It has been dubbed population replacement: The displacement of indigenous European populations by mass immigration, particularly from the Muslim world, and the cultural transformation which goes with it, enthusiastically facilitated by the powers that be across Europe. There has been much concern expressed on this site and beyond about the levels of immigration bringing this about and about the islamisation of our societies resulting from it.
That’s one half of the equation. The other side is the dramatic fall-off in birth rates among European populations to below replacement level. The UK’s annual birth rate per 1,000 population is 12.22, just below that of France. Italy’s is 8.84 and Germany is even lower at 8.42. For the population to maintain itself at replacement level, the number of children born per woman needs to be 2.1. In Italy each woman now has on average 1.34 children. In the UK births per woman are rising notably due to the number of foreign-born mothers. For comparison, Afghanistan’s birth rate per 1,000 is 38.84 and Somalia’s 40.87. Niger tops the list at 46.12, one of 36 African countries with a birth rate over 30 per 1,000.
A few years ago I was quite comfortable with population decline from an environmental point of view. I know there’s great scepticism in UKIP and the wider right to any notion that our planet might struggle to sustain ever-growing numbers of humans, that any resource may become depleted, or that increasing development might degrade the environment or threaten biodiversity. However I do believe that far too much of this overcrowded island has already been lost to concrete and I don’t see how we can accommodate the current rate of increase without destroying even more of our countryside.
Of course, falling birth rates among the indigenous British has not led to a falling overall population and a re-greening of the land. Economists worry about who will be working to pay the pensions of an ageing people. Big companies want their market to expand, not shrink. Politicians welcome mass immigration as a solution which enables them to virtue-signal at the same time. Paul Collier shows in his Book ‘Exodus’ how immigration is a socially-costly short term solution to those problems, which compounds problems in the long term. (I thoroughly recommend his book and may eventually get round to writing a review of it in these pages.)
Commentators have recently noted the number of leaders of Western countries who are now childless, suggesting that this means they don’t understand what it’s like to bring up a family and that they perhaps have little stake in a future in which they have no children or grand-children to grow up in – a particularly cruel criticism of Theresa May, who found herself unable to have children, rather than being childless through choice.
We not only have a culture which seems to promote the impression that family life is uncool, unattractive and even politically incorrect, but many people don’t see how they can afford it. No wonder people are deciding not to have kids.
On the subject of immigration, Anne Marie Waters has been a vocal campaigner against Islamisation in the UK and I have previously been an enthusiastic supporter of her bid to lead UKIP. She is also a lesbian. Peter Whittle and David Coburn are also openly gay and vying for the UKIP leadership. From murdered Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn, to the many gay supporters of Marine Le Pen, to the recent Gays Against Sharia rally in Manchester, homosexuals are increasingly outspoken critics of Islam. They know how they are treated under Sharia. The attitudes of the British Muslim community was amply demonstrated in their Twitter reactions recently to the first UK Muslim gay marriage.
The participation of gays is of course welcomed by UKIP and much of the right. Moreover it enables us to dispel the old image of the right as being reactionary and intolerant and helps us to get our message across to a wider younger audience.
How does our embrace of homosexuality fit with our defence of the traditional family though? Surely the normalisation of homosexuality has played a part in the collapsing indigenous European birth rate!
I have to confess that, as a shy young man lacking confidence with girls – and as a keen leftie – listening to the political lesbians demonising and denigrating all men did nothing for my self-esteem or mental health, and didn’t leave me with a warm fuzzy feeling about lesbians. Of course not all lesbians are raging man-hating feminists. It just so happens that they find they prefer women – and who can seriously argue that their preference impinges on anyone else’s freedom? Just because someone is homosexual, doesn’t mean they can’t also be pro-family.
Is it possible to argue that modern Western society promotes homosexuality? Certainly no amount of cool gay pop stars or school sex education lessons saying it’s OK could make sex with another man appeal to me. Then again, I see a lot of young women walking hand-in-hand in our local studenty area. We now have transgender awareness being introduced in schools and children being encouraged to question their gender identity at a young age. Research has found clusters of transgender children in schools where the head-teacher is particularly pushing this agenda. Are we confusing impressionable young minds?
This is the 21st century though. You can have gay families, lesbian families, all sorts of non-traditional families. Adoption and IVF are available to gays, lesbians and single women. Older women can give birth with donor eggs. There have been instances of transgender men giving birth. How long till transgender women can have a womb transplant? Is it any less healthy for children to grow up in a non-traditional family? I haven’t seen any research to answer that. Surely it’s better than growing up in an environment of domestic violence, mental health problems or addiction.
“I don’t mean to come on strong, but I am concerned,” as Parliament/Funkadelic said in a song coincidentally entitled ‘Biological Speculation’.
[To be continued tomorrow in Part 2, which is a must-read!]
For one further source of this mass migration stupidity look up information on the current UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres. Here is his ‘cv’
https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/24744-new-un-chief-to-europe-ignore-voters-open-the-borders
Peter Sutherland on steriods!! And he is from a european country – Portugal!!
Thanks for posting the link. What these people are doing is totally unacceptable isn’t it Semulum.
Interesting that there are one or two comments here discouraging procreation and seemingly happy with the ceaseless promotion of biological dead end socially worthless s*xual practices.
Indeed the author of this article seems to be a big fan of the above.
It would appear that the marxist agenda has been promoted with such efficacy that it has seeped into the subconscious of those who would at a conscious level describe themselves as at least vaguely anti-marxist / anti globalist.
And yet we observe one or two people agreeing with the globalist one-world-government advocates by recommending that (white) people should deliberately avoid procreating.
Perhaps by pursuing a gay lifestyle?
If only the right could pursue its agenda with the same level of efficacy as the left pursue theirs.
Hi Lauren
I’m not necessarily a huge fan of the ceaseless promotion of what you describe as “biological dead end socially worthless s*xual practices” (not sure if you are just referring to homosexuality here or also heterosexual sex involving contraception or without the intention of reproduction). I do however have genuinely mixed feelings around the normalisation of homosexuality. I don’t believe it should be an offence or people should be forced to live a lie if it’s just the way they are that they are attracted to the same sax – and it’s not really any skin of anyone else’s nose who you want to be in a relationship with.
I am however concerned that the ceaseless positivisation and promotion of homosexuality, especially to young people, can lead to some being susceptible to suggestion, think it’s cool or a political statement. The ease of opting for a gay lifestyle may be one factor in the birth rate decline among the indigenous population.
“…Is it any less healthy for children to grow up in a non-traditional family? I haven’t seen any research to answer that. Surely it’s better than growing up in an environment of domestic violence, mental health problems or addiction…”
Perfect example of a false dichotomy. A frequently used logical fallacy by those on the left
When would those ever be the only 2 options available? The answer is never.
Are there lots of ukip voters now pushing for the destruction of the only viable building block for a stable society? I.E. the heteronormative family.
Is this author yet another denouncer of objective truth? It seems there are those on the right who are now relegating objective truth in favour of imagined “social constructs” I believe is a term used by common purpose degenerates.
A transgender “woman” is not a woman, they are just a man who wants to physically appear and act in a way that they perceive to be feminine. They are still a man.
The same goes for transgender “men”.
If I sow a round bushy tail and long floppy ears on to a dog, is the dog now a rabbit?
Lauren. I hope UKIP will be the party that stands up for the traditional family. None of the other parties will do this. I think many UKIP members want this and it would get good support among the electorate. I hope to find out the opinion of the leadership candidates on this.
Hi Lauren
I very much am a supporter of the heteronormative family. I was postulating where it may not be such a bad thing for children to grow up in a loving homosexual environment. My gut instinct is there is something not quite right about it and children should have both a male and a female parent as a role model, but I know of no hard evidence I can point to which shows that that is the case.
As for your comments around transgender people, I am in total agreement.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/07/22/malloch-tragedy-european-family/
Yes, I read this. A good piece.
Certainly the idea of the traditional ‘nuclear’ family has been eroded away over the years. Marriages that end in divorce just a couple of years later. The number of ‘single parents’ out there. ‘Families’ with children from multiple parents (you know how it goes, mum has three kids who all have different fathers). Of course, this is more ‘normalised’ among the ‘working classes’.
And that’s the key word ‘normalised’. Homosexuality, infidelity, even transgenderism now, have all become normalised to an extent that anyone who has the slightest hint of objection is spouting ‘hate speech’.
Anyway, I’m sure I don’t need to tell anyone here that this whole population replacement plan has been going on for years, the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan:
http://www.westernspring.co.uk/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-the-genocide-of-the-peoples-of-europe/
I don’t believe that this and the ‘Muslim Invasion Of Europe’ are one and the same plan, I think there may actually be two (or even more) ongoing plans running in parallel, and those pulling the strings of the Kalergi Plan are unaware of how while they are taking advantage of the Islam Plan to fulfil their ambitions, the Islam Plan will eventually become their undoing.
I look forward to reading Part Two tomorrow!
Stuart. Always worth mentioning the ideas of Kalergi. I first heard about him a few months ago. Every time he is mentioned someone else will be prompted to google the name. So far I haven’t found an English translation of his written works.
The Conservative party should have resisted the culture change every step of the way.
Hi Stuart. I am aware of the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan.
However, having previously been a leftie, I don’t thing their ideas are as organised or thought-through as this. One they have decided they hate something, they are determined to destroy it – the family, men, heteronormity, gender itself, the nation state, anyone who disagrees with them …
You might like to read the
Frankfurt school of subversion 11point plan
It explains a lot about the situation we now confront on many fronts, including population reduction of Europeans.
Also, David Vincent’s book
“2030: your children’s future in Islamic Britain ”
And Gavin Cooke’s book
“Britain’s Great Immigration Disaster”
(Both available free on kindle)
Make very clear the future for this country.
( There is some overlap between the books).
Thanks Liz I have been googling those items.
I have no problem with anyone being any kind of gender they wish, living with anyone else of any kind of gender – I do have a problem with rampantly vocal feminazis however – who are rabidly ‘racist’ in their attitude toward men – only that isn’t ‘racist’ apparently – as a woman I find that attitude embarrassing as well as stridently ridiculous. I do think that what really matters for children is to be given a role model of a happy balanced parent – easier said than done these days, but extremely necessary, whether that be by one or two parents of whatever gender.
I will probably get into trouble for saying that what I do think is that degeneracy, lack of decency and morality has been deliberately fostered by what I always thought was the liberal elite – anything goes for any body any where – but lately I have begun to wonder. There is no doubt in my mind that we are all being softened up for life under Sharia Law – by both Globalist Marxists and Leftist Marxists, who both see Sharia as ideal tools by which to obtain their objectives.
Islam – Sharia – is quite relaxed about child rape of boys and girls, forced marriage (rape under Allah) bestiality slavery, violence even sex with the right kind of corpse – in fact every sort of practice that would be anathema to a society in any way moral. Some people in the West, I believe, would be relaxed if they were not longer at risk of prosecution for doing these things.
But to get there, to achieve Sharia, I am already seeing it touted by Muslims, and some non-Muslims who are calling it ‘White Sharia’ – we need to be persuaded that the lawlessness and immorality getting worse in our society can only be tackled by the imposition of Sharia. Think about it, people! You may think I am somewhat off topic, but I believe now that it’s all connected, and it isn’t really off topic at all.
I think the West is just going through a degenerate phase at the moment. Traditional values will return. As the Conservative party seems to be conservative in name only I would like UKIP to become the party that upholds conservative values. I don’t think schools should be promoting non-traditional values.
The danger is, Maximus, that Sharia gets there before the traditional values return.
Dee. Unfortunately Sharia will come first. To stop Sharia Europe and the UK need patriotic anti-globalist governments. The former Warsaw Pact nations such as Hungary and Poland show it is possible. It is harder for us in Western Europe due to the much higher exposure to cultural marxism from our media and education etc.
For us in the UK it is essential to have a strong UKIP. They are the only existing political force that can turn things around.
UKIP need a leader with the qualities of character of Margaret Thatcher. Exceptional mental strength and determination to battle on whatever the odds or opposition.
And then the entirety of UKIP needs to stay loyal through any stumbles and setbacks and difficulties. After all Maggie never lost a general election. Her colleagues did not stay loyal.
With this a major electoral breakthrough is achievable.
At least if we do succumb to sharia law, it’ll reinstate some traditional family values.
Exactly, Comarade Keith – don’t you see, your remark says it all. Except there are absolutely NO ‘traditional family values’ in Sharia Law – although it’s being presented as such. The only values are from the dark ages – give me one, just one, ‘traditional family value’ in the Sharia!
You seem a bit ambivalent on population growth or decline and the environment, Comrade.
Unremitting population growth is a disaster in the making, and will be mankind’s nemesis unless some other catastrophe intervenes.
Whereas static or even declining populations can be managed. It’s just a matter of how imaginative and resourceful we want to be.
Quercus
In an ideal world I would like to see the population reduced – both in this country and worldwide. I don’t think the world can sustain such a large population and this country is bursting at the seams.
The problem is that the population decline in the indigenous population is being more than compensated by mass immigration.
Perhaps the solution is to clamp down on immigration, resettle the recent arrivals who do not want to integrate and allow the UK populate to decline.
“Perhaps the solution is to clamp down on immigration, resettle the recent arrivals who do not want to integrate…”
Absolutely essential if we are to survive. We need to start by making them thoroughly uncomfortable through a clampdown on Sharia law and prosecutions for child abuse in every case of FGM and circumcision.
I’m in total agreement with all that Q.
Now – how do we stifle the screams of anguish from businesses who see their quarterly profits squeezed from lack of semi-slave labour from abroad?
OPTIMUM POPULATION OF ENGLAND 25 MILLION
Perhaps small families are a very good idea as we have a society of fewer but better people, better educated better resourced by their parents rather than state brainwashed.
Canada and Australia are both big countries where pop increase through large families and migration are not bad things.
We need to live more naturally that is in a more homogenous society and culture; those who oppose this deny racial preferencing, deny racial/cultural differences, deny history.
Societies can do voltes face and it would not be impossible for say Norway to embrace large families again and double its pop in 25 years. Germany and Italy are far gone but families are healthy in Poland.
PM May, Sturgeon,Lynne Wood, Merkel, greer and most feminastys are barren and yes it is part of the problem they are not Mothers; for some it was a career/life choice and for some of those it is part of a sick psychosis.
COUNTRIES DESTROYED BY FAILED MULTICULTURALISM
USSR; Yugoslavia; Czechoslovakia; AustriaHungary; British India; West and East Pakistan; Palestine; Ireland as part of UK;Georgia.
COUNTRIES BEING DESTROYED BY MULTICULTURALISM
Sweden; Denmark; Germany; Netherlands; Belgium; England; Spain; France; Ukraine; FYRO Makedonia.
I don’t understand why Spain going down this route after many centuries of struggle to achieve independence and democracy in the Iberian peninsula. Shows how powerful propaganda can be.
UKIP are the only party looking to address all the various ways we are going downhill.
I have no problem at all with AMW, Peter Whittle etc being gay. They know what fate awaits them under Sharia law. Either to be thrown down from a high place, or to be buried alive under a pile of stones. I do not want that to happen.
I am not sure to what extent the gay lobby affects the behaviour of heterosexuals. It did not consciously impinge on my thoughts when I married a woman. Unfortunately the marriage did not last.
What has probably a far greater impact on heterosexual men deciding whether to marry is the real risk that the marriage will fail. And then you will be at the mercy of the family court, with its huge bias against fathers. There really is no equal justice from them, as I have discovered first hand. I will not go into details, but their blatant discrimination against men has had a devastating effect on my life. The risk is just too great now, and I really would discourage men from getting married and having children.
There is a Gays against Sharia rally on 10th September. Unfortunately I have a clashing event in my diary, but would have gone to it:
https://www.facebook.com/events/627051040837621/
I agree with the problem of courts being biassed against fathers. UKIP should be calling this out and linking up with groups like Families Need Fathers.