Search
  • xenopolitix

580. Coming to meet (XI)



Should you have children? This has been a political issue for decades—back in the 1960s “the bomb” supposedly made the prospect too terrible to contemplate, today the culprit is climate change. The left says you should not have children, the right says you should. However, all is not as it seems; the left is feminine, so when the left says “don’t have children” this should be interpreted as “make me have children”—rayp a baby into me, if you’re man enough. This goes for leftist men as much as women, since leftist men—decadent progressive liberal men—act like women, so really when they say they do not want children this a petulant sulk crossed with a virtue-signal.


As for the other side, the right does not really mean it when it says “everyone should have children”. To say so is not a rightist position: to say everyone should have children is not an argument for quality—it is an argument for pure quantity. It suggests one child is like another—egalitarian, democratic. This is an irresponsible position: there are people who should not have children, and to say that to have children is natural or that “everyone does it” or that “it was the best thing in my life” does not constitute a responsible argument—besides, people lie as to whether their decision to have children was a positive development in their life; nobody wants to be seen as a monster by speaking the truth, nor to alienate favoured elements within their family. Yet parents usually have favourites; and where there are favourites there are the rejects, the unwanted…


Really, the right formulates its position in the way noted above because it wants to say “white people should have more children”, since this group is the foundation for civilisation and also exists in demographic free fall—yet it is possibly illegal to say so in many Western countries, and certainly a thoughtcrime guaranteed to see you shunned. Leftists only have a problem with white births and are happy otherwise—especially about black African births, since this is a holy group for leftists. The more black people there are, the holier the leftist feels. This is all part of the challenge, as with a woman or a petulant child: the left puts forward an absurd position and dares the adult to slap it down—except the adult is either unwilling or unable to do so.


Point: you do not have to have sex—other animals go into rut, man does not. I have not masturbated for years now; as Nietzsche noted, the sperm is reabsorbed—your power grows. When you have sex you feel that the woman has stolen your spiritual energy—women are vampyres. “Masturbation makes you go blind,” the Victorians said—or, rather, they said that “self-abuse” makes you go blind. The language interests, as a society we talk about “abuse” in all its permutations except “self-abuse”. Masturbation makes you go blind: spiritually blind, not physically.


You cannot renounce food, water, and sleep—you can renounce sex with no ill-effect. This being so, there is no compulsion to have children—although if you really do not want children you must also renounce sex, not have quasi-masturbation with a condom; anything less is hedonism, unnatural.


There are too many people, Britain only needs 14M people in her—and that is generous. I was disappointed when Covid-19 did not, as I expected, kill ¼ of the people in my cul-de-sac. It was nothing. The white race will die out? You think democratically—think more people equals more power; not so, the British ran India and the Jews pretty much run America with very few people. People who fear racial extinction fear their own deaths; yet I think races reignite given the right ecological niche—time is very, very long; longer than you imagine. In its dark recesses the whites have been born and died hundreds of times, perhaps even you as an individual have been.


178 views2 comments

Recent Posts

See All