just never happened.

Men don’t need impulse control, property rights will magically enforce themselves! I can leave my car unlocked in a diverse male area, I can trust my fellow men! I can let men sleep on my couch without paying rent because Brotherhood! It isn’t parasitism, if a man is doing it!

Men are forced to reproduce. It was an Oops! baby, a mistake! They didn’t know sex made babies! They can’t be held responsible for their reproduction! What did you expect them to do, get a minor simple outpatient procedure to ensure it’s impossible?

BUT men make better parents even though women only exist to make and raise babies. Women evolved to care for children but somehow, men are better at it. Men are better at everything, LOL, duh! Women evolved for no skills, are simple as children (but only female children) and a barren woman is useless to the economy, why are the WW2 women laughing at us?

It isn’t like girls and women pass the exact same blinded examinations men do! The IQ difference is definitely bigger than the statistical chance of 5%, especially once you’ve selectively rigged the results by taking out all the predominantly male retards. That’s just science. You hate science if you complain about systemic bias in calculation.

The tests should be different and the same depending on our feelings.
We don’t know the difference between equal and fair.
But women are hypersensitive and emotional. They make rape jokes about us and sausage gags all the time. Making a man feel bad should be illegal, it’s all that snowflake’s fault! They need to go to their safe space but Gent’s clubs are totally valid. No, none of us are gentlemen and weirdly proud but other men aren’t allowed to impose standards on us either! We’ll call them sexist, too!

And the test must be rigged if they do well! Except military tests, then rigging is good. Except we want the female draft. We don’t hate women, we just want them to go overseas knowing they’ll get murdered or captured and raped by foreigners, cuck!

The highest ideal of manliness is an r-selected, alcoholic, drug-abusing, nomadic manwhore. The Sexual Revolution is unquestionable, ignore antibiotic resistance, paternal abandonment and damaged pair bonding ability. We R da best 5eva. Men can never do better than this and should be shamed for trying.

Damaged goods only applies to women, ignore player burnout. Nothing behind that curtain.

BUT fathers shouldn’t be obligated to co-parent, to spend time with their child as a mentor like the old days to ensure its mental health! When a woman fobs her kid off on the nanny, she’s a heartless monster. When a man fobs his child off on a nanny, he’s being responsible and should be given a medal!

Women have a responsibility to breed like a sow but not men! Because that’s how babies happen! Lesbians!
And furthermore, men have a right to continue their genetic line regardless of quality (this isn’t r) and don’t need to pay a cent while the woman is investing biologically in two decades of labour, totally helpless.

It’s Darwin, men must spread their seed (citation needed), I’m sure the kids will survive.
No men in history weren’t absolute, amoral sluts. None were celibate. None died virgins. No great men weren’t crazed rapists like Genghis Khan. What a great man that slaughtering rapist was.

This is the ultimate good for society, which just happens to coincide with my sloth. It isn’t a sin, I am very lucky. This is not a privilege. I’d gladly swap with my ancestors to see more women in dresses.

It’s a coincidence I can act like a big baby and society enables this.

The problem is WOMEN.

I’m oppressed by all the free lust, free welfare, free schooling, free sympathy for my sin!

I hate that my vices bring no consequences, really! I want a Patriarchy, just like you, fellow conservative!

Stop being degenerate? What? It’s my right!!! How dare you! Next you’ll want me to pay for my sexual partner’s birth control! Oh, in Patriarchy?

Well, no, I’d just be raping your Christian teenage daughters and haha, you couldn’t stop me… what’s… what’s the rope for…?

And you’d totally have to pay for my “girlfriend’s” abortions. Not me. You pay for my orgasms. Because I exist.

Prostitution is wrong because then sex has a price paid for by me, person in receipt of service! It belongs on the taxpayer, that’s the moral choice!

It’s never been easier to survive in all of human history but this world sucks because there aren’t busty under-age Japanese girls servicing me under the table at every meal. Women are so entitled to want a husband. But they should find one or they’re defective.

I don’t wanna save for my own pension like a sucker.

We are not the luckiest and laziest excuses for men ever! Wastrel is still a word that totally has meaning now everyone is doing it, so it’s moral! It’s legal too so it mustn’t be antisocial!

Also gay is evil but lesbians are holy. Obviously? It’s just obvious porn does no damage. Fuck neuroscience.

Government largess is only evil when single mothers are doing it, when men hold the baby, they deserve all the money in the world. In. The. World. Or you’re sexist. And I’ll cry at you online but rape threats are funny, totally not to be taken seriously. You’re so weak, we don’t bully anyone. I’d totally say this to your face in public. Twitter is a public space.

R-selection can magically be contained to one sex despite being a sexual selection process between two sexes in societies.

We need traditional marriage and only traditional marriage – except I can cheat without being stoned to death, have bastard children and leave if I get bored without being sued for abandonment. That’s what commitment means. I’m such a catch, why does no good woman want me?

Women are females but male is insulting. Girl is normal and a compliment but if you call me boy, I can attack you. The law says whatever I want it to.

We don’t believe in “male”, it’s a social construct to tell us to man-up like we’re adults or something biological. But there are two sexes and we’re totally different. But we’re tired of double standards, women should be treated equally to men, it isn’t fair. We’re so rational. Ignore the suicidal ideation, all men should be like us. I’d choose this life again. Pass my antidepressants and testosterone pills. This is normal.

SATIRE OVER. Back to the demographic.

And I’m sure there won’t be any anti-white traitors in the white or non-white male group either.

In your dreams.

Where you all happen to have an IQ of 128-135, as you claim online.
But cannot do basic arithmetic like that up top, somehow.

You are not entitled to a waifu, you gotta earn it. That’s the red pill. This economy sucks for everyone. You are not special. Life really is that hard.

The First World is paying for the older generations’ “entitlement” and the rest of the world, with a reduced population. It isn’t the women. You say it’s white women going on welfare while admitting out the other side of your face that the birth rate is next to nothing. Okay, ban birth control? Marry? No? I think you’re too chicken to admit the other factors.

This is biodiversity 101 and you fail. If you think either sex can afford to rentseek and be spiteful, you can’t do maths.
The SJWs ignore it because they want to kill Western Civ, idiots. They don’t just hate white men, it’s women too! Rotherham? 

Misogyny makes no sense, it’s still your suicide and also that of your genetic line (kin).

You sure showed those SJWs, giving them exactly what they want!

Paper: Population cycles and dysgenic collapse

PAPER HERE (2007).

Prosperity > Moral decline > Decay > Decadence > Virulence > Decline > Collapse > Ruin

You are ——————————————————————————–^ HERE.

50s                       60s             70s        80s                   90s           00s                  2020+

Many institutions are failing, but the “collapse” per se is when this state of fact suddenly hits public awareness and becomes undeniable, it will seem like a flood all at once.

We’re the Titanic passengers who see a trickle of water. That shouldn’t be there.

WW1 killed us. Metaphorically, we got on the boat and abandoned class and character.

Scientific paper on the depopulation efforts

http://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/the-subversion-of-medicine-and-public-health-by-international-securityprerogatives-2161-1165-1000208.php?aid=65519

h/t http://www.naturalnews.com/052750_engineered_genocide_depopulation_humanity_self-destruction.html

Medicine and public health are compromised by the highest echelons of science, industry and public administration for the geopolitical objectives of international cohabitation, preservation of resources, environmental conservation and decarbonization, all of which hinge on depopulation. Under the cover of reproductive health involuntary sterilizations are implemented throughout the developing world through adulterated vaccines, while in the developed world flu immunization programs weaken the immune systems of the old and civil servants to shorten lifespans and spare governments from meeting insolvent health care and pension plan obligations in the last stage of the demographic transition. Endocrine disruptors inserted in the basic elements of life to presumably prevent caries chronically subvert the human reproductive system to lower the total fertility rate of every country to replacement level. In the name of sustainable development, experimental carbon capture and sequestration methods as well as solar radiation management methods double as weapons against longevity by subjecting billions to unnaturally high exposure levels of heavy metals so the world’s decarbonization goals are tackled from two directions, by reducing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and increasing morbidity and mortality among the general population to proactively lower future emissions. Poverty and hunger are used as fronts for the deployment of GMO crops that purportedly increase yields, improve nutrition and require fewer fertilizers and pesticides, but that in fact misuse the latest bioengineering advances to cause subfertility, immune deficiencies and crop failures and thus lower the population by limiting births and increasing deaths. Unless stopped, this engineered genocide will damage the genetic and intellectual endowment of humanity and cause population collapse within 20 years, time during which the incidence and severity of NCDs will grow exponentially irrespective of health system investments and medical breakthroughs. Only a political solution can restore our health as individuals and as a civilization.

The feminists won’t touch forced sterilization programmes but the Guardian has reported on it.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/12/india-sterilisation-deaths-women-forced-camps-relatives
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/nov/10/un-examines-australias-forced-sterilisation-of-women-with-disabilities

And it happens here too thanks to the SS.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mother-of-six-who-has-learning-difficulties-can-be-put-through-forced-sterilisation-rules-judge-10023496.html

A mother-of-six with learning difficulties can be lawfully forced to be sterilised by authorities to prevent further pregnancies, a judge has ruled.

Health officials and social services bosses made the request to force entry into her home and detain her with “necessary restraint” to be able to carry out sterilisation.

If the authorities don’t like you, they’ll call you disabled and sterilize you.

http://www.learningdisabilities.org.uk/help-information/learning-disability-a-z/l/204300/

Some examples of specific learning difficulties are:
  • Dyspraxia

  • Dyslexia

  • Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)

That’s right, we have legal precedent to sterilize practically anyone. On the basis of the opinion of government agents.

World population: The future is Muslim

http://uk.businessinsider.com/chart-demographic-and-population-statistics-when-earth-hits-10-billion-2016-1

But it is surprising that Asia and Latin America are about to take a back seat — The real population driver of the 21st Century will be Africa, Govender says:

The ‘migrant crisis’ will become an endless flow.

No Noooooo are you kidding me wtf are you testing me satan

That’s why IS is expanding there first. They can read a bloody chart.

This new population will be heavily skewed by growth in the Middle East and Africa, where the UN Population Division expects populations to grow by 72% and 305%, respectively, from now until 2100.

comeback required kilgrave

Asia and Latin America, once considered the future drivers of population growth, will take a back seat–Central and South America are projected to see a modest 14% growth while East Asia is due to see a 27% contraction. The developed world, meanwhile, will not be able to keep pace.

The Western economy is doomed.

Western Europe should see little change at all while North America, the fastest grower among developed regions, grows its population by 40%.

Hey, you wanted to get into debt saving African children, did you think they’d stay small and sterile forever?

Here’s the kicker.

42% — or 4.2 billion people — of the Earth’s 10 billion inhabitants will be Sub-Saharan African, Middle Eastern, or North African in 2100. No other ethnicity will have more than a 20% share of the whole.

Where will they want to go?

I’m sure we’ll think of something.

Death-Note-1

But remember kids, race isn’t real…. but anyone who argues otherwise is racist somehow… but it isn’t real….

UPDATE: Sent in;

http://www.theglobalist.com/africa-asia-nigeria-population/

“Today, Africa’s population is one-quarter the size of Asia’s. By 2100, it will be just 10% smaller. Africa’s population as a whole is projected to grow very rapidly in the coming 85 years, from 1.2 billion today to 4.4 billion people in 2100 — an increase of 266%. At the end of the current century, Africa’s population will be equal to the total world population back in 1980. Nigeria will move from being the world’s seventh most-populous country today to its third most-populous country in 2100 (behind only India and China).”

But sure, the West has the problem…