How long are we supposed to let the Liberal Humanists ( It’s a decease) continue to wipe the white race of the planet? They talk about multiculturalism? But if everyone keep mixing with everyone, what will be left of the various human differences?..
I TELL YOU NOTHING!
It will all be one light brown race left. And all of them will look the same. When we have reached that point, there is NO multiculturalism left as multiculturalism stands for diversity.
White Europeans: An endangered species?
Yes unfortunately its true. According to research by both the CIA and the U.N., every single member of the European Union has a birthrate significantly below the replacement rate of 2.1 births per woman. In the CIA World Factbook, Germany had a birthrate of 1.36 children per woman in 2007, and Spain and Italy had birthrates of 1.29. At such low levels of fertility, within 100 years, those three nations would have populations 80 percent lower than they are today.
And Germany, Italy and Spain are far from alone: Every single industrialized country in Europe has a birthrate below 1.9 children per woman. The average birthrate of the European Union as a whole is approximately 1.5 children per woman and that number is artificially inflated by the presence of millions of highly fertile non-European immigrants in the major urban centers of Europe.
And even if one ignores the statistical noise presented by the inclusion of millions of outliers, Europe faces a serious problem. Without a major shift in the current fertility trends, industrialized Europe will see its native population decline by about three-fourths over the 21st century. No civilization has ever recovered from such a population decline, and never before has such a decline been entirely voluntary. Europeans are not becoming less fertile as a consequence of war, or famine, or disease, but rather as a consequence of their Western, capitalistic consumerist lifestyles. Add to this also the infernal mixture of various races due to migration and immigration. Do the math!
With the increasing trend of interracial partnerships, it’s much more common for an individual to belong to a variety of ethnic backgrounds. As PolicyMic bluntly summarized, “in a matter of years we’ll have Tindered, OKCupid-ed and otherwise sexed ourselves into one giant amalgamated mega-race.” They’re absolutely right.
But first we have to remember that we do live in a world of differences, of seemingly infinite diversity and variety. These differences are of all types, affecting both animate and inanimate matter, living and non-living things. Humanity is certainly no exception to this rule, but exhibits great sometimes even bewildering variation, both physically and mentally, of body and of mind.
There are different kinds of human variation. Some differences are biological or genetic, others are cultural or environmental. There are also different levels of human variation. Some differences are at the individual level, others are at the population or racial level. The first distinguish us as separate individuals, the second distinguish a population of individuals as a separate race.
“A race, is a population that can be distinguished from other populations within a species by genetically transmitted physical characteristics. It possesses a unique and distinct ensemble of genes, and is identified by the traits produced by this genetic ensemble. (To the extent that mental characteristics are also transmitted or determined genetically it is logical to assume that there are mental as well as physical genetic differences between races, yet it is by their physical genetic differences that races are most readily distinguished and identified.)
“Members of the same race share distinguishing genetic characteristics because they share a common genetic ancestry, and consequently a similar genetic ensemble. They are capable not only of producing offspring (which all members of the same species can do) but of producing offspring who also share and continue their racially unique genetic ensemble and its distinctive traits and characteristics. When members of different races interbreed they cannot produce offspring that possess the racially distinguishing characteristics of both parent stocks. The distinctive racial characteristics of one or both of the parents are either negated or diminished as their racially unique, and therefore mutually incompatible, ensembles of genes are disrupted or diluted.
So what does this mean? The explanations for human racial diversity have been as varied as that diversity itself. Every culture and every age has had its explanation, and the more tolerant among them have had more than one, but the truth was usually unknown, and the universal rule is that the unknown is explained by legend, myth or religion, which in most cultures are one and the same. The ancient Sumerian account of creation was adopted by Judaism, which passed it on to Christianity and Islam. As promulgated by these two expansionist, universalist and often intolerant religions this Sumerian version of creation, and explanation of human diversity, is virtually still unchallenged by modern science.
If the world is to be made safe again for racial diversity its preservation will first have to be regarded as a matter of great value, importance and concern. As the Senegalese conservationist Baba Dioum has said,
“In the end, we will conserve only what we love. As we have developed ethically to have a sense of reverence for life in general, and for human life in particular, so we should develop a sense of reverence for the diversity of life, and particularly the diversity of human life. As we have learned to regard that which promotes life as good, and that which destroys life as evil, so we should learn to regard that which promotes the diversity of life as good, and that which destroys that diversity as evil. A change in thinking and consciousness, in values and way of looking at the world, will be needed to create such a sense of reverence, appreciation and concern for racial diversity, and the motivation to act for its preservation.”
An effective racial conservation movement would depend upon a sense of appreciation and reverence for that which it sought to conserve. It would also depend on the development of a philosophy of ethics which gives substance to that reverence by extending concepts of human rights to races. We are different, lets keep it that way! Lets not make us all the same. We were NOT created that way in the first place.
One must consider that allowing interbreeding between the separately created races would first destroy the Aryan race, and thus be a sin against the Anunnaki creation. We must consider it a high imperative to preserve all the variations of all races in its own primordial excellence.
Western Civilization Will Go Extinct
Scientists say at least 2 billion dead bodies will be burned and converted into fossil fuels.
And a well-known scientist now say that, “One-Third Of The Human Race Has To Die For Civilization To Be Sustainable, So I’m just asking: How do we want to do this?”
Saying there’s no way around it at this point, a coalition of scientists announced that one-third of the world population must die to prevent wide-scale depletion of the planet’s resources—and that humankind needs to figure out immediately how it wants to go about killing off more than 2 billion members of its species.
Representing multiple fields of study, including ecology, agriculture, biology, and economics, the researchers told reporters that facts are facts: Humanity has far exceeded its sustainable population size, so either one in three humans can choose how they want to die themselves, or there can be some sort of government-mandated liquidation program but either way, people have to start dying. And soon, the scientists confirmed.
“I’m just going to level with you the earth’s carrying capacity will no longer be able to keep up with population growth, and civilization will end unless large swaths of human beings are killed, so the question is: How do we want to do this?” Cambridge University ecologist Dr. Edwin Peters said. “Do we want to give everyone a number and implement a death lottery system? Incinerate the nation’s children? Kill off an entire race of people? Give everyone a shotgun and let them sort it out themselves?”
“Completely up to you,” he added, explaining he and his colleagues were “open to whatever.” “Unfortunately, we are well past the point of controlling overpopulation through education, birth control, and the empowerment of women. In fact, we should probably kill 300 million women right off the bat.”
Because the world’s population may double by the end of the century, an outcome that would lead to a considerable decrease in the availability of food, land, and water, researchers said that, bottom line, it would be helpful if a lot of people chose to die willingly, the advantage being that these volunteers could decide for themselves whether they wished to die slowly, quickly, painfully, or peacefully.
Additionally, the scientists noted that in order to stop the destruction of global environmental systems in heavily populated regions, there’s no avoiding the reality that half the world’s progeny will have to be sterilized.
“The longer we wait, the higher the number of people who will have to die, so we might as well just get it over with,” said Dr. Chelsea Klepper, head of agricultural studies at Purdue University, and the leading proponent of a worldwide death day in which 2.3 billion people would kill themselves at the exact same time. “At this point, it’s merely a question of coordination. If we can get the populations of New York City, Los Angeles, Beijing, India, Europe, and Latin America to voluntarily off themselves at 6 p.m. EST on June 1, we can kill the people who need to be killed and the planet can finally start renewing its resources.”
Thus far, humanity has been presented with a great variety of death options, among them, poisoning the world’s water supply with cadmium, picking one person per household to be killed in the privacy of his or her home, mass be-headings, and gathering 2.3 billion people all in one place and obliterating them with a single hydrogen bomb.
Sources confirmed that if a death solution is not in place by Mar. 31, the U.N., in the interest of preserving the human race, will mobilize its peacekeeping forces and gun down as many people as necessary.
“I don’t care how it happens, but a ton of Africans have to go, because by 2025, there’s no way that continent will be able to feed itself,” said Dr. Henry Craig of the Population Research Institute. “And by my estimation, three babies have to die for every septuagenarian, because their longer life expectancy means babies have the potential to release far more greenhouse gases going forward.”
While the majority of the world’s populace reportedly understands this is the only option left to save civilization, not all members of the human race are eager to die.
“I personally would rather live, but taking the long view, I can see how ensuring the survival of humanity is best,” said Norwich, CT resident and father of three Jason Atkins.
“I guess if we were to do it over again, it would make sense to do a better job conserving the earth’s finite resources.”
“Hopefully, the people who remain on the planet will use the mass slaughter of their friends and loved ones as an incentive to be more responsible going forward,” he added.
Miscegenation, more commonly called interracial marriage, is one of the touchiest subjects about which one can speak today. There is widespread pressure, coming from both Christians and non-Christians alike, urging people towards the claimed goodness of racial diversity within marriage. For instance, John Piper contends that “interracial marriage is not only permitted by God but is a positive good in our day. Another similarly, secular humanist Paul Kurtz gives a more comprehensive and forthright affirmation of miscegenation when he states, “The highest good, as I see it, is intermarriage between people of different ethnicity, races, religions, and cultures.”
Against views like these, it is rare to hear an opposing opinion today, and this is usually because any opposition to miscegenation even saying merely that it is not a good idea receives accusations of racism or, if the voice of opposition is a white person, white supremacy. Opposition to interracial marriage, especially if coming from a white person, is usually interpreted to entail hatred of other races.
Allegedly, the only reason people would be opposed to marrying those of other races is because they have hatred or animosity for other races. It is because of this allegation that any opposition to miscegenation has been thoroughly and censoriously silenced. Despite such censoring or perhaps, because of it is vital that we thoroughly understand the topic, rather than passively accepting anything with which our unbelieving culture and jewish controlled media might try to inculcate us.