More white Americans are dying than being born for the first time in modern history—suggesting minorities and newcomers will play an important role in fueling the population growth America’s recovering economy needs to thrive.


This news is especially alarming considering that people have an increasing life expectancy.  In other words, had the life expectancy stayed at 65 rather than 75 there would have been considerably more dying than being born many years ago rather than the statistic being delayed until now.

Nearly half the families in the country have just one child, according to an official analysis.

It found the number of one-child families has increased by almost 700,000 in 15 years, and they are likely to be in the majority within a decade.

The Office for National Statistics said larger families are under pressure because of ‘the greater challenge of combining work with childcare with three or more children compared with one or two’.

Those who wish to have more children simply go ahead and put that project ahead of financial concerns.  Those who do not do this have no genetic future.

SHOULD Scotland’s rapidly growing number of one-person households be seen as a sign of freedom or an erosion of society?

The latest analysis of the 2011 Census data uncovered an extraordinary rise in numbers living by themselves. In 1961 they accounted for just 14% of households. Today that figure is 35%, the largest single category of household type. It is the first time ever that people living alone make up more than a third of Scottish households. These solo households tend to be concentrated in Scotland’s cities, especially Glasgow where they account for 43% of households, making up more than one in five of the city’s population.


This article tries to put a positive spin on single person households.  Clearly this arrangement is worse than “an erosion of society”, but a clear example of complete collapse.  It is indicative of the death of a nation.

Even a few ticks upward in Hispanic turnout have major benefits for the Democratic Party, which stands to draw less than half its support from non-Hispanic white voters by the end of the decade. Meanwhile, the Republicans don’t have a tremendous amount of ground left to gain among white voters, who will shrink both in total numbers and as a share of the electorate in the coming elections.

Predictions are easy to mock. In recent elections, however, partisanship by racial and ethnic background has remained highly predictable in the face of countless calamities. The demographics of the electorate are going to change so rapidly in the next eight years that politics will seem unrecognizable, but these party loyalties may very well be intact. This fact is not difficult to recognize whatsoever.


There is a general apathy about this situation yet it is one aspect of the collapse of civilisation.  The Republican Party is repulsive in its obsession with money rather than folk – but that is the very reason it is reflecting a folk extinction.

People who have a racially loyal view on life are unlikely to support a party that is so inhuman and this observation applies to Whites who are racially aware too.  But what party is there in the US for such Whites to see as offering them hope for the future?

For the schoolmaster of the classic novel, ‘Mr Chips’ was an affectionate nickname.

And sadly it seems that’s the only way it will survive.

‘Chips’, once popular in Middlesex and Essex, is one of 200,000 surnames which have disappeared from England and Wales over the past 100 years.

Others said to be extinct –  with fewer than five left on the census – include Woodbead, Rummage and Jarsdel.

Along with the crisis of the disappearance of indigenous Europeans, it is inevitable we will see surnames vanishing through lack of descendants.

What do you do when your country is dying, one coffin at a time? Well, if you are Russian President Vladimir Putin, you call upon Russian couples to be fruitful and multiply, and have at least three children.

It is hard to exaggerate the demographic straits that Mother Russia finds itself in. According to the projections of the UN Population Division–we are speaking here of the so-called “low variant,” historically the most accurate–the Russian population will shrink by more than 30 million by mid-century if current trends continue. The population will age rapidly, from an average age of 37.9 in 2010 to and average age of 49 by 2050. In other words, most Russians will be beyond their childbearing years, and Russia’s demographic fate will be sealed.

The economy will follow the population into the tank. No economy can thrive when a population is moribund, filling more coffins than cradles.


I don’t really need to add anything to that assessment!

A Chinese government thinktank is urging the country’s leaders to start phasing out its one-child policy immediately and allow two children for every family by 2015, a daring proposal to do away with the unpopular policy.

Some demographers view the timeline put forward by the China Development Research Foundation as a bold move by a body close to the central leadership. Others warn that the gradual approach, if implemented, would still be insufficient to help correct the problems that China’s strict birth limits have created.


Effectively there is a one child policy for the indigenous White Europeans.  This is by choice, because most people are too decadent to have enough White babies.  In the UK though our government wants to reduce that average further by taking child benefit away to penalise anyone having more than 3 children.  This way the larger families that bring the average up to one White child per woman will be less likely to achieve that.

Meanwhile the Chinese have consistently, even with their restrictive law, produced more than one Chinese child per Chinese woman.  At present it is at 1.6


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.