Few issues divide our movement—whether we call it identitarianism, race-realism, or the “alt Right”—like abortion. To some, the practice is akin to murder, and its acceptance shows the degeneracy of the Left. To others, abortion—and contraception more generally—are eugenic practices, which are about the only things keeping our societies from falling into complete idiocracy.

I understand the pro-life temptation. The kinds of people who support abortion access most fervently are those who stand for the things we oppose: selfishness, atomization, the “liberation” of women, and leftist identity politics. In popular culture, legalized abortion is tied to “reproductive freedom,” which has liberated women from the horrible fate of being wives and mothers and allowed them to pursue more meaningful lives as cubicle drones.

Conversely, it is tempting to believe that abolishing legalized abortion would lead to a return to more traditional values, a higher birthrate, and healthier relations between the sexes. Many European leaders that we admire are moving their countries in a pro-life direction, perhaps because they have bought into this narrative.

Unfortunately, as our movement gains influence, it is important that we not fall prey to the pro-life temptation.

First off, the alt Right appreciates what is superior in man, in the Nietzschean sense. Most members of the alt Right applaud countries like Japan and South Korea for having low out-of-wedlock birth rates and not taking in Muslim or African refugees. We don’t simply say “who cares what they do, they’re not my tribe.” Rather, we recognize that such people have built impressive civilizations, and we believe that it is in the interest of humanity that these nations continue to exist, and not adopt the suicidal policies of the West.

Second, we on the alt Right have an appreciation of tribalism and identity. We realize that people are not just autonomous individuals. Life gains its meaning through connections to other members of our families, tribes, and nations.

Being pro-life flies in the face both of these principles.

The Pro-Life Movement is Dysgenic

First of all, the pro-life position is clearly dysgenic. A 2011 study showed that in 2008, while 16 percent of women aged 15-44 lived below the poverty line, among women who had abortions, the number was 42 percent. Hispanic and African-American women made up a combined 31 percent of this age group, but almost 55 percent of those who chose to terminate a pregnancy. The reasons behind these patterns aren’t hard to figure out. In a world with reliable birth control, it is quite easy to avoid an unwanted pregnancy; the only ones who can’t are the least intelligent and responsible members of society: women who are disproportionately Black, Hispanic, and poor.

A natural experiment in Colorado shows what happens when a state makes contraception and abortion more freely available. Over the last decade, the state has moved to the Left, and in 2009 it began offering free or low-cost long-acting contraception to poorer women. The state provided intrauterine devices and implants that, unlike condoms or the pill, did not require that the user be responsible enough to plan ahead. Within a few years, the birth rate of low-income women plummeted. In states where Republican legislatures have enacted a pro-life agenda, the opposite has happened.

The idea that there are capable women out there who are aborting their babies as they delay marriage and climb the corporate ladder is a fantasy. When an intelligent, responsible woman does have an abortion, it is often because the baby has a disease or the pregnancy threatens her health, not because she or her boyfriend forget to use contraception. A study in Europe found that over 90 percent of mothers who were told that their babies were going to have Down’s syndrome did not continue the pregnancy. In 2011, it was estimated that there are now 30 percent fewer people with the disorder in the United States due to prenatal diagnosis. In the future, as such technologies improve, what the Left calls “reproductive freedom” will continue to be the justification for private-sector eugenics.

The Identitarian Case

Not only is the pro-life movement dysgenic, but its justifications rely on principles we generally reject. The alt Right is skeptical, to say the least, of concepts like “equality” and “human rights,” especially as bases for policy. The unborn fetus has no connection to anyone else in the community. If it is not even wanted by its own mother, criminalizing abortion means that the state must step in and say that the individual has rights as an individual, despite its lack of connection to any larger social group. This is no problem to those in the conservative movement, who decide right and wrong based on principles like “the right to life.” It is no coincidence that some of the most pro-life politicians are those most excited about adopting children from Africa and those in their movement are among the conservatives most likely to denounce the “racism” of their political opponents.

The mother-child bond is the strongest of human relationships, the one least subject to being altered by government policy or societal forces. While over the last decades, fathers have become more likely to walk out on their children and divorce rates have risen, there has been no similar rise in females abandoning their children. When the parent-child bond does not exist for a pregnant woman, society has no business stepping in. Those who want to do so, by banning abortion because it’s “racist” or adopting children from Africa, are the ultimate cuckservatives.

If there were to be a pro-life position that we could accept, it would be based on arguments about what is good for the community. The case would have to be made that abortion is what is decimating the White population and decreasing its quality. While it’s true that a blanket ban on abortion would probably increase the White population in their numbers, it would, no doubt, decrease the overall quality, as well and leave all races stupider, more criminally prone, and more diseased.

A Better Way

For those of us who believe that the sexual revolution and women’s liberation have been disastrous for society, it is tempting to lash out at contraception and abortion. Yet the pro-life agenda would give us the worst of all worlds. Those whom we want to have children would continue to find a way to do what they wanted, while the birth rates among the worst members of society would explode. Childbearing among better classes would probably decrease even further under the strain of the inevitable increases in crime and redistributive policies that would follow.

It is as if pro-life identitarians want to force women to be wives and mothers by leaving them no other choice: Just take away their access to abortion and contraception, and they’ll have to stay home and raise children or stop having sex at all! Yet this kind of thinking implicitly affirms the Left’s premise that, when given a choice, women will want to be barren careerists.

A better way is to make an honest case that feminism has been bad for women. There is no higher calling in life than continuing the species, and raising happy, healthy children who will be a benefit to society. The case that babies are more fulfilling than cubicles should not be hard to make, and has been self-evident to every society not infected with the virus of leftism. Indeed, data shows that as feminism has progressed across the Western world, women have become less happy. The program of the Left fails by its own standards.

Of course, we cannot return to healthier relations between the sexes over night. Doing so is a long-term project, one that would require non-feminized men who can be worthy partners for women fulfilling their destinies. No one wants to be a stay-at-home wife to a man who is needy, weak, or cowardly. Much of the campus unrest we see has been estrogen-driven, and to be honest, it is not surprising that young women, prone towards conformity and cheap sentimentality, buy into modern leftism. But to me, the saddest thing is that we’ve come to a point where 20-year-old “men” are unashamed to show their faces in public while proudly demanding “safe spaces.” Careers are more appealing than relationships and families only when men and women are discouraged from exhibiting the traits that make them attractive to the opposite sex.

Perhaps nothing is more important than advocating for a return to more natural relations between the sexes. But that does not mean we mindlessly oppose everything that the Left supports. In the popular imagination, the pro-life movement is associated with opposition to women’s liberation and the rest of the leftist agenda. In reality, its positions lead to dysgenics and are justified through appeals to the same universalist principles that are allowing mass Third World immigration and other forms of suicidal liberalism. The alt Right, for both our own principles and the greater good, must oppose the pro-life agenda.

 

Originally published at RadixJournal.com.

  • Cam

    This kind of touches on the rural / urban divide. While folks in rural areas may find it abhorrent, it’s an absolute necessity in urban and suburban areas in order to keep the ferals off the streets.

    • ArkansasReactionary

      Cities survived for thousands of years without legalizing child-murder.

      They’ve only turned to crap in the last few decades.

      • Yehudah Finkelstein

        You are aware that the Romans would just abandon unwanted children out in the open?

        • ArkansasReactionary

          Somehow Europe survived for millennia after criminalizing infanticide.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            I’m not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that your statement is historically inaccurate.

          • Stevo

            It is historically accurate. Roman civilization is not identical with the European civilization. It was a precursor.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Roman civilization is one of the cruxes upon which Europe was built. No Rome, No Europe.

          • Stevo

            Rome was a crux for Europe because the Church found Roman legal traditions expedient.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Rome was a crux for Europe not only due its legal traditions but because of the organization of the Roman Empire whereby everyone paid taxes and traveled on Roman roads.

          • Stevo

            I am glad you are using the word crux

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            I am too, Europe owes more to the Roman and Greek pagans than it does to some dead Jew on a stick.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            The Romans and the Greeks were smart enough to abandon paganism eventually.

            I’d call the avoidance of hellfire “more”.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            The Greco-Romans didn’t voluntarily abandon Paganism, and neither did the Germans, Celts, Slavs, or Balts. The Balts were still Pagan in the 1400s.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            St. Constantine converted voluntarily. As did most Northern Europeans.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Charlemagne and the Teutonic Knights had to fight for hundreds of years to convert Northern European and Slavic Pagans. That’s not voluntary conversion.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Irish, English, Scots, Scandinavians, all came over freely.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            No, they didn’t. Pagan Priests were hunted down and killed. Why was that if Europeans freely came over to Christianity? Why did Christians need the spectacle of Witchcraft trials to prevent “backsliding” into Paganism?

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Their rulers converted voluntarily.

          • Ike35

            So fucking what!? They used it as a tool for consolidating power, doesn’t seem like a christian thing to do

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            European Christian Kings and the Pope to the Magyars, Celts, Balts, Germans, Slav rulers: Convert to Christianity or we’ll kill you and convert your people. Sounds voluntary!

          • Ike35

            Agreed. This silly semitic religion has never fit us right, they managed to painstakingly square the round hole for a few hundred years and by the 1300s we had the renaissance and the church began to gradually lose power and within another 200 years it was chopped off at the knees by the reformation and has become more bat shit crazy and progressively more irrelevant ever since to the point that the pope doesnt even believe his own religion anymore.

          • ThomasER916

            The autistic White cuck can’t even answer the question:

            Does Christianity have a special place for the White race?

            Clearly it has a special place for Jews. Christianity abandoned the White race for the Turd World. It has done this many, many times from Abolition in Britain to refugee resettlement through the White world. Christians built autistic Empires of Miscegenation in Mexico and South America.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            That you dislike reality doesn’t change it.

            Note that there is no argument in the post I’m replying to. Just mindless whining.

          • ThomasER916

            Does Christianity hold a special place for the White race?

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Not intrinsically, just historically.

            Neither does science, math, medicine, etc.

          • ThomasER916

            No one is talking about science, math, medicine, etc.

          • craicher

            You accuse everyone of being autistic who does not agree with you. Are you projecting ThommyJewBoy.?

          • ThomasER916

            >says projecting
            >uses Jewish/Cultural Marxist terminology to posture as an authority
            >calls other JewBoy

            You’re definitely in the wrong place. The Alt Right is a White Identity movement. Whites are always first. Your Jewish institution doesn’t matter. Our race is more important.

          • craicher

            Didn’t you admit to being a heeb? Your a one trick ponny, your hatred of Traditional Europe. Just like a jew.

          • craicher

            You are the only one I have called a jew because you are. You jews are all the same when you are taken out from under your rock into the daylight.

            Yet accuse everyone of being autistic. Always on the attack, vile jew.

          • Alex Harris

            The pope is a communist infiltrator. It’s not like he’s an actual Catholic, but faithless.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            So fucking what

            Not really sure. Yehudah brought up the forced conversion question.

          • craicher

            Or maybe they thought that human sacrifice was a bloody affair that they could do without?

          • craicher

            Because there actually were women practicing witchcraft, that is poisoning people and such. Many confessed. You should read the confessions. The whole of the innocent oppressed witches thing is a leftist narrative.

          • Ike35

            and now they’re all giving up on a foreign unorganic semitic religion, good on them.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            As part of a general collective suicide.

          • craicher

            That was against the Saxons. Give us other examples? Most all came over freely once their king converted.

          • craicher

            Yea and we know what a great Pagan civilization the Balts had? More like in a state similar to Native American Indians.

          • craicher

            Infanticide was still widespread.

        • Stevo

          That was in a Roman Empire which was collapsing and being replaced by Christendom. Christians would adopt those babies.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            No, it occurred throughout Roman history. It was a common practice in Ancient Europe.

          • Stevo

            Yes all those pagan Europeans were conquered by Christianity.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            And now Christianity is dying in Europe and the West and Europe needs to renew itself.

          • Stevo

            Yes Christianity is dying and is it a coincidence that Europe is dying at the same time?

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Europe got to this point because of Christianity. As Nietzsche wrote, Ecce Homo. Behold the Man. Worshipping Weakness over Strength is Christianity’s legacy. Now that Christianity is dying, Europe may be able to renew itself.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Worshipping Weakness over Strength is Christianity’s legacy

            Funny how that malady started as Christianity declined.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            That malady began the moment Europeans began believing in a Semitic fairy tale.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            If you says so

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Dude, you’re arguing with people who believe in “hellfire.” Good luck.

          • Alex Harris

            There are states of being/experience/consciousness in THIS reality, on THIS planet that are more hellish than you would care to imagine.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Okay, fine, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are. I don’t see how you can go from that to “hell fire is real.”

          • Alex Harris

            Pascal’s Wager. I’m not taking the risk. I’ve already been through enough.

          • Alex Harris

            Oh, because Odin and Zeus are clearly SO much more plausible, right?

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Zeus is every bit as plausible as Yahweh – and far more preferable.

          • Alex Harris

            “Yahweh” is not the Christian God. “Yahweh” is a word that has only recently been injected into “Judeo-Christianity” by (((YOU KNOW WHO))).

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Christians have always identified their God with that of the “Old Testament.” It’s a bit late in the day to pretend otherwise.

          • Alex Harris

            Where in the OT is God named “Yahweh”? I just ran a search through a PDF of the KJV. Results… 0.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Who cares what precise name he’s given; it’s the same Hebrew creep.

          • Alex Harris

            Do you believe you have a soul?

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Not in any traditional sense. It’s possible there may be “something like” souls, although it’s frankly difficult for me to conceive of what they’d be like.

          • Stevo
          • Alex Harris

            Worshiping weakness? Christianity is about worshiping the one true and all-powerful God. The way to be reunited with that God is through faith in Christ’s (God manifest on Earth as a man) sacrifice of himself to relieve us of the impossible burden of bearing our own sins. Christ wasn’t “weak” or a “failure”. He was God taking human form to feel the suffering of Man, and to give us a way to overcome sin. For whatever reason, God set up the universe in such a way that sin is punished harshly. No man can live a sinless life, and no man can “save” himself.

            And Christ’s life is an example of great courage, not weakness. He was essentially taking on the ZOG of his day.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            For whatever reason, God set up the universe in such a way that sin is punished harshly.

            Whatever that reason was, it can’t have been Love – even though it was in his power to set it up that way. Face it, you’re worshiping a tyrant and a creep.

            He was essentially taking on the ZOG of his day.

            The “ZOG” of his day destroyed the yids’ temple and sent them packing. Yeshua bin Yusif had nothing to do with it.

          • Alex Harris

            “Whatever that reason was, it can’t have been Love”

            Does a father have to smack his child once in a while to train him not to pick his nose? Or not to steal candy-bars from the corner store? I guess God could have just made us all perfect from the get-go, and called it a day, right? But if we were perfect, then we’d be… Oh, yeah, GOD.

            “Yeshua bin Yusif”

            Did you lean those words from the Talmud? They don’t appear in the Christian Bible. I don’t have any idea who or what they are referring to.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            That was your savior’s real name in his ancestral Hebrew tongue. Just thought you might appreciate the authenticity.

            Dude, your God’s cruelty towards those who fail to live up to his arbitrary standards (he’s God, so he could’ve chosen any set of standards he wanted) immeasurably exceeds that of the most sadistic torturers in all human history. After all, at least human torturers eventually stop. Not the Big Fella.

          • Alex Harris

            I have strong doubts as to the authenticity of anything published in Hebrew. I also have strong doubts as to the accessibility of any authentic historical Hebrew documents in the last century or so. I would lean more heavily on the original Greek translations, but that point is moot for now, as I can read either Greek nor Hebrew.

            Anyway, if “Yahoshuastein” was Christ’s “true name”, why did nobody ever utter that word until the Churches were thoroughly subverted by “Judeo-Christianity” and CZ?

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            I’m no biblical expert, but it’s my understanding that Jesus is just a Latinized form of the Hellenized form of the Hebrew name Yeshua, itself a variation on an earlier form, Yehoshua. The “bin Yusif” or “ben Yosef” just means “of Joseph,” Jesus’s “stepdad.”

          • Alex Harris

            I’ve heard it was from the Greek Iesus or some such thing. (Oh, I guess that would be the Hellenized form.) Not buying the “Yeshua” business at all. Nobody had ever heard that name until a few years ago. I think the earlier Church, and our culture at large had a much more vigorous interest in the truth than we do now. Now that there is clearly heavy jewish infiltration into “Judeo-Christianity”, suddenly everybody wants to start using these “forgotten” Hebrew words.

          • Alex Harris

            Disqus is eating my posts. Sorry, not going to re-type it.

          • craicher

            Europe in being renewed in the East and Christianity is a part of that renewal. Funny how Europe is in its death throws in the Atheist West and may not survive.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            And now Christianity is dying in Europe

            And so goes Europe itself. Funny that.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Christianity has no inherent in interest in ensuring European existence. None whatsoever. If anything, it is inherently opposed to ongoing European existence (when you consider what Europeans are now required to do to ensure that existence).

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Funny how European existence was only in jeopardy after Christianity’s abandonment.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Yes, it’s absolutely hilarious. It doesn’t change the fact that Christianity has no inherent interest in preserving Europeans and instead acts as an impediment to that objective.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            I’m not particularly interested in “inherent interest”. Christianity does what it’s supposed to, and served as the backbone of European civilization for millennia as a bonus.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Its serving as the backbone of European civilization (for less than two thousand years, not “millennia”) was completely incidental – nothing at all that Christianity was ever “supposed to do.”

            Christianity will carry on just fine without Europeans. Europeans, if they chose, can carry on just fine without Christianity.

          • Alex Harris

            Christian Europeans had no problem doing what was necessary during the Crusades, or during the conquest of North America.

        • Abcdedcba

          I don’t think he’s aware of much of anything. He strikes me as someone who thinks he knows everything and therefore never learns anything.

      • Rascal

        Cities have also been completely destroyed by barbarians sacking them too.

      • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

        Fetuses aren’t humans so it’s not child murder. That’s pretty obvious (except to christcucks).

      • Cam

        On the other hand, if we do consider this a rural/urban fight, then maybe we do want more ferals running loose, terrorizing the cities. Let loose the ferals to terrorize the liberals. Only problem with that is that we all pay for it. Although, it may be worth the payment to unleash hell against the liberals in the form of ferals.

        As a practical matter though, here in the DC suburbs, I still view abortion as quite useful for managing the feral population. Keep in mind – it’s mostly the minorities who are aborting; a very, very useful form of population control.

        • ArkansasReactionary

          Jim Crow kept blacks controlled for a century without mass murdering them.

  • From Ohio

    Pro-life… for white people only.

    • Yehudah Finkelstein

      Exactly. We need to encourage pro life policies in white countries and amongst white people. In Non White populations, we need to make abortion and birth control readily available.

      • From Ohio

        Reverse Jim Crow for abortion clinics, No White Women Allowed.

        • JosephtheGreat

          Except if that white woman is carry a mulatto baby.

      • Robert’sRules

        Maybe we could just stop feeding them instead.

        • Yehudah Finkelstein

          David Duke’s proposal when he was in the Louisiana State House was right. Women receiving welfare need to get birth control implants.

      • Idunna

        The only way to do that is to make white lives worth living. And white men and women worth breeding with.

    • Jarod

      I had a dog and his name was…Bingo

    • Rascal

      Absolutely. This is the only logical stance for the broader Alt Right in my opinion. It is a good median between Eugenicists/demographers and people who have a theological or moral stance on the life issue. People that complain about low tier White people, while I agree, a White ethno state needs ditch diggers too.

      • Alex Harris

        All productive work is honorable, and yes, somebody has to do the menial jobs. People who dream of some eugenic utopia where everyone is a 140 IQ robotics engineer are fooling themselves.

        • ThomasER916

          Literally who is talking about that? Where is that written? Who is calling for that?

          • Alex Harris

            It certainly seems to be implied in a lot of the conversations about eugenics.

          • ThomasER916

            If that’s your interpretation then you’re wrong.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            It’s one of the anti-eugenics Christian goobers’ favorite red herrings.

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          That’s like an African today arguing, “Haw haw, how can you ever have a 100 average IQ society? Who’s going to do all the menial labor?”

          • Alex Harris

            We got the menial labor done just fine with a 100 average IQ society in the past. Teenagers and the individuals on the left side of the Bell Curve.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            And you’ll get menial labor done just with a 140 average IQ society in the future. And enjoy a whole bunch of other benefits to boot. What’s not to like? (Seriously.)

      • Abcdedcba

        The ONLY women who should having kids are healthy, sane, responsible, pro-male heterosexual women. This is probably less than half of women. This idea that addicts, nutjobs, male-haters and SJWs should be having as many kids as every other woman is insane. If only the best 25% of our women reproduce then that fine, as long as their birth rates are high enough. As time goes on, the number of high-quality people will naturally increase as the low-quality people stop breeding.

        This “abortions for non-whites only hurr hurr” shit is extremely juvenile. Edginess should not be a factor in policy considerations. We don’t have to give up race-realism in order to acknowledge that many, many white women have no business breeding.

        • Evolver1

          So, do tell, how many children do you have?

          • Abcdedcba

            Did I hit a sore spot?

          • ThomasER916

            Clearly that number is zero.

          • Abcdedcba

            Et tu, Tommy?

    • marijan

      I advocate laws against abortion for whites only, so only in all white nations like Croatia, Hungary, Russia etc. The US on the other hand, I’m pro abortion

      • Abcdedcba

        This comment is retarded on so many levels. I think this article was raided by anti-white trolls posing as ridiculous alt-righters.

        • Evolver1

          Tell us why you think that comment is “retarded on so many levels.”? It sounds pretty good to me. No abortions for Whites=more White people. Abortions for non-Whites=fewer non-Whites. The world will be better with more Whites and fewer non-Whites.

          • Abcdedcba

            L’edge

          • ThomasER916

            What’s the matter? Too stupid to answer a simple question?

          • Abcdedcba

            Yep

          • Urbanus_II

            It isn’t retarded; it’s flat out evil.

    • Abcdedcba

      Did you even read the article? Smfh

    • OhioBrian

      Not what this article said, in part as the claim was that banning was perhaps destructive to any race as those having the unwanted babies often represent the worst off.

  • ArkansasReactionary

    [i]When the parent-child bond does not exist for a pregnant woman, society has no business stepping in.[/i]

    If they’re connected by an umbilical cord, then the bond exists.

    Oh wait I get it, you’re engaged in the common tactic of prioritizing subjective feelings (the fact that psychopaths don’t [i]feel[/i] attached to their children) over objective reality. Why not just join the left already, they’re full of emotivists?

    • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

      The objective reality in abortion cases is that the mother feels no emotional connection to the baby-to-be.

      Feelings matter. Morality would make no sense if not for the feelings it evokes.

      • ArkansasReactionary

        We have institutions for psychopaths.

  • ArkansasReactionary

    A person who claims to want to preserve our race while simultaneously supporting abortion and contraception is a quintessential cuck.

    • Strac5

      A race cannot be preserved but will die out if it is full of retards and other sicklings. That’s just a fact.

      • ArkansasReactionary

        Funny how the white race survived for thousands of years and is only now in danger of dying off.

        Almost as if killing and/or not having children is bad for a race.

        P.S. Guess which way contraceptive use correlates with intelligence?

        • Strac5

          That’s because the retards and sicklings used to die. Now they are kept alive by medical technology and wealth transfer programs at the expense of the fit and intelligent. On top of that, you want to force flood the population with more of them by enforcing the churning out of defectives from birth canals. We are creating a genetic pyramid scheme that will lead to the world in Idiocracy.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Or a deformed child would be exposed to the elements and left to die.

            I’ve seen articles from Catholic and Christian websites bemoaning the loss of Down Syndrome individuals because with Genetic Counseling there will soon be No people with Down Syndrome except among religious fundamentalists. Why is it a bad thing to decrease the number of people with Down Syndrome?

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Why is it a bad thing to decrease the number of people with Down Syndrome?

            Same reason it’s bad to murder people in general.

            People bemoan the drop in Down syndrome cases because that was achieved via murder of people with Down syndrome.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Sorry aborting an early term Down Syndrome fetus isn’t murder.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            How is it not?

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Aborting a down syndrome fetus isn’t murder in the same way putting down the sickly runt in a litter of dogs isn’t murder. Both the dog and the down syndrome fetus are going to grow up fucked up, so its a mercy killing.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Killing a dog isn’t murder because it’s a dog. Whether it’s healthy or not doesn’t matter.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            If you kill a dog, you do hard time. And Killing a dog is as fucked up as killing a person.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            What on Earth are you talking about?

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            You said Killing a dog isn’t murder. Well, the law considers killing a dog a grave offense. Go Ask Michael Vick. Killing a dog results in hard time on the level of a manslaughter conviction.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            IIRC causing the death of a dog isn’t even a statutory element of the crime of dog fighting.

            In any case it’s not considered murder in any jurisdiction.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Get real. Killing a dog is not remotely close to killing a human.

            But a fetus is unquestionably not fully human, and the termination of fetuses does not arouse anywhere near the strong moral repulsion of killing fully formed humans, so the two are clearly not the same thing.

          • Alex Harris

            Long, long before I was “red-pilled” on anything, I noticed a pattern of Christians having retarded children and/or spouses, or doing the third-world adoption thing. I actually knew one pastor with a crippled wife and an adopted Korean daughter. I wonder if the high prevalence of retarded children among certain Christian groups is the result of direct and intentional poisoning or genetic sabotage of some kind. It could very well be the case, with certain (((doctahs))) having a problem with adhering to the Hippocratic Oath.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            The sick perhaps, though the mentally retarded could survive before modern medicine (they were less likely to have kids though, being that wanton promiscuity wasn’t the societal norm).

            I suppose it hasn’t occurred to you, but people with low IQs are less likely to use contraception.

      • Alex Harris

        When, in our thousands of years of history, have we ever had anything resembling a universal scientific program of eugenics? Nature took care of the weak and sick just fine, until we became so “enlightened” that we believed we had conquered nature. Then the jews took control of our society, the sciences, and government policies and retooled them all to produce the most dysgenic effects possible.

        • Jusqu’au Bout

          Rome, Greece, Viking culture, etc,… all killed disfigured babies and mentally ill.

        • craicher

          The Spartans would throw them off cliffs. Infanticide was common in Christian Europe too. The priests would look the other way.

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          “When, in our thousands of years of history, have we ever had anything resembling the internet?”

          “When, in our thousands of years of history, have we ever had anything resembling spaceflight?”

          Not much of an argument, is it.

          • Alex Harris

            The internet is having unintended and unforeseen consequences, not all of them positive. For instance, every damned mud on the planet is now networked, and they can all read what we’re saying and thinking about. The internet is a highly collectivizing, socializing, power-centralizing force, while at the same time atomizing and alienating individuals. It has also supercharged female hypergamy, allowing them to “shop” for mates like they shop for a pair of shoes (and they take it just about as seriously).

            So I think comprehensive scientific eugenics programs would likely have similar unintended consequences. Better to stick as closely as possible to the natural way, as has been perfectly effective for all of our history. If you want to throw retarded and deformed babies off cliffs, you might be able to persuade me to look the other way.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Awesome. I’ll even let you pick out your own set of blinkers just for the occasion.

    • Abcdedcba

      It’s fine if you want to hold retarded positions, but for your own sake at least, refrain from insulting people who disagree.

      The only thing worse than arrogantly holding a wise opinion is arrogantly holding a foolish one. Really, you’re probably unshameable but your comment reflects poorly on you.

  • craicher

    This site is run by leftist, pagan, muds. True we don’t need downs syndrome kids running around but I would put my money on it that lots of healthy White babies are aborted by intelligent (but greedy) women who see motherhood as an inconvenience and a hinder to their career ambitions.

    And if Whites are aborting their downs syndrome children in doves how come when I am in Sweden I see retarded people all over the place?

    Anyone who cares about our people and survival knows that free, unrestricted access to abortion is bad for us. Women need to be made accountable when they copulate.

    Fact is women belong in the kitchen or the kitchen garden (making themselves useful) barefoot, pregnant and chained to the stove.

    • Yehudah Finkelstein

      Yeah, many of us aren’t “Conservatives.” The fact is that White people will make just about any type of government work competently. What matters is the race.

    • You’re obviously in the wrong place. I suggest http://firsthings.com is more your speed.

      • craicher

        Speaking of aborting retards.

        • ThomasER916

          We don’t need you. You need us.

    • Teresa Rincon

      Keep half your army barefoot and pregnant, and I guarantee the Left will keep winning. Maybe that’s what you really want.

      • ArkansasReactionary

        It’s hard to outcuck someone who thinks feminism will help us defeat the left.

        • Teresa Rincon

          Women learning science, math and literature is evil feminism now?Homeschooling mothers use these skills all the time, unless you want your sons to be uneducated dolts, too.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Encouraging women to work outside the home is feminist.

          • practicallyperfect

            What about if we just simply restructured the way we think of life patterns? As the average life span grows longer why not convince women to have and raise their babies when they are young then when the children are grown go out into the work place.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Women should not work period. Its that bullshit first wave feminism that led to revised economic forecasts and 2 income households. It used to be that a man’s salary was calculated to be enough to support a family.

          • practicallyperfect

            I agree with the one income we did barely did it for 15yrs. However each family’s taxes may be different. Keep up what the IRS wanted from us even with one income is what made me go into the work place.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Incomes and collective bargaining agreements should be reformulated so one income can support a family. Also, people need to make do with less. You don’t need new cars and new 6 bedroom houses with 3 car garages and a circle driveway.

          • practicallyperfect

            Be careful, you do not know my circumstances. My husband’s occupation is heavily taxed.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            I’m not referring to you personally. I’m referring to the American desire to constantly consume by purchasing new things they don’t need. If incomes are reformulated to support one income families, that means taxes should come down.

          • practicallyperfect

            Noted. Have a good evening.

          • craicher

            There are some things that men simply do not want to do. In these fields we need women. But they should be in their own sphere, working with only women.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Such as? There are many men in female dominated fields like Kindergarten Teacher, Nurse, etc.

          • craicher

            I don’t think men make good kindergarten teachers and men who are attracted to it are suspect pedophiles. Women make good nurturers. We need them for that. Men do not.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            My mother taught Elementary school and worked with many male teachers who taught Kindergarten and lower grades. You are playing into ridiculous stereotypes. We need men to prepare people for the real world. Our Schools are dominated by women and Anti-Boy.

          • craicher

            I don’t believe men have the same nurturing instincts that would lead them to become kindergarten teachers. And yes, sickos are attracted to jobs that give them access to children such as kindergarten teacher. In fact I don’t believe men should even be allowed into such fields.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            I’ve long advocated separate schooling. No real reason not to.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            I don’t have a problem with separate schooling. Men teach boys and Women teach girls. It works. But then you need a bunch of women teachers….

            How about you separate the sexes until Middle or High School. Then have all male teachers once subjects like Math start to become rigorous. Women elementary teachers would return to what they were before World War II, a job for young unmarried women in their 20s. Once women get married, they stop teaching.

          • craicher

            Yes in the older grades the boys need men.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            The need for separate sex education is greater as kids get older.

            Once you get to a point where college educated teachers are needed then I’m not sure how much more formal education is really needed for women.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Women teaching elementary school would probably be fine with a two year program out of high school that let them begin teaching at 20.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Generally the only thing elementary teachers are required to have at the college level is a degree in education (no post-secondary study of substantive content is usually required). And it’s not clear to me that that’s actually necessary (being that schoolteachers from of old didn’t need them). Dealing with kids seems to be one of those things that modern people need a college degree for, but which everyone else in history didn’t.

          • Alex Harris

            There definitely do need to be more normal men in education, but I think maybe the tiny tots should be left to women.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            That’s fine, they don’t need much of a college education to teach Preschool or Kindergarten. And teaching preschool at 20 years old prepares women for motherhood. We could even require young women to teach pre school (that solves the child care issue). Once women get married, they have children and leave the workforce.

          • practicallyperfect

            I would also add if you think historically women did not ever work outside of the home or owned businesses you are sadly mistaken. BTW what are you going to do with all those women who do not find husbands?

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Women had to work out of necessity during the Industrial Revolution. Who wants to bring back girls working in Textile Mills and Factories? Before that, women worked in agrarian settings supporting their families on farms.

            Women who didn’t marry lived with their families, they didn’t want to become a spinster and there was enormous pressure to marry, for good reason.

          • practicallyperfect

            Go back further than the industrial revolution. In a Medieval city unmarried women could own property, and in the absence of male heirs inherit. women of all classes had rights in property by law and custom they could sue and be sued, make wills and contracts in addition to pleading their own cases in court. Women worked in a variety of crafts and professions. teachers, midwives, lacemakers, seamstresses, weavers, fullers, barbers, carpenters, saddlers, tilers and many others. Women often learned their husbands craft and if he died took over the business. I don’t say this to advocate for feminism, I loath it, but we are about truth and at all times need to be realistic and rational.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            I don’t have a problem with women inheriting property to preserve their family birthright or stepping up to work should circumstances dictate that. Such attitudes are what separates Europe from the Muslim savages who stone women. But lets not deny the fact that European society has traditionally been a Masculine society. Feminism is a recent Jewish phenomena that can be removed from the culture.

          • practicallyperfect

            I understand. I am not a neophyte when it comes to being red pill. Your enthusiasm is nice to see.

          • Alex Harris

            Soylent Green.

          • ArkansasReactionary

            Better than working mothers, but still no good reason for it.

          • practicallyperfect

            That depends on the circumstance of each family.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Do you want your wife to have a male gynecologist or obstetrician? Just a thought…

          • craicher

            That would be ideal and we need women in the nurturing fields like nursing, elderly care and so on.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Yes, kindergarten and elementary education are also fitting careers for women. I would also suggest midwifery/ob/gyn careers too for the more ambitious.

          • Rascal

            The problem is, that instead of having sons, women are making power points. That is the problem, not “math and literature.”. Please don’t create strawmen.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Human Resources Powerpoints.

          • craicher

            And you will always find some bossy, bitch in human resources. Their job? Gossip.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            If Women don’t work, that means Human Resources Departments can be eliminated and Personnel decisions can be made by a Business office at Firms.

          • craicher

            Women learning literature is a joke. Just like female academics. Cooking, washing dishes, and milking a cow don’t require math, science or literature.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Name one good Literature book written by a woman.

          • craicher

            There are none. A few years back I was doing a MA and the class was about half female of which a few stayed on to do PhD’s. You should see what their academic interests are. It was a joke. Without men so philosophy, no science, no math just the gibberish of gossipy women.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Sounds about right. Let me guess, all the women were into analyzing “Gender.”

          • craicher

            EVERYTHING was about gender!

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Of course. Because Muh Vagina, right? Who would want to study Hegel, Military History, or Hemingway when you can deconstruct Kaiser Wilhelm or Herman Melville through gender norms?

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Harry Potter!

          • Alex Harris

            Women can learn all those things up until age 18, and pick up their studies again after age 38.

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          It’s hard to outcuck someone who thinks feminism will help us defeat the left.

          True. It’s a feat that probably only a christcuck is capable of.

      • craicher

        I didn’t realize men (the army) could get pregnant? As a woman you should not voice your opinion on politics as you biologically lack all reason and logic. You are welcome to have opinions in the female sphere such as cooking, cleaning, nursing, sewing, etc….

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          Dude. Seriously…

      • Jusqu’au Bout

        If you have ever been been pregnant then you would understand why we like to be barefooted and in the kitchen lol

      • Alex Harris

        Are you suggesting that we should be letting women fight? Physically? If so, that leads to extinction much faster. Women are not as “expendable” as men. Given an intact population of women, only a small handful of men could impregnate them all and re-populate. But the reverse is not true. If large numbers of women die in combat, and only few are left, they can only produce a limited number of children over a certain period of time. That, and all the surplus men will probably kill each other trying to mate with the few available women.

    • Jason R.

      I think the site is trying to let the voices – plural – of the Alt Right be heard. The author is correct that there is a strong eugenics party among us. I understand the arguments of eugenics – they are desirable – but as a Christian I would argue that we ultimately we answer to the Almighty God for slaying the unborn in their wombs. That said, let’s talk it out; let’s help purify a White Nationalist position, if possible. As I mentioned above, I think we can all agree, healthy White children should never be aborted, even if that means I have to adopt them.

      • Rascal

        Thank you for being reasonable on the subject, as I know there are many Christian among us. I am not religious, but I agree with the Christian morality on the life choice for my own children, and the people in my community, of which I consider to be upstanding (in the traditional sense) White people.

        For other communities? Who am I to say what they should do….

      • marijan

        Prove your god exists. Then tell me why anyone should worship it

        • ArkansasReactionary

          Aquinas’s five ways are a good starting point.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            All five fail (except in the minds of christcucks desperate to believe no matter what evidence or logic have to say).

        • Alex Harris

          Pascal’s Wager.

      • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

        Fine, then let the individuals doing the aborting do the answering. Your opposition to the practise will be noted and appreciated by the Almighty, I’m sure.

        • ArkansasReactionary

          This is one of the dumbest arguments heard from choicecucks. Things like murder should be punished by the state. For very obvious reasons.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Of course murder should be punished by the state! But abortion isn’t murder. Christcucks can content themselves with the knowledge that at least they didn’t abort.

    • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

      And if Whites are aborting their downs syndrome children in doves how come when I am in Sweden I see retarded people all over the place?

      Because any eugenics program would require multiple generations to show significant effects? Granted, that’s a very complex thought, so you can be forgiven for not grasping it.

      • craicher

        You must be a genius. But for a simpelton like me, it seems that if a retarded baby is aborted then it can’t be out walking the streets for my eyes to see. Very complex issue. I’m sure you have some grand insight that I just cannot grasp.

        Women need to get knocked up young so they don’t have so many retarded children. It’s pretty simple really.

        Everyday this site reveals its true leftist leanings. What else can you expect from a Swede and an Iranian mud.

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          If you’re seeing retards walking the streets it obviously means that not all retarded fetuses have been aborted yet. That’s why it takes a number of generations.

          • craicher

            So you believe that Down’s Syndrome people birth other Down’s Syndrome people? That if in a few generations they are all aborted then they will never be? You are a genius.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            I thought “retards” was just a reference to people with severely undesirable qualities in general. Pardon the confusion.

          • craicher

            I meant retard, retard. And yes, you see them everywhere in Sweden.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            I doubt there are more retards in Sweden per capita than elsewhere. Maybe the Swedish Cucks are just open about letting retards out in public. I spent time in Germany and the Germans do the opposite. The Germans basically hide retards in group homes and don’t like retards out in public.

          • craicher

            Yes, they are out in society and each one has a personal assistant. How much does that cost? They also have the right to get married and have babies and thus are not sterilized like they are in the USA.

            Putting them into homes makes more sense.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            I’m not surprised the Swedes subsidize a Personal Aide for a Retard and let them breed. These Nordic social welfare policies are going to be interesting when Islamization happens!

            We put retards into homes here in America but give retards make work jobs instead of just giving jobs to the mentally able.

    • Alex Harris

      “Fact is women belong in the kitchen or the kitchen garden (making
      themselves useful) barefoot, pregnant and chained to the stove.”

      More traditional roles for men and women would be ideal. But your comment really sounds like a leftist troll, trying to generate “point and sputter” material.

  • Stevo

    Abortion and Contraception have been practiced for millennia, but they had not been accepted by Western Civilization until relatively recently.

    If we save society and morals they will no longer be acceptable. Women will yearn after motherhood, casual sex culture will be eliminated, whores and adulterers will be shunned and face legal punishment. Abortion and contraception will be a non issue.

    Our morals will be universal and non-western morality and culture will become subordinate and irrelevant to the future of mankind. Abortion and contraception do not factor into a happy human destiny

    • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

      No, none of that will necessarily happen. Nor ought it to.

    • Jusqu’au Bout

      I like your ideals… someday *sigh*

  • Albionic American

    We realize that people are not just autonomous individuals. Life gains its meaning through connections to other members of our families, tribes, and nations.

    I’d like to see a stronger emphasis on this, with the framing that the Alt Right has a vision of human flourishing and the good life based on reason, evidence and tradition. This vision qualifies the Alt Right’s world view as a form of humanism.

    And this perspective contrasts sharply with our elites’ childish utopianism, with their plans to merge humanity into one huge ball of fungible mystery meat where no one has roots,

  • Robert’sRules

    No. Adults don’t wish to Constitutionalize their errors.

    The alt-right is not feminist. What the hell is this?

    • ArkansasReactionary

      The alt-right is not feminist. What the hell is this?

      Entryism

    • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

      It’s not christcuckery, that’s for sure.

  • Jason R.

    The article raises some interesting – and somewhat convincing – points. I would argue that the White race cannot afford to abort a single healthy White child. We can at least agree on that. Moving forward, we should consider supporting White families who are willing to adopt White children, rather than allow them to be aborted.

  • Sean Fielding

    Here is a Darwinian, atheist take: At the core of morality is trust, and strategies around trust vary by ethnicity. Therefore morality is ethnically specific. Unsurprisingly, the most trusting group, NW Europeans, was the one that developed universalistic morality; by definition, the other groups could not because their dealings with out-groups were characterized by lower trust than dealing with in-group. (NW Europeans had this too, and still have a little, which is why universalism had to wait for the fantastic prosperity of the post-industrial West: a critical mass, the more naive half of Westerners, believes in something approximating it.)

    All this is to simply present a basis for why the morality of non-White abortion is not an issue for me. Practically speaking, the more non-White fetuses are aborted, the better for us, and from the point of view of my particularist moral theory, it’s up to non-White out-groups, with their out-group systems of morality, to decide what to do with their fetuses.

    Turning to White abortion, it’s a question of patriarchy. ANY Eurasian civilization, Brown and Yellow ones too, is characterized by patriarchy in its creative and consolidative phases. Relatively high IQ, energetic beta males are the heavy lifters of Eurasian civilizations, and without patriarchy to lock down an average or better chance at marriage and reproduction against women’s instinctive hypergamy, Eurasian civilizations inevitably decline.

    Patriarchy by definition is ownership of the reproductive choices of females by their fathers and husbands, backed by the state with strong laws. Obviously that includes the ancient, informal means of female input, but they are far more limited than what we see in our current dilemma.
    And obviously ownership of reproductive choice extends to abortion. Likely none but the weakest White men would allow their women to abort a healthy fetus under patriarchy. Negative eugenic abortion is a different matter. Clearly the biological orientation of our movement should encourage it. The main problem would be the usual tendency of medical categories to expand unscientifcally: let a closet feminist at the issue and it would make your head spin how fast ‘sired by a man whose genes I don’t respect’ (beta) would turn into ‘genetic defect.’

    • “Likely none but the weakest White men would allow their women to abort a healthy fetus under patriarchy.”

      It’s been driving me nuts for the last half decade reading this conversation over and over again. I’m starting to understand all the “autism” jokes.

      Married women who want to be mothers do not have abortions except in extreme causes, like severe fetal defects or rape. The “abortion” crisis is because people are hooking up, postponing marriages and baby making for other things.

      There are thousands of ways we could promote family formation at a biological appropriate age (16-20 for women, a few years older for men.) We could make college easier for pregnant and nursing mothers to attend. Why the hell has no one (except yours truly) ever mentioned that?

      Because no one wants to discuss the actual issue, it’s always talking around the issue, like “patriarchy” or “chastity” or “abortion.”

      You know that 17 year old white high school senior? You know that 21 year old college sophomore boy? They already want to do it. They are likely even “dating.”

      So where is the social support for them to actually get married? I mean it’s legal in all 50 states for a 17 year old girl to get married.

      There are economic reasons but no one wants to discuss that either. Everyone only wants to talk about the sex.

  • White Dude With Guns

    55 million black children have been aborted since 1973. There are 39 million blacks in the United States.
    Just take a while to consider that before you start clamoring for abortion clinics to shutter.

    • marijan

      Exactly, Christ cucks don’t get it though

      • Alex Harris

        Abortion should ultimately be made illegal in White nations. But yes, first we have to have all White nations. For now, intense social pressure and shaming should be used to prevent White women from aborting.

        • Jusqu’au Bout

          Agreed and men should also be shamed in our community if they abandon children and the women they have them with.

          • Alex Harris

            I don’t think it is terribly common for White men to abandon their children. But yes, it should be frowned upon.

          • craicher

            Most of the time it is the woman who leaves the man and then she will still cry victim. We should not put it out there that White men are abandoning their children as that is very rare in our community. Most divorces are initiated by women.

        • Abcdedcba

          This is why we can’t have nice things.

      • West coast and burnt toast

        A shame a Christ cuck I’m ok with less noggers.

    • Jusqu’au Bout

      The liberal left don’t discriminate when they advocate abortions. We should at least advocate for white women to not get abortions.

  • Demented Divil

    I’m all for abortion of non whites obviously.
    My problem with abortion firstly is it flies in the face of one of the strongest instincts humans posses-the maternal instinct. If you can convince a woman to rip her own child apart in the womb you are committing a crime against nature in my view.
    Also many abortion methods are quite damaging to a woman’s reproductive ability and can increase the possibility of gobshite babies in the future.
    I advocate strongly for euthanasia and in the case of broken or dysgenic children then I would prefer a mother births the child and gives it a peaceful death under medication for example, rather than rip it limb from limb inside the womb.

    • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

      My problem with abortion firstly is it flies in the face of one of the strongest instincts humans posses-the maternal instinct.

      The essay addresses this point. If the mother-to-be fails to feel that “maternal instinct” then why should anyone else care about the fetus she aborts? It’s not as if we’re talking about forcing women to have abortions.

      Also many abortion methods are quite damaging to a woman’s reproductive ability and can increase the possibility of gobshite babies in the future.

      Pre-natal screening can detect those fetuses and they can be aborted too.

      • Jusqu’au Bout

        “Maternal instinct”… “paternal instinct”… sometimes these don’t happen until after the baby is born. And that in itself is sooo subjective and definately not a cause for abortion. I’ve had a few friends (both men and women) who didn’t really feel *connected* to their children until they were born and then, as they describe it, a light switched on and they knew they had to be fathers/mothers to their children and began feel that love.

        Also, abortion should never be one-sided. The father’s input should always be considered!

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          The father’s position needs to be considered, but the final decision must remain the mother’s. Fathers who claim to have wanted the child could perhaps be compensated, and fathers who didn’t want the child should certainly be exempted from child support.

          • craicher

            Like women are going to take the man’s view into consideration. Don’t be silly.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            See my comment above. Somehow feminists have turned sex and having babies into a one-sided affair and I heartily disagree.

          • craicher

            I have been in those situations and what I thought did not matter at all. You,Silviosilver, must be a man and a man who has very little experience with women.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            I’m sorry if you’ve been so mistreated by women. It’s really unfortunate for them and you. I hope you’ve never really been in the situation of aborting a child and if you have my heart goes out to you. And I think you are most likely an exception to the rule (as most us are who are altright).
            Btw- I am not a man lol.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Women regularly do take their man’s views into consideration. I wonder how many women have children that they don’t really want as a result. I suspect the number is non-negligible.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            You are such a feminist. Always focusing on what the cursed, shamed woman has lost and nothing about the father. Let’s not talk about all the sons and daughters that fathers have lost because of abortion. No one even cares if they wanted them or not.

          • Alex Harris

            Bizarre role-reversal in this conversation, you two.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            I’m sorry but I don’t agree with you. If the mother does not want the child but the father absolutely does, I do think the mother should have the child and give the child over to the father. Honestly, I’m really tired of the “it’s my body” argument.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            The mother gets nothing out of that. If the father wants the child so much, he should be prepared to satisfactorily compensate the mother. If he can’t meet her price, she should be allowed to abort. That seems like a reasonable compromise.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Yeah and a father gets nothing out of an abortion and the mother should be prepared to satisfactorily compensate the father. If she can’t meet his price, she should have the baby.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            But then you’re back to the unavoidable problem that it really is the woman’s body – it really is. The physical strains are not remotely shared equally between men and women in this regard. What can I tell you? Biology isn’t fair.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Haha, fortunately I’m not an egalitarian and I don’t believe in “fairness”. Women are women and men are men and we each have our burden to bear.
            Obviously, the woman’s body “is her body” but the baby is genetically half its father.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            A commitment to fairness doesn’t require or imply a commitment to egalitarianism. I am quite capable of saying, “These two people are unequal but they both deserve to be treated fairly.” Men and women are obviously unequal, but I don’t see why that should require me to treat the womenfolk of my race unfairly.

            And yes the baby is half the father’s, but it’s also half the mother’s. The fact that it’s the woman’s is the tiebreaker.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Ok, but “The physical strains are not remotely shared equally between men and women” obviously….
            That’s just the way it is. I agree. It’s biology. What should I say? If a woman is willing to have sex with a man, she should be prepared to become pregnant and the man should support her. Throwing ‘abortion’ into an already complex mechanism only creates chaos. I think a world where ‘abortion’ is the best option for a couple stinks.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            That seems like a primitive way of dealing with the predicament. It’s a bit like saying if you have an operable heart condition you should forsake medical attention and just endure it.

            If abortion “stinks” to you, I must assume it’s because you read into it a moral dimension which for me is completely absent.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Pregnancy/childbirth (a natural process) is not analogous with heart surgery (manually altering the body to extend human life). I think I need to clarify my previous comment. What I meant was that it’s not as if a man and woman can choose which one of them will carry the baby and give birth.

            And yes, abortion is connected to morality, a morality which stems from our cultural values. Science dictates that “that lump of cells” will always develop, if left undisturbed, into a human. It will not be a tomato or a heart or an ape. It will be a human every time. I believe humans, including the unborn, have intrinsic value because we are more than the sum of our parts. Unless you are a baseless utilitarian, abortion will always be intertwined with morality.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            The unborn don’t even exist as human beings, so I don’t see what “intrinsic” human value they have. There is no such thing as a the “soul” (as traditionally understood), so nothing’s being lost in that sense. The only person who could genuinely care about the unborn fetus is the mother who is bearing it and the father expecting it. If neither of them care about it, I don’t see it as any of my business to worry.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            I think you’ve hit on an important point that is partly at the root of a lot of our people’s problems. “Not my business to worry” is such a nihlistic atomized thing to say. “I don’t care” “My choices only effect me” “No one else *really* cares, so what does it matter” etc. are all attitudes that have worked to dissolve our sense of community and subsequently our people.

          • Alex Harris

            Yeah, and that is where the traditional feminine virtue of chastity comes into play. It is part of our traditional culture, and it is ennobling for women to practice it.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            I wonder if you are not confusing chastity with loyalty. It is loyalty that is virtuous, whereas I fail to see any inherent virtue in chastity per se.

          • Alex Harris

            Chastity until the proper mate is found, then loyalty. Maintaining chastity until marriage IS loyalty to the family, the community, and the nation. If you are frequenting these forums, you are probably in agreement that promiscuity, especially female promiscuity, has been a destructive force.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            I have felt that way in the past. More recently I have begun to doubt just how destructive it’s actually been. “Not nearly quite as bad as I thought” is the conclusion I’m leaning towards.

          • The real issue is that men and women aren’t getting married and having children young. Our whole culture panics at the idea of “teenage motherhood” which is of course the normal and natural way. Puberty for men and women start in their teens. Many white women are biologically ready to have children at 16-19. But as a culture we’ve decided that is “too young” so we demand horny teenagers “wait” then act all shocked when little Sally winds up pregnant. Or the parents with time preference put her on the pill or buy her condoms, so she winds up “dating” which means having little mini marriages and divorces for a decade – at which point the men and the women are promiscuous enough that sex is no longer able to form a personal bond that keeps marriages fun for the first decade.

            Christians, for some odd reason I’m still trying to figure out, are always “against” something as opposed to “for” something. So they are really against fornication, heavy petting, lust, pulling out, sluttiness, condoms and abortion.

            But they are not “for” actually marrying off Sally, at say 17, to the 24 year old Billy who just graduated, because they are “too young” to have kids. Even thought both of them are basically at the peak of their actual biological fertility.

            Economic issues? Ok, Billy and Sally can live with mom and dad until they can afford their own place. Oh but we can’t have that because mom and dad might hear Sally squealing as Billy is doing her and our little girl is growing up too fast, etc.

            Christians are in the perfect position to be promoting a healthy white sexual culture but they can’t because they really are prudish church ladies reaching for the smelling salts at the thought of sex. Sure it wasn’t like this with Christians hundreds of years ago but we’re discussing The Current Year.

            So don’t bother looking to Christians for any solutions. Sad but that’s the way it is.

          • Alex Harris

            Looking at the way society and the legal system have been operating, do you really think we can allow women to retain that type of leverage or opportunity for blackmail?

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Maybe not, but I offer it here for consideration all the same.

          • Alex Harris

            Agree. If the woman doesn’t want a child, DON’T F***. Actions have consequences. A strong morality would entail the self-control to maintain chastity, instead of giving in to degenerate lust, having an “unwanted” pregnancy as the entirely predictable result, and then resorting to infanticide in order to shirk the responsibility of dealing with the consequences of your actions.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Yes! Instilling this in both our young men and women is ideal, and then if they faultered they would, hopefully, both be prepared for the responsibility of raising their new family together.

          • “degenerate lust”

            So it’s really not about the well being of the baby. It’s some sort of psychic payment for the pleasure of having sex. Never having sex results in zero white babies, but that is ok because no one gave into “degenerate lust.”

            But having lots of sex and having two white babies and two abortions is actually worse than never having sex at all and no white babies, because the lust vs. baby thing is out of balance.

            But of course all this is moot. Christians have no power to regulate sex. Pro-white Christians can’t even take back their own churches. All they can do is complain about other people having sex or not “believing” in Christianity. It’s just that WNs are the only people still listening to them.

            It’s too bad because the Christian church is in the perfect position to promote YOUNG marriage, young family formation, and a perfect family friendly place for young fathers and mothers to get the support they need to raise their children in a culture without any other functioning social institutions.

            But that isn’t nearly as much fun as trolling heretics and atheists.

          • Alex Harris

            I’m not saying sex is always evil or degenerate. It is all about intent, knowledge of the consequences, and making conscious choices, not just “going with the flow”. “The flow” only goes in one direction, and that is down the drain.

            As for “psychic payment for the pleasure of having sex”, there is probably something like that involved. If you constantly indulge in the pleasures of life, you become desensitized. So the act either loses its magic, or you need something novel. I’m sure you see where that goes. Also, self-denial builds will power and spiritual strength.

            No sex —-> No White babies
            Is definitely better than
            Lots of sex —–> All White babies aborted

            In scenario two, you debauched yourself AND murdered your children, and ended up with the same lack of White babies.

            So hypotheticals and ideal scenarios aside, Whites should definitely be humping like rabbits, and making White babies. But doing that within the confines of a monogamous relationship, or God forbid, a marriage, is what we should be shooting for.

          • Alex Harris

            The mother’s moment of decision comes when she chooses whether or not to spread her legs. Once the child is conceived, she should bear it. (Rape, incest, and deformity/retardation being the only reasonable exceptions.)

      • Alex Harris

        “If the mother-to-be fails to feel that “maternal instinct”

        Then something is already psychologically wrong with her. Maybe she has been brainwashed???

      • Demented Divil

        My point about the maternal instinct is that in place of Christian morals-as I’m not a christian-I take my cues from ‘natural law’ so to speak and the existence of maternal instinct implies the morality of a mother protecting her child. Even if she is dysfunctional or brainwashed the morality of the situation is clear that killing your own child in such a fashion is base criminality.
        Your point on pre-natal screening is moot, we shouldn’t damage the vessel in the first place.

    • Alex Harris

      There is no way having an abortion doesn’t damage a woman’s psyche. Those who say otherwise are in denial.

      • Jusqu’au Bout

        I imagine it would be damaging to a man’s as well.

  • Thomas Garrett

    Drone strikes abroad kill more non-white children than they kill white children; Should the alt-right support them?

    • Rascal

      I don’t think drone striking Israel’s enemies in the Middle East has much support among the Alt Right.

    • ThomasER916

      Why are you autistic?

  • Jusqu’au Bout

    As a white woman who has physically born white children into this world, all I can say is that pro-life is pro-White. We are not mere individuals whelping livestock and our children are nothing “things” that are either qualitative or quantitive.

    Obviously, *abortion should be allowed in cases of rape, incest, severe deformities, or if continuing the pregnancy is clearly life threatening to the mother. In general, promoting abortion in our community is not acceptable because we are just that, a community, and all white babies are intrinsically connected to our larger family and any of them who are aborted without a *justifiable cause should be mourned as a blow to the advancement of our people.

    Women, and men, already have the choice to have sex or not, to use contraception or not. Abortion is not meant to be administered as contraception and is considered “major surgery” with long lasting physical, emotional, and hormonal effects on the mother. This should not be promoted among our people as it negatively effects the unborn, the mother, in many cases the father, and our extended community.

    As for contraception, Natural Family Planning is a great alternative choice. If you’re a woman, I highly suggest that you look it up online 😉

  • practicallyperfect

    Relevant thoughts, I’ve been having much of the same. I work in the public and see more and more white children born with disabilities and handicaps. You can see the toll it takes on the family (for those who do not wallow in the victim status) and predict the toll it will take on the community in the future. However as a Christian abortion is something I struggle with, because many of these handicapped children are avoidable with younger parentage.
    Encouraging young women to see the value of being a stay-at-home mom is my top priority, but honestly as the mother of a young woman who is looking for the potential husband and father for her future children that is just not happening. Having spent much time in the manosphere I know young men do not see the need or have the desire to get mixed up with marriage 2.0.

    • Jusqu’au Bout

      Agree. Bringing value back to the “home career” is essential for both men and women. I think we really need to combat the zero sum game of motherhood vs education vs career.

      • practicallyperfect

        Sadly this discussion is turning into one about abortion rather than the more pressing matter of lack of relationships and their sustaining proper gender roles.

        • Jusqu’au Bout

          Yes. The problem is that it is so complex. There are many issues intertwined and dependent on each other. It’s a multi-edged sword that knows all our weaknesses. I think we all (at least those of us here that are commenting about it) can identify the problems in our community and know how to fix them. It’s disseminating that information to our extended people and encouraging our family positive lifestyle that is problematic.

          • practicallyperfect

            Yes! How do we get this to real life. The fear of doxing is stifling.

          • Jusqu’au Bout

            Our predicament didn’t happen overnight and fixing it will probably take twice as long. It is nice to have kindred spirits for the meantime 🙂

          • practicallyperfect

            Anytime.

          • Alex Harris

            You need to learn to spot somewhat susceptible “normies” in the real world. Create a “deprogramming curriculum”, and get them cornered in a situation where they must face the issues. Set up an “intervention” type scenario.

            You might want to focus your efforts on men first. If you are a woman, appeal to their protective instincts and goad them into “manning up”. Tell them you are fearful for your safety and your children’s safety.

    • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

      Then why not consider challenging the tenets of your faith? It’s easier than you might think.

      • practicallyperfect

        I struggle with it. It is a morally unhappy choice.

        • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

          One of the simplest ways to start is by realizing that some of the goofier beliefs that you’re allegedly required to believe are not really essential at all. Then just take it from there. I don’t think it’s necessary to abandon Christianity completely. Despite my incessant complaints about “christcucks,” I myself retain residual fondness for Christianity. I’ll never let Christian guilt-tripping and faux morality get in the way of standing up for my racial interests, though.

          • practicallyperfect

            Really now? You pick and chose the parts of Christianity that just works for you. It seems to me that is how the church and conservatives became CUCKED.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Christians pick and choose all the time. I doubt you’ll ever find two Christians with precisely the same religious beliefs, each maintained with precisely the same intensity. There’s a Christian “core” there, without which it would hardly make much sense to speak of Christianity. But there’s obviously a lot extraneous material there which can quite easily be jettisoned without affecting that core. That’s all I’m saying.

          • practicallyperfect

            Now that is a much better point for you to make!
            Racial issues and Christianity are a discussion I have with my husband all the time. The argument would be the universalism that seems apparent in Christian scriptures. However my argument to him is one of mirco verses macro. Christians should be applying their faith and laws to their families and faith community first before taking it into all the world as we are commanded. The problem is Christians today put the world before their own communities. Like trying to eat an elephant whole. This is to deep to go into here but this is a conversation that should be taking place in Alt Right meetups.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Here’s a couple of lines of argument you might try:

            (1) Christianity didn’t invent families; families existed long before Christianity arrived on the scene. But Christianity supports families because it recognizes them as an intrinsic good. Similarly, Christianity didn’t invent races, but if it recognized positive racial identity as an intrinsic good, then it could conceivably support ongoing racial existence.

            (2) If Christianity doesn’t require the destruction of white existence, then why should it be immoral for whites to want to continue to exist? Just as the desire of any individual to wish to exist should be taken for granted and not require justification, the desire of races to exist should be taken for granted and not require justification. People who would deny whites the right to exist should be forced to justify themselves; they should have to explain why whites must be destroyed.

          • practicallyperfect

            okay hun, but I should warn you I am a 50 something pastor’s wife who has been red pilled for 10yrs. I’ve been making these points IRL for a long time now.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Dayum, that’s tough.

          • practicallyperfect

            LOL. Have a good day.

          • Alex Harris

            As someone who was an atheist for years, I’m rather glad that I rediscovered Christianity as part of my “red-pilling”, because some of the atheists’ beliefs have become a million times more goofy than those of Christianity, and they are nihilistic/suicidal to boot.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            Atheism is a weird, largely leftist, cult unto itself. If an Alt Tighter isn’t interested in religion, I would encourage them to have an open mind and be agnostic.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            because [1]some of the atheists’ beliefs have become a million times more goofy than those of Christianity, and [2] they are nihilistic/suicidal to boot.

            I have a funny feeling that [2] played a far more important role than [1] (examples of which I doubt you could proffer – a million times more goofy than Christianity’s, come on).

          • Yehudah Finkelstein

            The Atheists in my town Set up boothes at Farmer’s Markets. They have A Skeptics’ class teaching Atheism to elementary school kids. That’s pretty damn goofy.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            Yeah, I can see how that would be kinda goofy, but a million times goofier than what Christianity requires a man to believe? Please. (And really, there’s nothing “goofy” per se about teaching kids the importance of reasoning and weighing up evidence, which of course is how atheists typically come by their views.)

          • Alex Harris

            No connection between a “belief” in atheism and a belief that there are 1,567 different “genders”?

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            There’s a strong correlation, I’m sure. But there’s no causal relationship. As a generally sensible commenter, I’m surprised you’d even suggest this.

            I don’t begrudge your leap of faith. But why not just keep it as a matter of faith instead of muddying the waters with rationalizations which only leave you looking silly?

          • Alex Harris

            I’m aware of the correlation/causation dichotomy. And you might be right, at least partially in this case. But can you present any evidence that would falsify the possibility of a causal relationship? There is certainly a constellation of “beliefs”, social norms, and behaviors accepted by many atheists. Isn’t accepting the initial premise (absence of God) a first step or a gateway into accepting more of those other “beliefs”, social norms, and behaviors?

            “Slippery slope” is CLEARLY NOT a logical fallacy. All one has to do is pay attention to current events and recent history.

          • silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ

            It’s a tough one. You’re correct that there’s an awful lot of correlation there. It does make me think twice. I’d be perfectly happy with belief in a generic, sorta Deistic “God” whose alleged qualities we can tailor to suit our own needs, with a modicum of traditional religious trappings for flavor. I’d call a truce right there. The farther you venture from that towards fundamentalist la la land, the more inclined I’ll be to begin bashing again.

          • “a belief that there are 1,567 different “genders”?”

            Nobody actually believes any of that. The liberals and leftists that run the West do not “believe” in 1,567 genders anymore than you do. They pay lip service to the idea because it’s a useful distraction for the lower orders who otherwise might start taking Bernie Sanders style economic policies too seriously.

            The upper class liberals and leftists don’t really approve of “LGBT” either. They may invite a gay hairdresser and his “husband” to a cocktail party, but they make fun of them behind their backs. It’s the upper class liberals and leftists that still get married and have 2.1 children – which they send to private schools with only very carefully selected “diversity.”

            These liberals and leftists are all atheists or agnostics too. Religion and “tradition” are important for low IQ types who need to outsource hard decision making to some sort of “system” outside of their own heads.

            The liberals and leftists that run the West have contempt for the lower orders and treat them like children, so are perfectly happy to let them play “I’m a unicorn.” It simply doesn’t affect them.

          • Alex Harris

            Religion and “tradition” are important for low IQ types who need to
            outsource hard decision making to some sort of “system” outside of their
            own heads.

            Are you saying that, or are you speaking the thoughts of the upper class liberals?

            There are plenty of very high IQ people on the side of religion and tradition. Clearly, these upper class liberals who think they are too smart for all that are in for a rude awakening. When they have finished the genocide of all the dumb, superstitious proles, they’ll be standing alone in a sea of brown, yellow, and black, and who is going to protect them then? Do they really think the colorfuls are going to want to keep them around for some reason?

          • You are mixing up who your enemies are.

          • Alex Harris

            I don’t follow. Our enemies are clearly jews and their bought-off White shabbos goyim. Then the “elites” of the non-White world, then the teeming hordes.

            Elaborate on your statement.

          • You seem to be under the impression that upper class secular “liberals” are somehow promoting anti-whiteness, yet that just as often comes from upper class secular “conservatives” who may promote religion for the lower classes. The Catholic church and virtually all Protestant churches, including the “conservatives” like the $BC all promote anti-whiteness and mass immigration as well.

            The Koch brothers are promoting mass immigration for their own reasons, not because the Jews are making them.

            The Jews are anti-white for their own reasons and it’s easy to see that. What is harder for especially conservatives to get is that Capitalism, Imperialism, and Christianity are as much a force for anti-whiteness and mass immigration and that would be the case even if the Jews weren’t a problem (which of course they are.)

            So bitching about upper class secular liberals is basically a big fat red herring. Of course at the end of the day we’re all in the same boat when it comes to the rising tide of color.

          • Alex Harris

            Yeah, I’m aware that “conservatives” and capitalists are involved. Post-Modern capitalism/finance capitalism is pretty jewed. Sure, there are greedy goys involved, but remember, the banks are the ones supplying credit to all the mega-corporations. Henry Ford style capitalism was probably not so bad. Christianity has only become a force for anti-whiteness recently, because it has been subverted.

  • VictoryOrValhalla

    White nations for white people first.
    Abortion is irrelevent if we cease to exist.
    I am glad however to see intelligent women in the comments.

  • Sean Fielding

    No ascendant White civilization without patriarchy. Abortion is minimal in ascendant patriarchy.

  • ronno

    on top of all that, it’s a good way to troll the left who’s become so hysterical they feel they have to disassociate from everything the alt right endorses.

    • Abcdedcba

      This!

  • The abortion issue is a “temptation” because it is a distraction.

    Any ink or thought spent on it now takes away focus from the existential issue that is the meaning of the Alt Right.

  • Rutger3

    The most important thing to do to change behaviour is to abolish all the wellfare state. That is what is breaking the sexes apart, that there is another provider than a responsible husband.

    About the arguments in the article. Imho, numbers trump quality. Hence, low income white women having lots of babies would be a huge boon to our cause. Especially since people that perceive they have fewer opportunities and options in life have a stronger tendency to band together over race. Middle class and upper middle class people have a strong tendency to swerve away from basic identity for something more lofty.

    Still, for me, the argument that the state should not meddle with mother child relationship is the winning argument for me. Yes, abortion is bad. No, the state does not have the right to punish a woman for removing a life she created.

    Anyway, good article!

  • craicher

    White nations in Europe are literally dying off because women do not have enough children.The muslims (Blacks and Arabs) are filling the void and taking over.

    Besides the social affects on a woman’s behavior, we need women to become mothers and free, unrestricted abortion is against our interest whatever you may think of the moral question.

    • Crud Bonemeal

      Mass immigration would destroy a white population even if it had a healthy fertility rate.

      • craicher

        Possibly but when women have a brood they get more protective and nationalistic. Besides an aging, greying population is just plain bad for the spirit. We need youth, vitality and thus the future and for this White women need to have children.

  • If this is the semi-official policy of this website and/or movement generally, I think readers are allowed to ask if Hunter Wallace and James Edwards endorse it. You should consider replies to this essay, otherwise you’re skating on thinner ice than you realize. This essay has the moral seriousness of an intelligent college freshman.

    • Rascal

      I understand you may not like the contents, but I felt it sums up thoughts quite well.

  • Idunna

    The other effective method would be to, ya know, start having more babies. Poland is expecting a huge native boom at the end of the year- take note, everyone.I love memes too, but they don’t make white babies.

  • Sam Cru

    Not all white people were created equal. If any of you basement dwellers had been outside recently you’d have seen many examples, too many, of human detritus clothed in white skin. Free abortions for everyone under 100 IQ. If you don’t abort the babies of unfit white people then white people will degenerate.

    • Rascal

      (((White people))). I don’t ever remember a vote on replacing ourselves, and quite clearly White people are against mass immigration every time there is a poll.

  • ))) Depeche Europa (((

    GREAT Article/Op-Ed……

    Revolutionary……..

    100% Correct……..

    100% Anti-CUCK………

    It’s a Brave Position……..

    I can’t argue with it……..

    I’m not completely comfortable with it……..

    But, I can’t argue with it……

    It’s dangerous though…….Politically…….

    Since the only Vehicle for the Alt-Right to gain expression at the Federal Level is the GOP……

    Which is 100% Pro-Life…..

    ….well, except Tomi Lahren……

    Ha!!

  • ))) Depeche Europa (((

    Which is why the Alt-Right should partner with instead of fight Mike Cernovich……

    …..who is trying to help Men be better Men……

    …..for a “return to more natural relations between the sexes”……

    FACT…..

    • Rascal

      How do you partner with someone who feels that White interests are not a worthy political endeavor?

  • Scott Schroeder

    Pro-life is a distraction from pro-white.

  • Zorost

    Abortion shouldn’t even be discussed until after or shortly before we form the ethnostate. Until then its a useless distraction. Why should we expend an ounce of our extremely limited political capital on this subject either way, especially considering the massive amounts of effort already being poured into it from either side? Not the alt-right’s problem

    • ThomasER916

      Agree.

  • Clytemnestra

    Traditional conservatives have this knee-jerk negative reaction to any birth control that does not involve total abstinence. We have had illegitimate children throughout history even during much more stringently moral eras, which proves total abstinence does not work. Then there is the fact that a woman can be impregnated against her will via rape.

    I don’t like the idea of abortion and don’t want taxpayer dollars going to pay for it. I could, however, wholeheartedly co-sign onto a Colorado Program where IUDs and Norplants are made freely available to women. In some poorer, more feral urban areas with the snitches get stitches mantra which makes reporting a rape and getting treatment dangerous, I would imagine such birth control would be very welcome.

    Such birth control, made freely available to women most likely to seek out public assistance for their unplanned children would be much less of a drag on the public purse and make affordable family formation possible for couples who want to have children.

  • Dillon Francis

    The author wrote that ‘The unborn fetus has no connection to anyone else in the community. If it is not even wanted by its own mother,’

    Wrong. The unborn has a connection to his/her father and grandparents, not to mention any siblings cousins, aunts and uncles. This is such a careless omission.

  • Simon_in_London

    It’s a question of balancing interests – and even eugenics is not an absolute good. I agree abortion should not be banned – but it shouldn’t be legal to kill 36-week babies just because they’re not born yet, either. I think 12 weeks is a reasonable limit but there are arguments a few weeks in either direction.

  • So now you’re showing your real face, eh ?

  • West coast and burnt toast

    Someday they’ll be able to do genetic screening for autism. This day will be the day the alt-right dies.

  • Now isn’t that a cohencidence.. the so-called Alt-Right militating against the same things as the globalists.

  • Rhino23

    Christ loved children now the alt right pro choicers want to keep murdering the most vulnerable-babies. The same policy as the liberal dems, cultural marxists, and the greens, What an alt right slogan- “Europeans are disappearing so lets keep aborting and keep the religious right sealed tight in the cuck camp”. Forget about trump for now and remember the republicans too are terrible and only the religious segment keeps them barely afloat.

  • A_Sturmmann

    Honestly, you could have left this issue alone. There were, to most people, more important issues to deal with other than the late game policies which would only matter once we’re actually in the running to have a nation we can call our own.

    But no, altright.com just HAD to practically disavow any self-respecting christian in the movement. With terrible reasoning to boot.

    My biggest issue is that abortion and contraceptives are MORE dysgenic than without. Playing the numbers game doesn’t actually work in this case. Poor people will have more abortions yes, absolutely. HOWEVER, they will STILL have just as many kids than if they couldn’t abort. The assumption that all the aborted children would still be alive today is false as the more children a mother has, the less opportunity is available to have more. In other words a black woman might have 10 abortions and still put out 5 kids. Without abortions those 5 kids from 4 fathers are probably going to drastically reduce her ability to pop out a 6th. So in this respect nothing changes.

    The dysgenics occurs in the wealthy and intelligent communities. People who wouldn’t have the balls to preform coat-hanger tier abortions and most definitely have the wealth to support accidental children. These are the ones who get abortions the least. However, despite only having 1 abortion per couple, they then have zero children and a dog.

    TL:DR – For poor people, the number of aborted children doesn’t mean anything when the same number of kids show up alive either way. For wealthy people, the few children they might ever have in their lives won’t ever happen. Therefore, instead of numbers, a net gain/loss should be examined. And the wealthy suffer a net loss while the poor don’t suffer.

    TL:DR of the TL:DR – abortion is more dysgenic.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c969dad26d8deffadbda7c51082cddf2e765e3f05938bd4cf0bb50bb90346709.jpg

    • Rascal

      55 million black babies have been aborted since Roe v Wade. You cannot tell me that hasn’t made a difference, even if parts of your theory are correct.

      If Whites are too survive we have to shake off churchian, cucked Christianity. I consider no eugenics at all costs, pro-lifers to be cucked. Woke Whites don’t need a Christian morality system to tell us not to abort our own babies, we already don’t do it for our race.

      If a Christian cares that blacks abort their babies, and are willing to spend political capital on the issue, than they are at direct odds with the survival of Whites anyways. I would expect Christian Alt Righters to have no direct involvement in abortion and not support it, but I would also expect them to NOT go out of their way to stop our political adversaries from aborting themselves.

      • craicher

        Funny, 40 years ago near all Irish women had 8, 9 or 10 children and the country did NOT fill up with retards. Now Irish women have one or two and you see retards all over the place. And then you see the Nigerian hogs with a brood of 5, 6 or 7 nigglets and you know, you just know that contraception and abortion (they can legally take the morning after pill and go to the UK for an abortion) is killing off the White people of the world from Ireland to the USA to Australia.

        Only a reall idiot would listen to anyone claiming to be for our people and civilization who is for abortion. Wake up or die off.

        • Rascal

          So you live in Ireland I take it? Well if you live in Ireland you don’t already have 40 million blacks living in your country. You may change your tune if every urban center in your country is absolutely overrun.

          I never said the solution was a one size fits all.

  • Amadis De Ayala

    Ok Guys… Speaking from Europe we have to deal with abortion in a very different way. Indeed, blacks are having abortions more than whites even here but that does not compensate the extremely higher rate if babies within African population.
    On the other hand, we can be nothing but horrified by the devastating effect abortion had on white population of France in the 70′ and 80′. This abortion programme made the white lower classes vanished.
    And there is one last point I’d like to mention. Muslim people do not abort… They just don’t ! Considering that Europe has been receiving an enormous amount of people with an islamic background, at the end of the story and after 40years of pro choice policies, WE are the only people targeted by this kikery. (Simone Veil who promoted abortion in France in 1973 is from the tribe)

    Sorry to be so long

    P.s : Just to make it clear, I am not even talking from a catholic or christian perspective.

    • Rascal

      Yea, Europe is different than the US. I knew that Muslims don’t abort, but Christian Hispanics do.

      • craicher

        And still have a large brood anyway. Nope, abortions kills off Whites and the best of our people. These pro-abortion people are tools, fools, or servants of the dark lord.

        • Rascal

          Yea, and they would be even bigger without it. Contraception is what causes the best of our people not to reproduce, not abortion.

          • craicher

            Somewhat true but it is both. I swear, every woman I know has had an abortion. Everyone.

            And we would be even bigger without it too! This is the thing that we cannot underestimate and that is the vitality of youth. We must have that. Otherwise we are finished!

          • Rascal

            For the record I hate abortion myself and will never support White women having them. I completely agree that every European nation needs to raise their birth rates. Maybe banning abortion in nations that are still 90%+ White is the answer, and if it is I support it, but in America it is different.

  • Joe Redtree

    okay, now the altright just has to be pro herbal jew and i’m back on board. until then, SWPL right fo’ life!

  • Urbanus_II

    First off, the alt Right appreciates what is superior in man, in the Nietzschean sense.

    In other words, the alt Right is liberalism simpliciter. It’s the other side of the same liberal coin doomed to make the same secular mistakes of the 20th century. The same concepts in a different package.

  • Devan Hadlock

    I don’t even consider myself a liberal person but is this article for real? There might be a few good points in her but this is mostly another shit sandwich.

  • craicher

    And that picture. I swear, that is something the left would put up. White enemy women claiming to be pro-Life and that implying more White babies. Don’t be a fool.

  • WR_the_realist

    I am in favor of legal abortion in the early stages of pregnancy and am against the Roe vs. Wade decision. Why? Because the supreme court has no right to make our abortion law, that should be left to the states. Most people would say, “Who cares if the rules weren’t followed? You got the result you wanted.” But once we have the principle that the supreme court can create laws that I like you also have the principle that the supreme court can create laws I don’t like.