Once your fertility rates drops below two, it is very, very hard to get it to go back up again,” Poston told Reuters.

“We now have 75 countries in the world where the fertility rate is below two,” meaning the average woman is having fewer than two children.

That is far below the rate of 2.2 to 2.3 considered optimal to hold the population steady, factoring in the number of females who have no children or who don’t live to reach childbearing age.

While he says Europe and the industrialized democracies of East Asia are the ‘poster children’ for demographic shift, low birth rates are also being seen in Brazil, in China, and in the Islamic Middle East, where the fertility rate in the United Arab Emirates is 1.8.

“Japan is losing more people today than they’re gaining,” Poston said. “South Korea has an alarmingly low fertility rate, 1.1.”

LINK

The world population continues to rise as the Third World, despite the growing problems of starvation or AIDS, increases beyond their means.  We with the low birth rate concentrate our resources to help them to live, while our own die off.  They will replace us as they fill the vacuum in our lands and we need only look to the ghettos in the west to see how unlikely it is that this will result in a happy outcome for the world.

The point is, about recovery, that it is possible for the birth rate of an ethnicity to recover from such low fertility rates, but that they will be a dispossessed minority with no land, State or power.  It is probably too late to recover enough for any White nation to salvage this well enough to take any country back.  The Titanic is sinking and it is the pieces of wreckage to hang onto that we must look for now.

It’s difficult to write the words “live births to non-UK women” without sounding like a member of the English Defence League, and God knows what would happen if anyone used the phrase on Newsnight. So let me quickly point out that it comes from the Office for National Statistics, and features in the Government press release that landed on my desk on Thursday morning. “Disconcerting” is the word I’d use to describe the information it contained. Others come to mind, but this is a supremely touchy subject, so forgive me if I play safe.

—-

Future historians will regard this as the major development in early 21st-century British history, more important even than the loss of our sovereignty to the EU, which I’m beginning to think may be reversed one day, thanks to the slapstick collapse of the euro. Demographic change, in contrast, can’t be undone by happy accidents. Nothing like this has happened before. Please pay no attention next time a Left-wing historian pops up on TV to romanticise the arrival of the Normans, Huguenots, Eastern European Jews etc.

LINK

Telegraph article that reminds us of what inspired me to set up this blog!  How many times must this “disconcerting” demographic disaster be pointed out?

One thing that tends to cross my mind with this issue is that of how we are a somewhat more infantile and less responsible nation.

We are no longer the society we used to be – thanks to a myriad of events, from loss of industrialisation / manufacturing to increased reliance on the state, perversion of society, religion, education, debt money and materialism, the need for two parents to bring in a wage in order to keep a roof over their heads when it only used to require the male of the household to financially provide for a family unit….etc.

Add on top of this, a long length of “peace time”, relative luxury as a nation, advancements in consumerism, electronic entertainment, selfishness for pleasure. Also loss of interaction in safe environments like dances, proms, societal events, etc. Even if they were available to go to, we have spawned a generation that would not want to go to them. We have been trained to think they are “sad”, for “losers”, “not cool”….

People can often spend more time alone and at home than out with friends. It is a common theme. The art of interaction outside that of a noisy nightclub or outside of a drinking culture is perhaps being lost -especially if you are not into inane celebrity culture, X-Factor competitions, and consumerism.

To some degree I include myself as a sad and tragic by-product of this combination – and I see it in most of my friends of the same age, people in their early-to-mid 30′s.

Many people I know cannot drive a car (and have never had a single lesson to learn how to drive). Many still have to live at home, and are single because they either do not want to share their lives with another long term partner, do not know how to successfully do so, cannot afford it, or fear being taken for a ride financially if they take a chance with somebody (because they law tends not to be on their side). Even those who have had long term partners (unmarried) can suddenly ditch their partner in order to “play the field” before they are too old.

Money is tight, getting on the housing ladder is a nightmare – especially of you want to avoid the worst areas.

Many people in their 30′s are still interested in computer game consoles and shooting up pixelated aliens, buying Japanese comic books, 3d television sets, new iphones, etc, sitting around in their boxer shorts with a lager watching leftwing comedians on TV. Some of the old “ravers” on music forums are proudly still out there at 35+ trying to relive their clubbing heyday on hedonistic drug and booze weekends – even though some of them do have little children, which makes it even worse that they are doing that!.

The age which used to be deep into “adulthood” is now often more represented as being children themselves. This goes for men and women, although a lesser degree with women I suspect. We have been told, from birth, to go to school, get an education, go to college, go to university, ‘find yourself’ get a career – then settle down. Before you know it, you are getting “past it” – pushing 40 and no long term partner or children in sight.

People I know with degrees are working in retail for minimum wage and their time spent gaining a degree and putting their life on hold has not helped them get to where they want to be. Others are working in crummy jobs that they see no end in sight to.

Women are often working long careers, putting off child rearing until they start to panic that it is too late to have the “experience”. (Which is often a “one off” to fulfil that desire, and the relationship with the male often does not last).

Either we are the selfish victims of our own success – or the state of life has been purposefully engineered to present a new generation of whites with a system that is not conducive to furthering their survival. Perhaps a bit of both.

I have even had conversations with two close friends who are women, and they plainly stated that they never want to have children. That may change when they get a bit older, but they certainly aren’t in any rush or desire to raise a family at the moment – and it is not all down to financial costs, it is also selfishness.

Due to what I suspect as being down to societal pressure and expectations, many ‘non-gansgta looking’ Asians in my town seem to be married at 22, have one or two children and another on the way. My parents generation also seemed to marry young, early 20′s, got a place of their own – prefabs or council housing – and had two or three children before they were 32.

The generations are changing, things are being delayed, slowed down. Something is going badly wrong somewhere, and we are working to pay for the welfare and upkeep of immigrant families and their birth rates, rather than be able to keep it for ourselves and have our own!

The whole thing, the whole way society seems to have been set up, seems to be crazy.

Link

While browsing some Nationalist blogs I happened upon this sad and well-put lament on the pathetic modern mind-set.  I hope the poster doesn’t mind that I reproduced his post here.  It is by “BritishActivism”.

It is not an all-encompassing rule because it has always been restricted to ethnic Han Chinese living in urban areas. Citizens living in rural areas and minorities living in China are not subject to the law.

Now that millions of sibling-less people in China are now young adults in or nearing their child-bearing years, a special provision allows millions of couples to have two children legally. If a couple is composed of two people without siblings, then they may have two children of their own, thus preventing too dramatic of a population decrease.

LINK

The Chinese official birth rate now stands at 1.7 per woman, but this in not a replacement level, let alone believable as a statistic when we know that the population is in fact still growing.  Someone is fibbing…

And who will explain this:

These statistics coming out of China’s housing boom are mind boggling. In a fortnight, enough houses are built to reproduce Rome. In a year, it would replace every house in Spain. In a decade it could just about build the equivalent of Europe’s entire housing stock, give or take Turkey. It’s this phenomenon that underpins the strength of resource-based economies like ours and any major reversal would have serious implications here. I spoke to the economist intelligence unit Stephen Joske who’s just finished a report on the Chinese property boom.

LINK

The article states that the rural Chinese are moving to the city, but still these figures suggest a burgeoning population.

China is undoubtedly limiting births.   Their eugenic policies are not highlighted very much though.  China understands eugenics – and we should be aware of what they are doing.

effective 1 June 1995. The amendment to the marriage law is contained in a new Maternal and Infant Health law. The law will require couples to pass a battery of health tests before they are permitted to be married. Persons who risk passing along serious ailments to their children are barred from marriage until they undergo long-term or permanent measures to prevent pregnancy. People afflicted with sexually transmitted diseases–including AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) likely will never receive permission to marry under the new law. People suffering from schizophrenia or manic depression will not be permitted to marry until treatment has successfully removed such conditions. The new law also requires the abortion of diseased or abnormal fetuses.

LINK

Whites in America will be outnumbered by 2050 by rising numbers of ethnic minorities, according to official figures.

Hispanic, black and Asian people accounted for 90 per cent of all births in the U.S. between 2000 and 2010.

In 40 years’ time they will comprise more than half the population due to their higher birth rates and immigration.

LINK

These “higher” birth rates are not that much higher than replacement levels, but Whites are just giving up on reproducing to the extent that all it takes is for immigrants to average two children (although they do a bit better than that) to replace us.  What is wrong with White people?  Why do they want to bequeath a future for the rest of humanity, of all races, that is full of terror, pain and sadness?  That is the world where Whites no longer keep an eye on things.

Almost two thirds of parents who have one child say they are too poor to have a second.

The crippling cost of bringing up youngsters means the average size of a British family is ‘shrinking’, a report claimed yesterday.

Researchers warn: ‘The average UK family size could be set to shrink as the cost of bringing up a child spirals to £271,499.’

Figures from the Office for national Statistics show the average number of children born to married or cohabiting couples has fallen.

Link

This is nothing other than a lame excuse.   If one realises the racial peril our people are under then the fact is that we can’t afford NOT having children.  There will be a reduction in one’s cash supplies but no one faces starvation in Britain due to having some children.  The State will have to help.  At the moment the State is instead busily bringing in more and more economic migrants to drive down wages and take all the new jobs.  They are finding that genociding the White race is like taking candy from a baby – and it is our babies and genetic future they are taking away.

But even under the Bush presidency, the US embassy in Paris had started to reach out to the multi-racial French suburbs. This was partly prompted by fears that the fanatical anti-Americanism which produced the 9/11 attacks in 2001 was being fostered by extreme Islamist groups in Paris and Lyons. But it was also prompted by a belief that the next generation of movers and shakers in France might come from surprising places. “The Americans are betting on socio-demographic change in France,” said Vincent Geisser, a French sociologist. “They reckon that the French elites – now white and ageing – will have to change and the leaders of tomorrow may come from the periphery of the system.“

The US embassy has, since 2001, built an extraordinary network of contacts among the young, non-violent political and cultural leaders in the Paris suburbs, many of whom contrast the US interest in them with the relative inaction – despite many promises – of successive French governments since the 2005 riots.

Rokhaya Diallo, 32, of a group called “Les Indivisibles”, which promotes racial harmony, said: “A foreign country identifies us as potential leaders. Here we receive no recognition.”

LINK—–

French President Sarkozy is quite possibly attempting to calm French fears of this demographic change with his token gestures getting tough with various groups of immigrant criminals.   The “global community” however is moving towards what they believe is an inevitable non-White government in France in the not so distant future.

Almost a quarter of babies are born to immigrant mothers, an official breakdown showed yesterday.

It found that 24.7 per cent of children born last year have mothers who were born abroad – and that their numbers have doubled since the late 1990s.

—

The three most common countries of origin of foreign-born mothers are Pakistan, Poland and India.

LINK—–

Once the child of immigrants has received British nationality by being born here then they are not considered as being a migrant.  This means many second or third generation migrants are not counted in these statistics – and the true number is being down-played.

Nearly 20 percent of older women do not have children, compared to 10 percent in the 1970s, the Pew Research Center said.

“In recent decades, social pressure to play traditional roles has lessened in a broad variety of ways and there is more leeway for individual choice. This could play a part in lowering pressure for people to get married and bear children,” said D’Vera Cohn, a co-author of the report.

“Women have more options than in the past to build strong careers and to exercise the choice not to have children,” she added in an email.

LINK—

Social pressure has a great deal to do with it.  Various relationships and behaviours that have been traditionally expected no longer are so, or previously socially unacceptable status  – eg single parenthood, couples living together unmarried, and choosing to remain childless are now in fashion.  Indeed having a big family is seen increasingly as something disapproved of as selfish and irresponsible, when the opposite is the truth.

According to a preliminary analysis by the Federal Statistics Office, 651,000 children were born in Germany in 2009 — 30,000 fewer than in 2008, a dip of 3.6%. In 1990, German mothers were having on average 1.5 children each; today that average is down to 1.38 children per mother. With a shortfall of 190,000 between the number of people who died and the number of children who were born, Germany’s birth rate is well below the level required to keep the population stable.

LINK——–

Indigenous nations will become minorities in the west and will lose their countries and their state (infact they already have lost them).   If they decide to cooperate with the foreigners and become civic nationalists,  these people will only be used to prop up a state that is killing them.  Better to withdraw support and maintain ethnic identity and loyalty.